So actually, millions of lives have massively benefited from science and technology. To be cynical in the face of all that is a personal take, not a reflection of the facts.
It's really getting tiring repeating this stuff over and over again to the anti-space crowd.
You’re arguing against the misanthrops. To them, nothing humans could do would be good enough. We could end slavery in the West and they’d accuse us of not ending slavery enough.
You didn't provide any citations that show any of the above has lifted people out of poverty. Please go on, and maybe tell us how ships navigated the seas before GPS, sounds impossible.
There are no causal connections between going to the moon and lifting global poverty. In fact, the money spent on going to a dried up satellite could have lifted people out of poverty.
Obvious post hoc fallacy
And in the case of lifting most of humanity out of poverty, two things are responsible: capitalism and technology.
You can argue that China is a communist state, but it’s the allocation of capital to things that matter that has enable China to thrive.
These don't appear to be the words of someone who understands what the post hoc fallacy is.
In any case, the subject is not "capitalism and technology" generally but rather manned Moon missions specifically.
Happy now?
However, sometimes it is true that the first thing caused the second thing.
Therefore, it’s only a fallacy when it’s fallacious.
My argument is that going to space was an allocation of capital that mattered in driving technology forward and improved the lives of everyone.
You alleged above it was due to the moon landings that people were lifted out of poverty. Do you understand the difference here?