Quote Originally Posted by Thorne View Post
A lot of the current research into interplanetary travel is involved in sending robotic missions to establish viable bases and begin the task of creating a man-usable habitation, then sending the men (and women) up to run things. True, a lot can be done without the use of astronauts, but right now we have at least one rover on Mars which is stuck in sand, probably forever, when all it really needs is for someone to walk up and give it a good swift kick in the wheels.

But a lot of your concern over space travel seems to be the tired old complaint of where to spend the money. Give it to these people, help those people, throw it down yet another rat-hole. Yet the very fact that you are here and able to complain about it is evidence that you don't practice what you preach. How much better could the world be if you would just donate the money you waste on internet access to charity, where it would be put to virtually no good at all?

I think what bothers people most about the frontier of space is that, like virtually every frontier mankind has faced, the best and the brightest will flock to it, leaving the homelands to stagnate. Unfortunately, once the frontier has been tamed, all those nay-sayers will drag their preconceived notions along and try to make the new world exactly the same as the old, thus destroying whatever good there might have been.

So just sit there at home bemoaning how other people choose to spend their money. Let those who really care about the human race push back the frontiers, making a better world, and a better solar system, for themselves. After all, it's not costing you anything.
Perhaps I feel the marginal utility of getting internet access is very high, while the marginal utility of money spent on the space program is very low. I might also feel that many charities have better marginal utility than the space program. So its certainly consistent for someone to have internet and not support expensive space programs because they have other priorities for the money.

I think this is awfully close to a personal attack. Someone can't advocate having charities get money over space programs without being told they personally shouldn't buy internet and should instead donate the money to charity? Or being told by implication they don't care about the human race?

A similar vein would be suggesting you think its a good thing to let the starving children in Africa die because you'd rather spend money on the space program than feeding them. I haven't brought this up before because I don't think its constructive, and its not the type of argument I'd normally make. However, you are making the equivalent argument in the opposite direction so now it becomes relevant.

I also disagree strongly with your view of how the new world evolved but that is a whole thread of its own.