Hello, alcaray.

I am against letting the search for life drive the space program.

* Not I. Once man understood the mechanics of this huge vacuum, stars, spheres, physics laws, etc., that was THE number one question that man asked himself when looking up at the night sky.

And letting the finding or not-finding of it permit it to continue or kill it off.

* Of course that is not THE *only* reason for space funding. As I said and I'm sure you realize that in our quest to find life and other systems similar to ours, technology has benefitted and so have we.

It could be another "beat the Russians" kind of motivator. With 30 years of malaise to follow it.

* Well, in my personal view, the race was 2nd, discovery was 1st.

I think we need to get Americans space-educated. I think we need them to be just as excited by a Mercury probe as a Mars probe.

* Yes, and such a Mercury probe/mission is in the works. It will be a good testing ground for the technology of the probe itself.

I think we are being lazy by taking the sensational/easy route to space funding.

* Agreed there. No big 'gambles' (PE/PKO mission). I have felt disappointment since Voyager2. Not that the Galileo Mission hasn't been wonderful or even the promise of the Cassini Mission. Studying mother Earth is important, but as most have said here, it's become a 'pork barrel'... a 'sensational/easy' industry. In the last 30 even 40 years most of the science and dollars have gone to it. As I said, nothing wrong with exploring our own planet, but there is more out there. Many must realize by now that much more could have been done.

No Bucks, no Buck Rogers. Guess the bucks stop here then.

Marcia
*Honest, I'm not THAT disappointed.