I think it is instructive to contrast the phenomenal successes of the scientific exploration of space; earth resources satellites, orbital observatories, planetary probes, etc., with the dismal failures of our manned missions. Sure, our manned explorations have been technical triumphs, but they have yielded little in the way of concrete results or lasting programs. None of the neat things predicted by Clarke and von Braun have been accomplished in space, not the perfect ball bearings, high vacuum zero-g technologies, novel industrial techniques, super pharmaceuticals and so on. Many of their predictions, such as space telescopes, have been achieved better by automated probes.

As far as sheer cost-effective dollars-and-cents practical accomplishment is concerned, only the communications and military sectors have actually benefited, and again, it is with robot spacecraft. I'm not really happy about this, I'm a space groupie too, I want to see a permanent and expanding manned presence in space, but so far it has been very difficult to convince those who don't feel that way to pay the bills.

Yes, I agree the spiritual and inspirational value, as well as the long-term financial benefit of man in space are real and legitimate, but we have to either do something of immense practical value or that will capture the imagination of the world again. Apollo was a good try, but it wasn't enough, and we haven't come close since.