"Human missions to Mars, if and when they might occur, are so far in the future that lessons learned on the Moon will have little relevance."

So, Chris, you accept this something that is true?
Do you even think that what was learned in Apollo will have little relevance going to the Moon, today. Or if we were instead were to do a Manned mission to Mars tomorrow, that Apollo would have no relevance. Now, Apollo was over 30 years ago, and the Saturn launcher was canceled, and NASA went on an excursion with the Shuttle, then ISS. We don't expect a similar wandering in the wilderness this time around, because we planning on going to Mars after the Moon, and it's integral in this development- unlike with Apollo which was solely focused on putting a man on the Moon and safely return him to Earth [before the Soviets could achieve this goal]. Though many people at time had high hopes of doing further steps, such as going to Mars- but those weren't part of any specific plan.
The suggestion of the above statement puts Manned Mars at some period beyond 2050 or perhaps even beyond 2100. Is Manned Mars so unrealistic that it will require so much time and require technologies unrelated to current technology or that technology we hope to develop within the next couple of decades? As specifically, what he says next:

"If humans eventually travel to Mars, technology that would be used will be far advanced over that which NASA would employ on the Moon in the next twenty years."

And: "Costly and risky human exploration of Mars may never be needed." AND: "The need to establish human settlements on Mars in the future is problematic."

He goes on to say:
"If pursued, the program would add additional information to our present knowledge of the Moon’s early history and current state. However, we already have an excellent understanding of the Moon’s history and composition compiled from data returned from Surveyor, Lunar Orbiter, and Apollo missions."

We don't know if there is water at polar region. How can anyone characterize this as knowing all we need to know about the Moon.

Now, he seems to think that Mars exploration [and development??] can done with robotic only, yet [regarding lunar mission]:
"The robotic missions would have to be more capable than the present Mars rover missions for, in addition to making detailed chemical and mineralogical measurements, many would require deep drilling and sample return from both the Moon’s near and far sides. To date, there have been no estimates of how much such an ambitious campaign would cost."
Yet he says lunar exploration would have "little relevance" for Mars exploration.

More idiotic statements:
"There are no lunar resources that, when processed, would have any economic value if utilized on the Moon or returned to Earth. Lunar in situ resource utilization has been shown by several analyses to not have a positive cost benefit."

More idiotic statements:
"Recent press releases seem to indicate that international interest in cooperating with NASA on returning humans to the Moon does not exist. Some, such as the British, have clearly indicated they have other plans."