What kind of scientist can claim his view and his view only deserves the attention for exploring worlds?

Why is one world more worthy than another?

Who decides and why?

50 years ago, almost, humans went to space. The US decided it too and spent a lot of money for a decision that involved thousands of skilled men and women, a decision that inspired even more people, throughout the world.

And only because SOME scientists claim their way is the best, the cheapest and the fastest, it would be worth dropping sending humans to space?

It was a political decision that sent humans to space. Even though this decision never was by itself justified. For half a century, humans have gone to space.

And it would be a political decision to abandon that.

Knowing how many skilled jobs that would affect, knowing how many important states that would affect and knowing how many successes manned spaceflights involved, would it not be supremely humiliating to stop this positive side of the militaro-industrial complex?

It is not weapons but people like us who go to space.

Manned space exploration is political. Many new countries are getting involved in the same field and the US would drop their lead at the same time?

It is costly but it is very rewarding, thanks to prestige. And it still is the case.

Another paradox: not wanting astronauts going round and round, endlessly, (which is something other nations can do too) and at the same time, rejecting Flags and Footsteps!
Space enthusiasts are sowing the branch on which they sit.

Exploration IS Flags and Footsteps because it is politics and because it can't last long, must avoid being boring, and be inspiring instead. We should recognize it. Or else, we'll remain in earth orbit for a long time.