[Arkie2]

I don't know how you feel about the manned missions but for the most part I think they're a colossal waste of resources. I didn't always feel that way. The ISS and the Shuttle problems changed my mind.

Unmanned exploration returns so much more knowledge than manned spaceflight that it's criminal to put funding into the manned moon/mars mission. Just my humble opinion.

[Cincinatus]

Unmanned exploration returns so much more knowledge than manned spaceflight that it's criminal to put funding into the manned moon/mars mission.

That presuposes that science is the only driver for the space program.

The story of life on Earth is the story of extinction. Thus, in the long run, we need to develop the skills needed to survive and thrive off-planet. This makes human spaceflight an imperative. Space is about much more than exploration -- it's also about wealth creation and settlement.

[chimera]

FWIW I think both serve a useful purpose. One can legitimately question specific programs, but the manned/unmanned divide is largely artificial. True, there are some places people just can't go right now, so unmanned missions are the ticket. OTOH, having that "Mark I Organic Computer" in the field and on-station allows you tremendous flexibility. A comparison of the Apollo vs. Surveyor or Lunakhod returns gives you a feel for that.

There are no reasons other than lack of will (guts, courage, vision) that we can't do both.