Most if not all exploration has been with a reason in mind beyond pure information. Usually it was for better trade routes or new lands to trade with. I never said you needed people to be there to exploit martian (or any other kind of) resources. They can even be exploited by robots. As for having an 'anti science' attitude it is probably because I am sick of us spending lots of money and having nothing to show for it. Until profit starts being made in space then exploration will never really take off. So rather than spending piles to find out what Pluto's air is made out of we should focus on closer objectives and how to exploit them. Send some robots to experiment with mining the moon. That at least has potential to return benefits in the next hundred years. The exploration will still be there later and it will be even cheaper then.
I am all for space science but not at the expense of things that are useful. Why should we wait to sent people back to our own moon while we send yet another probe to sniff the dirt on Mars? Exploration comes first, yes. But it should not also come second, third, fourth, fifth...
As for having an 'anti science' attitude it is probably because I am sick of us spending lots of money and having nothing to show for it.That's exactly why I strongly prefer robotic probes to the manned space program.
So rather than spending piles to find out what Pluto's air is made out of we should focus on closer objectives and how to exploit them.
Again, you have no way of knowing what will be economically valuable and what's not. Your guesses and prejudices about what's most likely to pay off aren't worth much. (I'd detail my personal opinion that the economic value of science, while enormous, is secondary to its true value to mankind, but I suspect you'd be tone deaf to it.)
Send some robots to experiment with mining the moon.
Sounds great! But how will you know where on the moon to send them?