And I agree. My point was that there was damage to the left wing during takeoff, the extent of which was not known, and it should have been checked out. "Utopia" and "perfection" have nothing to do with it.
On the other hand, maybe there was no way to "check it out" - - in which case we have another problem, and an inexcusable one, given the history of debris flying off the fuel tanks and tiles leaving the orbiter during launch. (See Jael's post #140.) "Utopia" and "perfection" have nothing to do with that, either.
Shuttle launches and re-entry are strenuous situations for the vehicle. "Wear and tear" (including some loss of tiles) has occurred on each and every launch and is expected.
Jael's post DOES refer to "wear and tear" on flight STS-87 (December 23, l997) that was greater than previously experienced. (It also makes passing mention of similar, albeit lesser, damage that occurred on the previous flight, STS-86.)
In comparison, the tragedy we experienced with Columbia was flight STS-107.
Rather than becoming frantic over a single report of "wear and tear" suffered 20 flights ago, I'd be more interested in seeing a tabulation of the comparable inspections that occurred with the intervening 20 flights. It would have been with the benefit of that additional experience that the experts would have been basing their judgement whether any potential damage caused by the foam at liftoff was within "normally" acceptable wear & tear parameters.