To: GST who wrote (159870 ) 1/16/2004 9:20:21 PM From: Lazarus_Long Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 164684 I, dear Sir, with no exaggeration, qualify as a rocket scientist. My current project is a commercial communications satellite. The previous one was this:sirtf.caltech.edu I am quite well aware of the differing economics of manned and unmanned space flight. And the politics. NASA is also. You can get taxpayers all hot and bothered about manned missions; they are relatively cold and uncaring (with a few exceptions) about unmanned ones. Hence manned space flight. But it is hardly true to say there is no gain for the added cost of manned space. If you have a heart attack, you will have a small box attached to you in the ER that you will wear throughout your hospital stay. It telemeters your heart rate, BP, and EKG to computers at the nursing station. If those computers see something they don't like, they SCREAM at the nurses. Who hopefully come running with the right equipment and drugs. Know where the first units like that came from? Manned space. At some point the real intention IS to send humans into space. The unmanned missions are just probes to find out what things are like. There's more than abstract scientific curiosity here. We intend to go ourselves. So let's get on with it. EVERYTHING is political. NAFTA is political. Protectionism is political. A wildlife refuge or a developed park is political. The price of NG is political. There's nothing that can't be political. Since you are raising the issue again, though, I assume you think John Kennedy was an a$$. Correct?We have an unmanned exploration vehicle on mars today, doing great work. Yes. And the plan is to follow it up with manned flights. So tell me: If Isabella had taken your attitude and not hocked the jewels, where would you be now?