Finally, just for the record, none of the above is to say we should not
have done the Apollo Project as we did it when we did it. That was a
much different era; Apollo was a proud and admirable accomplishment; it
was worth doing.

Why?

Earlier on you said

First of all, manned space flight at this point in time is just too
difficult, dangerous, and expensive to be worth pursuing.

Well, it was even more difficult, dangerous, and expensive in the Apollo
days. Most of your post seems to be that we should wait until space
travel is easy, safe, and cheap before we pursue it. You complain that
manned space research isn't impersonal enough (comparing it with
manufacturing facilities on earth), but then you single out the Apollo
program as being "a proud and admirable accomplishment" that was "worth
doing".

What's the difference?

I would posit the opposite. Manned space travel isn't bold, daring, and
audacious enough to capture our imagination and inspire mankind to do
better than blow up people who hold the wrong opinions. The space
shuttle has been, as NASA wanted it to be, "just a truck". Using the
shuttle to replace rockets was an error given the lack of anything
better than chemical rocket engines to power it. Instead we should have
(and should now) use expendable rockets to put stuff into orbit, and a
space station based fleet of mini-shuttles to do stuff with them once
the heavy lifting is done. Another fleet of mini-shuttles would be used
to carry people up and down - they would be the size of a lear jet and
have enough payload capability for six people and little else.

But the focus of our space program should be going to Mars and onward.

Because it's there.

Jose
--
Nothing takes longer than a shortcut.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.