🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <27@enuxha.eas.asu.edu> kluksdah@enuxha.eas.asu.edu (Norman 
C. Kluksdahl) writes:

>Paul, (and others against manned spaceflight);
>Please use a little discretion in your arguements; try not to come across
>with the attitude of "it's not economical; therefore it's a waste of time
>to even think about doing."  ...

I fear Mr. Kluksdahl misunderstands Mr. Dietz's position.  The argument
as I appreciate it, is not against the idea of manned spaceflight, but
rather against the manner of its funding.  I believe Mr. Dietz believes that
the unmanned space program is much more efficient, in terms of scientific 
return-on-investment, than the manned space program.  The combination of
this belief with the the observations that:

    * both programs are publicly funded;

	* the manned space program is preferentially funded (to the detriment 
	  of the unmanned);

and the opinion that public funds are a scarce resource and likely to 
remain so in the near future, has led Mr. Dietz to conclude that
It would be wise to adjust their relative funding levels.

I don't recall Mr. Dietz ever arguing against private funding of a manned 
space program as being a waste of time.

(Paul, please feel free to correct me).
-- 
Steve Emmerson                     Inet: steve@umigw.miami.edu [128.116.10.1]
SPAN: miami::emmerson (host 3074::)      emmerson%miami.span@star.stanford.edu
UUCP: ...!ncar!umigw!steve               emmerson%miami.span@vlsi.jpl.nasa.gov
"Computers are like God in the Old Testament: lots of rules and no mercy"