> Since we're usually quite lazy slobs at heart, tell me which is easier of the two: a quick & dirty, knee-jerk expression of loathing over the idea of mustard+pretzels; or a thoughtful meta-analysis of all the factors which have resulted in our apparent loss of global interest in developing on-going space technologies?

The former doesn't require inspiration, or being completely awake. ;)

I want to go to Mars. I mean me personally. It would indescribably potent--and a big rush--to set foot, for the first time, on a totally new world, where, quite literally, no one had ever been before. To be, in all likelihood, the first *life* ever on that world. Can you imagine the sense of beginning that would accompany the first footstep?

As a nation, we've lost interest because we're comfortable and busy.

We need space as a modern day Wild West, a territory to grapple with and struggle against, rather than rule over or reside comfortably within. Sometimes we'll lose. More than likely, we'll lose often and heavily, especially early on. A serious, daring space program could capture the world's attention more fixidly than the inanest of Reality Based TV shows, because this would be real adventure: high stakes, chance, skill, ingenuity, setbacks, breakthroughs, disappointments, discoveries, hardship, hope, and an impact on everyone, sooner or later.

An effort like this would require three things. First, it would need the public sector, at least initially. If there is one thing capitalism needs, it is capital, and private organizations will have enormous difficulty raising the necessary resources. Second, it requires the private sector through and through. NASA is just like virtually every other government agency in that the incentives are all backwards: it seeks greater funding, larger staff, and more power; managers are isolated from the effects of their decisions; goals are determined politically rather than scientifically; there is disadvantage to meeting deadlines or staying within costs; the list goes on and on. Recently (today?), a private program--the name of which I have forgotten, but it was founded by Carl Sagan--launched a prototype solar sail, to test various design features. If everything goes well they will proceed and launch the real deal. The project to launch the demo spacecraft cost the group only $4 million, and it is scheduled nine years ahead of NASA's similar plan. Private groups are simply more likely to produce the innovations necessary to allow human space travel at a reasonable cost. That, of course, is the last key. The program can't be done with unmanned spacecraft. Consider books and movies: what makes them most compelling is the character at the center of the travails. Without a character, there is nothing to attach to or with which to identify--there would be nothing to incite further outpour of support and resources.

The universe is vast beyond imagining, and all a mystery. We should need no more reason than that to explore it. Even if all we find is limitless exotic scenery, the attempt will be a success. The only downside are those marauding hordes of alien ghosts.

gab"Just kill them with mustard and pretzels"by