Comment Re:Publicity stunt (Score 1) 37
Yes. We learned a lot about the formation of the solar system from the rocks Apollo brought back. We'd learn more if we had more rocks. It's also a great place to build telescopes.
How many more moonrocks do we really need? And can't an unmanned craft bring back many more rocks than any manned mission, and much more cheaply?
More importantly, there are good industrial reasons to go to the moon. It's a big pile of resources and available energy already in orbit. Space habitats, manufacturing, power satellites, data centres and whatnot are silly currently, maybe sort of doable with cheap access to orbit like Starship promises, but pretty straightforward if you have an industrial base on the moon.
Anything the moon has the Earth has in much greater abundance. The sheer energy cost of moving anything productive to the moon makes producing all of these things on Earth much more cost appealing. A moon-based telescope sounds fun, but I'm not convinced it would be better than a telescope in its own orbit around Earth.
I'm not opposed to science, and I'm not opposed to space exploration...but we have not had leaders who have clearly set forth a long-term vision for why we should do this, or how it will benefit humanity in the short- or long-term. And the investment is so massive and so cost inefficient, I would love to see much more of that going to making Earth sustainable and habitable for the long-term rather than dreaming some fantastical, unrealistic dream about humans living anywhere other than here.