> But why are you talking out of your ass? Keep it civil, please. > The point of going to the moon was never to dimly increase utility to the public. I think

> But why are you talking out of your ass? Keep it civil, please. > The point of going to the moon was never to dimly increase utility to the public. I think maybe you've lost the thread of the conversation? The original claim was that scientific research/projects should be funded based on evident utility. My point is that if you fund such projects purely based on immediately evident utility, then projects like Apollo (among many others) don't happen. My unspoken corollary is that that would represent a loss to humanity, and that pure utilitarianism is too narrow a frame to use when assessing the value of a given project. Honestly, I think we're in agreement, here, and I'm not sure I understand your aggressive response.