You said "spaceflight", not "manned spaceflight". Manned spaceflight has brought and continues to bring many important advances in science. I would argue that

You said "spaceflight", not "manned spaceflight". Manned spaceflight has brought and continues to bring many important advances in science. I would argue that the science dividends of the ISS (which is mainly a research station) are quite worth the relativly low costs. How familiar are you with the science currently being done on the ISS? It often doesnt get heavily talked up, so I suspect your "fringe" assertion is coming drom a place of ignorance. Do you have speficic experiments that you think are a waste of time and money? Manned expeditions to the moon are harder to justify. However, given the track record of technological and scientific payoffs, betting against a positive return, if even from the "exhaust" isn't safe. I do wish that Artemis wasn't our approach though. FYI we spend more money subsidizing fossil fuels than we do on space travel. If we can afford handouts to oil companies that are killing our planet, we can afford to pay for the research that will help save it.