Whenever I hear the nonsense about ‘manned space flight’ I have to cringe.每当我听到有关胡说八道'载人航天'我不得不低三下四。 Here’s why这也是为什么
- The budget for space exploration is finite.预算的太空探索是有限的。
- Any money spend on manned missions can not be spend on real space science.任何金钱花费在载人飞行任务不能花在真正的空间科学。
- No science has come from any manned missions (except for studies of human space physiology).没有科学的来自任何载人飞行任务（除研究报告人类太空生理） 。
- Manned missions cost orders or magnitude more that robotic missions but yield no scientific results.载人飞行成本的命令或规模以上的机器人任务，但收益率没有科学的结果。
- Manned missions have and will cost human lives.载人飞行任务的成本和将人的生命。
- All hard scientific results so far have been obtained by inexpensive (compared to any manned mission) robotic probes and instruments.所有硬科学成果迄今已获得了廉价的（相比，任何载人航天）机器人探测器和文书。
So why does NASA still plan manned missions?那么，为什么不美国宇航局载人飞行任务的计划？ I have no idea.我不知道。 In fact nobody has any idea as to why we would try to send humans into space.事实上没有人有任何想法，为什么我们会尝试传送人类进入太空。 By-the-way: The so-called ‘Space Shuttle’ is a bad joke.中通过的方式：在所谓的'航天飞机'是一个糟糕的玩笑。 It neither goes to space (unless you call being just outside the earth’s razor thin atmosphere ’space’), and it is no shuttle.它既不去的空间（除非你请外面正在地球的稀薄大气剃刀'空间' ） ，这是没有航天飞机。 It is, in fact, a death trap that has not yielded a single scientific insight during its multi-trillion dollar existence.它实际上是一个死亡陷阱还没有产生一个单一的科学见解在其多万亿美元的存在。 It’s not even any good to put satellites into orbit; it’s failure rate is simply too high and its launch reliability too low.它甚至没有任何好把卫星送入轨道，它的失败率仅仅是太高，其发射的可靠性太低。 If NASA had just simply burned the money that they spend on the "Space Shuttle", continued to use the Saturn V rockets from the 60s for it’s high-payload scientific missions, we would have generated some heat for cold winters (especially if they had used one-dollar bills) and 14 people would still be alive instead of being dead as doornails.如果美国航天局已经烧毁只是钱，他们花费的“航天飞机” ，继续使用的土星5号火箭从60年代它的高载荷的科学任务，我们将产生一些热量为寒冷的冬天（尤其是如果他们利用一美元钞票）和14人仍然活着，而不是作为doornails死亡。
There is now talk about human mission that involve ‘going back to the moon’, or even ‘going to Mars’.现在谈论人权的任务，涉及'回到月亮' ，甚至'去火星。 It speaks for itself that the ‘Mission to Mars’ idea is being pushed by a president who thinks that Evolution is a questionable concept and who provided no money for this grand idea.这不言自明的'火星'的想法是被推由总统认为，谁的演变是一个值得怀疑的概念，谁没有提供资金这一宏伟的想法。 The region between the planets is inhospitable to organic life and we currently have no good idea of how to shield the poor humans from the high-energy radiation that’s out there.该地区之间的行星是荒凉的有机生命和我们目前还没有很好的主意如何保护人类的穷人从高能量辐射的了。 At this point of our technological evolution we have no business sending people into space.在这一点上我们的技术的发展，我们没有任何商业派人进入太空。 From a scientific point of view, manned space exploration is a complete waste of lives, time and money.从科学的角度来看，载人航天探索是一个完整的浪费生命，时间和金钱。 Anything a humans can do in space, a robot or robotic instrument can do better, cheaper and more reliably.任何一人可以做的空间，机器人或机械仪器可以做的更好，更便宜和更可靠。
I think that human space exploration will happen eventually, if the human race survives long enough to make it technologically feasible.我认为，人类空间探索会发生，如果人类生存足够长的时间，使其技术上是可行的。 Now is not that time.现在不是那个时候。 We have bigger fish to fry, like gaining scientific knowledge about what’s out there.我们有更大的鱼鱼苗一样，获得科学知识，有什么了。 A ‘yes’ to manned space flight at this time is equivalent to a ‘no’ for real science.阿'是'以载人航天飞行在这个时候，相当于一个'不'的真正科学。 That’s the way to look at this issue, in my humble opinion.这就是看这个问题，在我的愚见。
While writing the above rant, I looked up some articles that would support my view…here goes.虽然上述书面言论，我抬起头来的某些条款，支持我的看法...在这里不用。
Steven Weinberg’s view on the subject… 史蒂芬温伯格认为关于这个问题的...
This prescient article on the Space Shuttle was written BEFORE the Challenger disaster….well worth reading. 这条明在航天飞机上写前挑战者号灾难... 。也值得一读。
