Ken Murphy critiques recent pieces by both Bob Zubrin and Gregg Easterbrook. I may take a shot at the Easterbrook thing myself a little later, if I get time.

I still await the opportunity for an on-line debate on space with Gregg, but he doesn't seem interested in doing that with anyone who knows what they're talking about.

[Update at 1 PM EST]

Clark Lindsey has further thoughts:

Seems like he could call a scientist like Paul Spudis or Larry Taylor and listen to their reasons for advocating a return to the Moon. But I guess contrary facts would mess up the flow of his essay.

I'll never forget Easterbrook's post Columbia editorial. I suppose writing an editorial that gets people's attention and is memorable may be a goal to someone. However, a child who touchs a hot stove will never forget the experience either and will never do that again.

Easterbrook is an idiot.

Easterbrook is sloppy and gets lots of details wrong.

He was correct that the shuttle should have been scrapped immediately after Columbia, though.

Allow me to be so impolite as to note that Spudis is a planetary scientist and Zubrin is an engineer. So if Zubrin is going to challenge Spudis on planetary science, he needs to work extra hard at it.

There was also a discussion about the Easterbrook article titled NASA Priorities Out of Whack? over on Slashdot yesterday.

For what's worth, I'm the ChuckDivine who wrote the comment Priorities.