Well without going to far off topic, even if it produced zero beneficial products the simple idea of starting off-earth colonies is worth it if for no reason to further gauruntee the survival of our species.  But there are a huge list of things that resulted from the research put into the program, you can search the net and find tons of info on it.

Certain people will have built in biases on how they see technology ...

John Carmack and Mark Rein have spent so much of their lives, and built their reputations, because they were able to produce games/game engines that produced 10% more polygons, used 10% more texture data, and had texture effects 3 months earlier than their competition. If you asked them whether the PS3 would be a better system if it had 2 Cell processors, 2 RSX GPUs and four times the memory they would probably say yes even if the system did cost $1200.

In general though, greater processing power and data storage are really not that meaningful; what is meaningful is your ability to create a great game with the processing power and data storage that you have been given.

 Going to the moon helped us with nothing, and it's a proven fact, we could NOT get to the moon agian. (we are working on it, but it will be another 5 years... funny, almost as long as it took us from going from... "Who cares." to "Being there."

over 30 years down the road, and our space program is still inferior to what it was 30 years ago.

Why do we need to blow up an entire country? We dont. We never did. But we did. We killed millions of innocents because of it. In terms of who killed the most... "Innocents."

America killed roughly 20% more than germany.

Funny facts you probibally didnt know.

I feel america was a greater evil in WW2 because of the bombs than Germany. (and I am american. I have invested god knows hours into research into this subject.)

Japan offered a conditional cease fire, to start talks of surrender in June. We said no. 3 months later we killed millions by dropping a bomb on them. 

you know, its kinda accepting you lost the argument if you ignore the point of the whole post and try to nitpick little things.

Sure, I was being polemic. Although I tend to think that the money could have been spent better to benefit mankind. But, as you say, we're probably drifting way off topic.

Hmm, well I do believe that you killed a lot of people in Hisoshima and Nagasaki, but not in the millions.
Around 250-300.000 was the total direct death toll, with another 120-150.000 from injuries and/radiation sickness.
The impact politically was great though, as many countries thought it unnecessary to drop the bomb simply because they could.
It was a test, a test against a nation that nobody liked because of the atrocities the japanese had commited against other asians (did you know they killed 20 million in Manchuria?).

Japan would've folded, and the supposed "liberation" of pacific areas had nothing to do with the bombing of two cities that didn't even house any military at the time.
In fact, these were the only 2 major japanese cities which had no garrison at the time, and it's no coincidence that these were the targets, they were utterly defenceless.

PS: Anyone else getting sick of WW2 games where it's portrayed as if the US won the war single handedly? (Yes I know it's an American website, but still).

Mark Rein likes what ever platform Epic's next big game is coming out on.

360 is inferior duhh.

As more time goes it will be proven more and more.

The PS2 was inferior to the Gamecube and X-box and we all know how that turned out. I mean being out first and becoming the lead platform because of it had nothing to do with the PS2's success. Developers all jumped at the chance to max out the potential of the X-box and Gamecube. They didn't care that each systems sales lagged behind the PS2. They built custom engines tailored to each consoles strengths right? I mean those two consoles are going to have 10 year life cycles, right? In spite of the fact that 3rd parties traditionally start ditching the third place console after two or three years right? 

The most technically advanced console always over comes launching after its competitors to win the generation. I mean the Master System crushed the NES. The 3DO and Jaguar stomped out the SNES and Genesis. The N64 steamrolled the PS1 and Saturn. The X-box dominated the Gamecube and easily overtook the PS2. So the pattern is set, the PS3 while win this generation because superior tech. I mean it always happens that way. The Game Gear and Lynx showed that at against the Gameboy. The PSP is showing that against the DS as we speak. 

Hus I have seen the light you are wise beyond your years my friend.