Catch22,
Many people think that during the Cold War, the Space Race was driven by chauvinistic pride. This is not to say that valuable research wasn’t done, but it certainly wasn’t driven by altruistic ideals. The Soviet Union could, and did, point to its scientific successes (of which their substantial space successes were an example) and assert that it showed the equivalency of the results of the Communist vs. the Capitalistic system.
I think that these “we have arrived” demonstrations remain attractive to countries which need to prove that they are real players on the field of technology. There remains a certain flash and glamour about outer space successes which are difficult to match with revelations from the seafloor or breakthroughs in understanding why we are as we are.
While the discovery by the submersible ALVIN of the Black Smokers,
http://www.amnh.org/nationalcenter/...ck_smokers.html ,
http://www.oceansonline.com/smokers.htm , and the associated ecosystems that are not dependant on photo synthesis is an extraordinary event, it is hard to counter such glorious visuals as the “The Pillars of Creation”
http://hubblesite.org/newscenter/ne.../1995/44/image/ pictures returned from the HST. The irony is that many scientists believe that life on earth first arose in environments similar to those surrounding submarine geothermal vents!
http://www.well.com/~ajmilne/black_...ack_smoker.html
On the subject of human habitation, it is difficult to see much justification for either deep sea or space exploration, for both environments are inhospitable in the extreme. It is less expensive to get the humans to the bottom of the sea than into space, as the cost of lifting each pound to orbit is, if I may be permitted to say so, astronomical. The pressures at the bottom of the ocean are as difficult to manage as the airlessness of outer space. The cost of building and operating cities under the sea will keep such proposals in the realm of fantasy for some considerable time.