We are already doing that, hence your ability to post the recent findings as evidence of its benefit. Space exploration is but one part of what science is doing, and it does it with robots, instruments, theories, as well as with human activity. How much longer would it have taken the experiments on the ISS to have been done without humans on board, humans who can react to events as they happen. Yes, it is more expensive and complex to put humans in space, to send humans to other planets, but it is a step that we should take for reasons of simple curiosity, for technical development, and as paddoboy says, because it is there to be done. But nor should space exploration be the sole focus. And it is not, as you yourself evidenced with ongoing exploration of the oceans, as one can also evidence with the progress of medicine, with material sciences etc. But only one area offers a possibility, however remote, of eventually extricating ourselves from our one-rock home. Only one area has the potential to provide humanity with a means of avoiding the inevitable collision of our home with another, less-friendly, clump of matter. We might not achieve that for thousands of years, if we survive that long, but any step forward is just that: a step forward. The only question in my mind is how quickly should we prioritise it above others, and I don't think we necessarily have to, but a budget sufficient to make even small steps keeps that progress going. And should be encouraged.