Ah yes... you don't like the opinion I expressed, so you resort to a personal attack: you accuse me of playing some kind of trolling game...
Because I dared to criticize NASA about their progress in designing new human rated spacecraft, since the ancient 1970's technology of the spaceshuttle.
Look: I understand that you might be impressed with NASA's advancements in that regard... and that you and I have a difference of opinion in this matter... and that you're assuming I'm "playing a game"...
But all I'm saying here is that I'm just simply STRONGLY DISAPPOINTMENT on NASA's part in this regard!
To counter my viewpoint, you point to Scott Kelly's experiment...
And fine: I agree with you about that!
It was absolutely an important, vital and highly fascinating experiment on the part of Scott Kelly.
But if that's really the main thing you want to point at, and that's the first thing that comes to your mind as evidence of your side of the debate, to show what NASA has achieved since the 1970's in human space flight...
Then... well, once again... I'm simply not all that impressed!
I understand it angers you to hear me say that, and you think I'm trolling... but that's my opinion. And I'm not the only one here who feels NASA has GREATLY stagnated when it comes to human flight.
FINALLY...
Perhaps you may take heart in the fact that I am EXTREMELY IMPRESSED with NASA regarding their robotic space probe programs.
I mean that sky-crane landing of the Curiosity rover on Mars:
That was a f'ing work of engineering art!
Not to mention the Cassini probe, New Horizons, and how the Hubble Space Telescope has really revolutionized our understanding of the Universe.
THUS... at the very least...
I am assuming you and I are in perfect harmony and agreement on NASA's progress with robotic Mars exploration, and other probes.
(Although I'm disappointed we haven't yet had a robotic landing on Jupiter's moon Europa yet! I've been waiting for that mission since the early 1990's! I would have thought NASA would have made that more of a priority. But that's a whole other different debate!)