3 ms·

This wouldn’t be a problem if science 1). Wasn’t underfunded and 2). Made up of sellouts trying to shill for industry research. The latest scandal involving the

This wouldn’t be a problem if science 1). Wasn’t underfunded and 2). Made up of sellouts trying to shill for industry research. The latest scandal involving the NIH and alcohol funding that involved $100 million going to waste is an example of this. I’ve also wondered about this with global warming. Obviously it’s true, but what if you found something as a scientist that said the heat increase will be 5% less than expected. Would they let you publish it? In the end, distrusting science causes it to become distrustful. Ironic.

rukittenme 8y ago
> Science is underfunded. Citation needed[0]. 0. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_research_and_development_spending https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_research_...
- Bucephalus355 8y ago
  Better statement would have been science is funded in a very controlled manner. There is so much gate keeping with the funds to access them, that much of the funding winds up being used to pursue funding for the next round. I can understand why the system was set up, and it is the way it is, but alas. Peter Higgs (of Higgs-Boson particle) talks about this here: https://www.theguardian.com/science/2013/dec/06/peter-higgs-boson-academic-system?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other https://www.theguardian.com/science/2013/dec/06/peter-higgs-...