> It is unfortunate that a science communicator would express her research preference in such a way. Why is it a bad thing to have preferences? > but for peop

> It is unfortunate that a science communicator would express her research preference in such a way. Why is it a bad thing to have preferences? > but for people unfamiliar with science it may sound like "defund LHC" (that would be unfortunate) She's on the record against building bigger colliders. It follows from her views that we should fund other stuff and not colliders.