No one said scientific research direction and progress didn't have bias. There's a large set of unknowns and it's dictated in part by the things people want to

No one said scientific research direction and progress didn't have bias. There's a large set of unknowns and it's dictated in part by the things people want to investigate, what people can get funded to investigate, how much progress already exists / how much promise seems to exist, and so on. If you look at health related research donations, you'll find a lot of money is poured into breast and prostate cancer. By most measures of overall impact, these diseases aren't all that critical but people care about their breasts and prostates. Funding agencies try to look at things a little more objectively but this is but one example of bias. https://www.vox.com/2014/8/20/6040435/als-ice-bucket-challenge-and-why-we-give-to-charity-donate https://www.vox.com/2014/8/20/6040435/als-ice-bucket-challen... Federal funding agencies themselves intentionally introduce bias by largely picking areas to fund that influence direction. Researchers work to spin whatever they really want to do in the context of where the money is but they need to eat and pay rent too.