 |
| LIGO Hanford Observatory |
Over the past several months, Congress has gotten rather upset by some of the research funded by arms of the federal government, such as the National Science Foundation and the National Institutes of Health. That displeasure eventually prompted the House Science Committee's chair, Lamar Smith (R-TX), to float a bill that would require the head of the NSF to certify that every single grant its organization funded was either in the national interest or groundbreaking.
As we pointed out, the mission of the NSF is to fund research in fundamental questions in science (typically called "basic" research). As such, the research isn't intended to have immediate commercial or military applications; those would come decades down the line, if ever. And it's generally considered impossible to predict which areas of research will eventually be viewed as groundbreaking at some point in the future.
Now, scientists who have served in the NSF are saying the same things. In a letter to Smith obtained by Science magazine, they point out that the draft bill "frankly requires the Director [of the NSF] to accurately predict the future." And they point to a technology that's currently having a huge commercial impact—the laser—that grew out of basic research using microwaves. In fact, in their view, "many basic research projects in every field supported by the NSF would likely not qualify for certification under this bill."
"You can lead a horse to water, but you cannot make them drink. You can send your rep to congress, but you cannot make them think!" (Old chemistry professor's sign outside his office: his wording was "child" for rep; "college" for congress - same concept.)
Arguably, this is "market as deity," i.e. using market-driven motivations in research, education, government and all other aspects of life, liberty; the pursuit of happiness. Question: what market forces still have our military larger than anyone else's: 41% of the world total? Some estimates put the total number of countries between 189 - 196. Let's round down to 192: we have more military might than 53 nations combined. Even with the best intelligence in the world, 9-11-01 and now 9-11-12 was a complete surprise to two administrations, except to conspiracy theorists that manage on the most part to not have formal degrees or command of critical thinking skills, but dangerous influence on our elected officials that parrot their nonsense. Science makes decisions in probabilities, so even a 90% assurance will not be "sure enough" and stymied bill passage; filibuster is more likely. Terrorism is a method, needing counterterrorism, i.e. Special Forces, not forces for the Battle of the Bulge. What's "market driven" about that?
My own "conspiracy theory": this is designed to put us effectively and efficiently in last place on the globe in science. Else, this is flat-out, Chiroptera-excrement crazy (and will result in the same fate)!
"There are also Idols formed by the intercourse and association of men with each other, which I call Idols of the Market Place, on account of the commerce and consort of men there. For it is by discourse that men associate, and words are imposed according to the apprehension of the vulgar. And therefore the ill and unfit choice of words wonderfully obstructs the understanding. Nor do the definitions or explanations wherewith in some things learned men are wont to guard and defend themselves, by any means set the matter right. But words plainly force and overrule the understanding, and throw all into confusion, and lead men away into numberless empty controversies and idle fancies." Sir Francis Bacon, Aphorism 43.
Ars Technica:
Proposed bill that would regulate NSF research funding faces backlash
Scientists not amused, bill's backers appear confused.
by John Timmer
