Surely even the evolutionists on this forum can agree that this is a waste of our tax dollars. If anything, we should all be against the evolution of big government.
Unless you're a libertarian who does not believe in any government role beyond law enforcement and the military, everyone agrees that education is a legitimate role of government. Public education is supposed to help ensure all the voting citizens out there are well-informed and have a proper understanding of our system of government. It is also important that the public has a good understanding of basic science, since so many issues today involve scientific matters. (E.g., nuclear power; stem-cell research.) So it is only reasonable that science museums, which play a significant role in educating the public, should be supported by the NSF (whose mission is to support scientific research as well as science education).
The NSF and the large government role in scientific research and education are an outgrowth of WWII. In WWII we discovered how tremendously important science was to our national security (in the Manhattan Project, the B-29 project, and cryptanalysis). After WWII, Vannevar Bush wrote a famous report, "Science: The Endless Frontier" that predicted the modern world we now live in, and outlined the role of government to get there. On October 4, 1957, Sputnik reinforced the importance of the United States maintaining scientific and technical superiority. It is no less important that the US maintain scientific superiority today. Science education is a critical part of this equation: Currently, we are importing a large fraction of our scientific talent. This cannot go on forever since China and India are now developing to the point where it is more attractive for their talent to return home. We must cultivate our own talent. This includes using scientific education, such as museums that can capture the imagination and excite children about science.
No.