U.S. Research Budget Worries Scientists

AP ^ | 01/02/06 | ANDREW BRIDGES

[KevinDavis]

WASHINGTON - Defense and space projects account for most increases in the $135 billion federal research and development budget next year, worrying scientists who fear that after years of growth the nation is beginning to skimp on technology that fuels marketplace innovation.

The realignment by Congress of research money toward national defense and human space exploration means many universities, institutions and scientists will have to scramble for new sources of money or cut back current or planned projects.

[KevinDavis]

Well at least the money is going in the right direction...

[KevinDavis]

[conservativehusker]

Considering most of the technology that we use to make our lives better today came from space and defense makes me feel warm and fuzzy about this shift...

[stephenjohnbanker]

Whenever someone mentions a scientist, I automatically thing of Larsens' mad scientists from "The Far Side"

[mlc9852]

"Most immediately, decreased R&D spending will lead to layoffs and other cutbacks at some facilities that rely on federal funding, including the
Department of Energy-supported Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider at Brookhaven National Laboratory.
The Long Island particle collider creates subatomic head-on collisions between intersecting beams of gold ions, allowing nuclear physicists to study what conditions prevailed at the birth of the universe."

What could be more important than studying what conditions prevailed at the birth of the universe?

[satchmodog9]

Boo hoo. I guess a lot of people will lose their paychecks and will no longer be able to study how the sun rises in the east and the mating habits of ants. There is a private sector.

[brivette]

I've been there. It does fantastic research.

[Ninian Dryhope]

"The realignment by Congress of research money toward national defense"

In case these "scientists, did not notice, we are in global war against Islam, upon which the future of western civilization depends.

[mlc9852]

So you believe it is money (taxpayer) well spent? What has been the benefit to the American taxpayer?

[MaDeuce]

"What could be more important than studying what conditions prevailed at the birth of the universe?"

Yeah really. As soon as they have a practical particle collider that I can put under the hood of my truck with a million HP ... no more of this fantasy garbage of the birth of the universe research.

Everyone whines about the budget being too big and needs to cut it. But as soon as any area of funding has their next year's budget INCREASE reduced (not just an overall cut), the violins come out from the MSM (unless it is military spending cuts).

[brivette]

Good question. They are investigating "quark gluon plasma" stuff that existed in the first instance of time after the big bang. It could lead to such break throughs as worm holes, instantaneous travel, etc.

[mlc9852]

But how will that benefit the American taxpayer who funds this research? What is the ultimate goal of this research?

[brivette]

Time travel.

[mlc9852]

LOL

[darbymcgill]

What could be more important than studying what conditions prevailed at the birth of the universe?

Getting some poor taxpayer to pony up the money... obviously..

[Smokin' Joe]

Imagine being able to take the trash out and throw it in the wormhole, heck the truck wouldn't even have to come around and pick it up.

Not to mention dumpster diving would realy be an adventure....

[From many - one.]

Don't bother.

Explaining what we used to call "blue sky" research to the anti-science crowd is not a productive activity. There is an assumption that scientific research can be directed by bean counters and only projects whose benefits are immediatly apparent to a layman are worthwhile.

[brivette]

Well said.

[ClaireSolt]

I think government monopoly of science is a bad thing and potentially a progress-stopper. The ban on federal funding of stem cell research sent Harvard and Stanford into the fund-raising arena, and that is better, imho.