That’s actually not what I said.
> If the PI chooses use some funds from a grant to carry out speculative research. Good. GOOD. That is what scientific inquiry is meant for.
My claim is not about good or bad. My claim is that there is a gap between how science is done and how it is presented to the public.
> This is grants 101
You seem to agree such a gap exists, you just think it’s a good thing or a matter of business.
> because it is not my expertise
So notice when I bring up correct information, I’m told I don’t have the experience/expertise to do so despite my academic union card.
Please do share opinions about software. We have no professional organization. People argue with ideas.
> You are contributing to the decline of American science, and I will not stand for it.
you seem to identify intellectualism as a group of people or an organization.
I think that’s a mockery of truth and ideas.
Yes American science as a family of organizations deserves scrutiny and critiques. Funding these organizations is not an absolute public good.
