1 Comment »

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

1. I believe that governments need to be a substantial source of support for science research and science education. Businesses will support what is in their immediate best interest. Individuals and foundations can only fund so much. That leaves it to the government. Education and basic research are both important
   
   But there’s only so much money, so peer review is critical.
   
   And that’s why funding something like the Adler Planetarium’s new projector through an earmark that’s not reviewed seems wrong. They do get a lot of support through public and private sources. I realize that a new projection system is a big item, but go about getting it the appropriate way.
   
   The National Science Foundation and other parts of the government fund a lot of science in the US. You need to show results, but lesser known scientists can get funding.
   
   I’m optimistic that whichever candidate is elected will pay more attention to and value science more highly than the current president. They both claim they will. You can look at
   
   McCain’s Technology Plan and Obama’s Technology Plan
   
   Personally, despite disliking the attempt to use an earmark to fund the projector rather than go through other funding means, I’ll be voting for Obama for many reasons including that I believe he’ll take the country in the right direction.
   
   Disclaimer: I was supported by NASA and the Office of Naval Research while an undergraduate and graduate student and have worked on various projects funded by the National Science Foundation.

   Comment by bethkatz17582 — October 1, 2008 #

Leave a comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.