▲ | throwawaymaths 4 days ago | ||||||||||||||||
No. There are some routes that are obviously pointless in foresight, and funding them is just giving money to someone's pet project, for example: Everything Julius Rebek does. Then, there are people who are defrauding by making claims that are for SURE easy to know are sketchy. I promise you every active researcher (grad student, postdoc) can off the top of their head tell you AT LEAST three results that they know are on shaky ground. "There are no right answers" is perfectly valid. Saying "there are no wrong answers" is a recipe for disaster, and cronyism. To put it bluntly: Should the DOE fund perpetual motion research? Of course not. You 100% should block dumb paths of research. We don't do that enough. | |||||||||||||||||
▲ | FrustratedMonky 4 days ago | parent [-] | ||||||||||||||||
Yeah, but was it really obvious we shouldn't pursue String Theory? It seemed promising in the beginning. Even for Alzheimer’s, it isn't as slam dunk obvious as a perpetual motion machine. Recent discussion on pro/con of Alzheimer’s controversy. https://www.astralcodexten.com/p/in-defense-of-the-amyloid-h... I'm just super wary of the 'right's tendency to throw the baby out with bath water, like JFK JR, and set the US back a few decades. Just because they don't understand science, so it must all be bad. | |||||||||||||||||
|