With Earth Day and Al Gore lurking somewhere around the murky shadows of the bio-corridor, Saturday marked the politicization of science on a national scale, as hundreds of thousands gathered in urban networks, city squares and the middle of roadways to apparently show their support for science and their dismay in the Trump administration spurring the arduous task of scrapping junk government funded research programs burdening the tax payer.
The axiom in all of these coordinated events writhing with examples of First Amendment rights is that a simple truth becomes convoluted through the damaging combination of coercion, Soros funded rallies, and ultimately devolves into sub-agendas and fear mongering. No, science is not going away anytime soon and even the most evangelical readers of the teleprompters from the far right are not currently articulating a systematic ban of research facilities under the umbrella of the will of God.
Of course the misunderstood or careless distinction regarding the differences between the concepts of subjective and objective by the bellowing masses is the crux of the flawed protests and combined with the inability to properly apply simple research towards logical conclusions. However, the drivers and tourists in the big cities were unfortunately awarded front row seats to the inane, and of course minus a needed helping of popcorn with extra butter.
In 2015, capital from the federal government accounted for only 44% of the total funding towards the $86 million spent on research grants and subsequent projects. The majority percentage was facilitated by private business and most notably the pharmaceutical companies and the burgeoning industry of prescription medications as the median age continues to rise thanks to low birth rates prompted by the degradation towards the idea of family. The majority of pundits leaning on the tedious playing card geodesic dome of an idea that government spurred research is being transformed into a martyr highlighting the complete annihilation of innovation and technological progress fail to grasp the subtleties introducing sensibility into a broken system that is wasting billions of dollars of taxpayer money on an annual basis.
Conducting a simple internet search on the irregular research projects being funded by federal dollars borders on an insane triggers lucid nightmares featuring 1990’s late-night television infomercial wacko Matthew Lesko screaming about the many ways to gain financial awards from the government. “Ask Lesko!” Here is a short list of utterly ridiculous research efforts made possible by the hard earned money of tax payers-
-$35,000 Allocated To Breweries Utilizing Solar-Power
-$171,000 To Study How Monkeys Gamble
-$856,000 To Film Mountain Lions Running On Treadmills
-$387,000 To Study The Effects Of Swedish Massages On Rabbits
While these are extreme examples and a majority of current federally funded projects have tangible value, this clearly illustrates the fiscal importance of reviewing and amending an inefficient and ineffectual vehicle of allocating tax payer money for apparent progress, without compromising the integrity and nature of science. In looking at the demonstrations from an objective standpoint, one can conclude that the price of the First Amendment from an environmental standpoint is extremely steep, especially with ten thousand people confined to a small area. Factors that have to be accounted for include the incessant littering by the attendees and civic pressure from city and county workers to clean up the mess of discarded signs and general refuse. What supersedes this notion is the amount of energy wasted from traveling to the destination via automobile or mass transit (If a Prius was used as viable transportation, please read here). Finally, with the shear amount of individuals concentrated in a small area, the realities of global warming triggers such as an excess of C02, Methane and BTU’s generated from body heat signatures have to be considered in the creation of a temporary microclimate that has plausible influence over the polar caps.
In all seriousness, an application utilizing Schrodinger’s Cat principle should be applied in quantifying the intrepid “fear” of a complete manifestation and adherence to religious doctrine with a spiritual and science-less base. If one not does not attend a fabricated public demonstration admonishing sensible measures to alleviate poor government spending decisions pertaining to research, how does one know if people chose to go or stayed home? The obvious answer is that the next month’s invoice to the city and county from the sanitation department will display the exorbitant cost of cleaning up the litter, while policy is comprised for two decades.
VIDEO: Science Is Cool