Hello /sci/. I am a politician. Mostly up and coming, as I

>>8199194
How do you fund original research without funding crazy people? It's hard to tell the difference. Maybe just fund both rather than neither.

>>8199201
Main problem I find is trying to direct funding at all. Most of the time you're so unaware of the field you can't really specialize or come up with creative solutions and the bastards are clearly smarter and more knowledgeable than you, so they can twist it whichever way they like.

https://www.newscientist.com/article/2096542-evolutionary-forces-are-causing-a-boom-in-bad-science/?utm_source=NSNS&utm_medium=SOC&utm_campaign=hoot&cmpid=SOC%7CNSNS%7C2016-GLOBAL-hoot

The free market will fix it. Cut taxes and everything will fund itself.

>>8199420
this
Business men can see whats coming around the corner which gives them insight who to fund. taking tax dollars and giving it to people usually doesn't have any results. That's why they come up with ridiculous theories because they know they have to show progression to get that next welfare check.

>>8199420
>>8199626
What about basic research?

>>8199420

if i dug into my asshole i'd find better quality bait lel

>>8199194
Communist revolution is the surefire way of accomplishing "advancement of humanity" through science. Good luck with that.

>>8199211
>Researchers are finding it harder to replicate each other’s findings, while the rate of retractions of published studies is rapidly rising.

>However, new research supports the idea that, in fact, we are encouraging poor scientific practices by accident.

>Beyond mere significance testing, research design in general has a history of shortcomings and repeated corrective guidelines. Yet misuse of statistical procedures and poor methods has persisted and possibly grown

into the trash

>>8199420
>The free market will fix it.
If that's all you're going to say, then say nothing. I believe in a free market but you're practically rendering a bad image about the free market with your post.

>>8199194
Make trade school worth it, separate college and university completely. Uni should be for people who want into research not for the mass who want practical skills - make the courses more theoretical, at the end of the degree students should be able for research under supervision, not codemonkeys who never read a publication. This will also fix humanities as their departments won't be flooded with retards making studies without any value.

Found institutes for research between basic research and industry to a) get the Postdocs into work without bloating uni departments b) close the gap between academia without application and industry without commitment to the public.

No new positions founded for less than 3 years. 1 year contracts are slavery and result in horrible research.

Don't let chinks and indians in as international students. They add nothing to the university, other students hate them and they shit up the courses.

>>8199706
wew lad

>>8199194

To be most effective, find a higher level solution.

Dont increase funding, but do something to make everyone else appreciate science more than they do now.

Science propaganda and awareness. Systems to ensure scientific foundations of things are emphasized more in various contexts.

>>8200215
>science propaganda
please no

Science is too slow to keep the general population interested. And during the slowest years, newspapers and magazines will be filled with charlatans claiming free energy meme engines and age-halting diets based on the latest quantum woo

>>8199626
Yes. Let's let the free market decide. Who needs to cure any rare desises when we can have another heart burn medication.

Get the kids interested early. Kids love shit like space, extinct animals, robots/machines, building stuff and who doesn't love pictorial illustrations showing advanced mathematical concepts?.

>>8199194
Please could you push for an escalating (to ~$100/ton) carbon tax that offsets income tax. Also voucher systems for families to use for education.
And could you do something about the jews e.g gas.

>>8200391
Exactly. Curing rare diseases is just not utilitarian enough, that money can be used in better ways.

>>8199194
>I've always held a very deep-seated belief that the only pure cause is the advancement of humanity and thus science is the most important.

MUH PROGRESS

You're base assumptions are not o ly wrong but are dangerous.

Enjoy the "utopia" you create for yourself.

>>8200391
So people are too stupid to pay up for curing rare diseases, but smart enough to choose someone who would pay with their money?

I love science but there are many things more important than it. Sort those out first and science would come naturally.