How Government Funding is Stifling Science

This article about research funding is like a snowball. It starts small, and with little energy. However, as it rolls along, it picks up more momentum. By the end, most right thinking people can easily agree that the funding system outlined by Dr. Miller is indeed flawed and in need of redirection.

Dr. Miller's point throughout the article is the current funding system will not fund scientists who do truly groundbreaking work. Miller states, "Peer review replaces true scientific research by only funding those projects that follow the established path." This the problem is this truly damns real scientific research. Miller backs up his assertation with real examples and includes enough evidence to show the need for a different system.

"In 21st century America, consensus and computer models masquerade as science. They supplant experimental data." I agree with this statement.  The current system "develops established lines of knowledge to perfection." However, major advances in science are not accomplished this way. Instead, we need more research where "long-cherished ideas are replaced wholesale by new ones that lead science in a different direction." These new-thinking projects, however, are not funded because of the orthodoxy of the reviewers, not because the new ideas are not sound science.

Read the whole article and judge for yourself.

Hat Tip Crossfit.