US House Approves Over $300 Million For Science Agencies

sciencehabit notes that the US House of Representatives has allotted an additional $337.5 million in budget increases divided amongst four science agencies. NASA, the National Science Foundation, and the Department of Energy's Office of Science will each receive an additional $62.5 million, and the National Institutes of Health will receive $150 million. The money will help to offset the decision to reduce budget increases earlier this year. Early plans for the money include the training of new math and science teachers, and another reprieve for FermiLab's financial troubles.

Comments

Less than 1 Day in Iraq

[SloWave]

This is less than what 1 day in Bush's Iraq War. http://www.nationalpriorities.org/costofwar_home

Criticisms

[scorp1us]

NASA: An outmoded government agency that will be replaced by private enterprise in 10-25 years. I'd rather see money go to private enterprise, if you are to dish out my tax money at all.

NIH: A bunch of self-serving PhDs that make policies about public health then go on to corporations that benefit from those policies. The NIH has yet to do a scientific study on weight loss. (Note: combining diet /and/ exercise in a study is not scientific, as you can't tell if it was diet or exercise that produced the result.)

NSF: They seem to be doing an ok job. Nothing stands out in my head at 3:17am about them.

New Math: What was wrong with the old math? I remember being exposed to new math in 4th grade. It was pointless. I never needed until college, and only for bit mapping. I don't impress the ladies with knowing DEADBEEFBABE can be a number.

Re:And forcing creationism with the other hand...

[glitch23]

If the US government gave a rats ass about Science they'd crush creationism once and for all. It seems like a hypocritical gesture to dole out hundreds of millions of dollars for science R&D and allowing creationism to be taught in science classes. Which is effectively sabotaging the next generation of scientists. Teach the controversy and all that crap. Isn't the expanding earth theory a viable alternative to gravity? Crystals work better for treating cancer than Chemo Therapy, sin causes Aids. It's all valid when you don't think about it.

Whether you view it as science or not, what is so wrong about teaching creationism so that people get both sides of the debate instead of being spoon fed what a minority believes? People on /. complain all the time that the public at large act too much like sheep and then when something that doesn't jibe with the status quo is attempted to be taught it is squashed so the sheep can remain indoctrinated into believing a theory based on assumptions with massive holes.

As far as the gov't crushing creationism, I have a feeling that *could* create a conflict of interest with that whole separation of church and state some people believe exists. But maybe it depends on what you mean by "crush" and in what venue(s). Then again, many schools won't allow any hint of Christianity within the classroom even though Islam is beginning to run rampant; go figure. I guess the separation of church and state only exists for when it is convenient to push an agenda.