Science & Technology. Buddy can you spare a $?

OK the party's over lets get real.
Priority number 92 on your agenda:- Science & Technology.
Joe?

Announce we are going to throw a few $s at the egg heads, over a period of time of course?

Fine!
Priority number 93:- Appointment of First Dog.
Any suggestions?

New Scientist has an article commenting on BHO's policy for science and technology.
This has the thumbs up from 61 of the Nobelist of them all.
Times are hard. It would be good to see money well spent.

In brief the priorities are, as they are listed in above link:-
-Restoring integrity to U.S. science policy;
-Doubling the federal investment in basic research over a 10 year period;
-Making a national commitment to science education and training;
-Encouraging American innovation to flourish;
-Addressing the “grand challenges” of the 21st century.

All good stuff - but solve a few problems too. Global warming, famine, preventable diseases, and a few more grand challenges that may face us this next year or four. I doubt that throwing money at basic research is going to produce solutions to major problems.

Take energy, for example. We know the basic science behind producing renewable, sustainable energy. Take your pick of solar, environmentally derived, or even nuclear fusion. We, or someone with a pointy head, has known the basic science for years. What we don't know is how to do it cheaply, effectively and then store the energy efficiently and spread it around without boiling the oceans. There is also the small matter of paying for it let alone the political implications of doing it.

So by all means give the man with the pointy head a few bucks to play with and good luck to him and his ilk. We've got big problems and there is certainly no big science fix, and there will be no big techy fix based on a big science fix. I hope I live long enough to be proved wrong.