2 minutes ago, ToastJenkins said:

For science? Surely. For gender sfudies?? Negative ghost rider.

the best way to view research funding is through the training lens. Industry doesnt have the time horizon for that kind of roi

NIH et al are subsidizing research training and some seed research for industry.

I'm ok with that, it's just a reality of the system we have that ought to be acknowledged.

Just now, JohnSnowsHair said:

NIH et al are subsidizing research training and some seed research for industry.

I'm ok with that, it's just a reality of the system we have that ought to be acknowledged.

Its a necessary component dont get me wrong. But the roi isnt in the tech its in the people 

even frd employees say NIH stands for Not Invented Here

1 minute ago, ToastJenkins said:

Yes after my phd i didnt understand what fundamental research is…funded by NIH grants…

i can give you endless companies doing fundamental research. From gene therapy to small molecule to large molecule to immune oncology to nuclear medicine

I got my PhD during the deconstruction of Bell Labs. In part looking at bond angles and energies of hydrocarbons on catalysts -- that's fundamental research. Mobile did further R&D on how to develop that research. How much of what you describe is developmental R&D based on fundamental research? I acknowledged biomed, btw but most of this is also built on some fundamental research done at a university. As you know since you have a PhD, I'm assuming it is in the sciences or engineering and not comparative literature, there is a difference between research for the sake of advancing our understanding of the natural world -- fundamental research and research done that builds on those understandings to develop useful products and solutions -- R&D. We can disagree on semantics. No big deal. 

Basic and applied is surely a fuzzy line. Industry is looking for an application and therefore profit motive. Perfectly healthy.

my training is molecular biology, but the payoff is in all the taxes i pay not in what i published as a doctoral candidate and i wager same applies for you.

its not about drosophila genetics or nematode gene regulation. Its about training us how the learn and critically think. That can be applied to countless efforts

1 minute ago, ToastJenkins said:

Basic and applied is surely a fuzzy line. Industry is looking for an application and therefore profit motive. Perfectly healthy.

my training is molecular biology, but the payoff is in all the taxes i pay not in what i published as a doctoral candidate and i wager same applies for you.

its not about drosophila genetics or nematode gene regulation. Its about training us how the learn and critically think. That can be applied to countless efforts

Entirely agree

9 minutes ago, Next_Up said:

I got my PhD during the deconstruction of Bell Labs. In part looking at bond angles and energies of hydrocarbons on catalysts -- that's fundamental research. Mobile did further R&D on how to develop that research. How much of what you describe is developmental R&D based on fundamental research? I acknowledged biomed, btw but most of this is also built on some fundamental research done at a university. As you know since you have a PhD, I'm assuming it is in the sciences or engineering and not comparative literature, there is a difference between research for the sake of advancing our understanding of the natural world -- fundamental research and research done that builds on those understandings to develop useful products and solutions -- R&D. We can disagree on semantics. No big deal. 

I think part of my issue is that a lot of scientific research can be framed as wasteful when presented to the lamen. One of my brothers old coworkers had 15 minutes of fame because she studies duck **** and her papers were used as an example of wasteful research by some politician.  The reality is that she uses it as a model for the genetic mechanism for establishing chirality  (they got corkscrew dongers) which is fundamentally very interesting. So you can't really subject that kind of research to the whims of non scientists.  Y'all would know more about the funding BS than me though

31 minutes ago, DEagle7 said:

I think part of my issue is that a lot of scientific research can be framed as wasteful when presented to the lamen. One of my brothers old coworkers had 15 minutes of fame because she studies duck **** and someone used her papers as an example of wasteful research by some politician.  The reality is that she uses it as a model for the genetic mechanism for establishing chirality  (they got corkscrew dongers) which is fundamentally very interesting. So you can't really subject that kind of research to the whims of non scientists.  Y'all would know more about the funding BS than me though

Yeah the grant process sucks and could be so much better

but the problem lies in the politics and connections with the agencies

What the F are you nerds even talking about?

14 minutes ago, mayanh8 said:

What the F are you nerds even talking about?

Duck deeks and how much they're worth. 

^Someone is an only child

this thread sucks

My prediction is that the Democrats will use some sort forms of chaos as election interference since they're such a crooked, incompetent trainwreck that they can't hold onto power through legal, honest elections.  Most of the country isn't batisht crazy like the commies in CVON and would never vote to keep them in office.

 

What? Every poll has Harris clearly closing the gap.

1 hour ago, DEagle7 said:

^Someone is an only child

Psycho analyzing obviously isn't one of your hobbies.

The fact that I have siblings is exactly how I know where to rhetorically punch.

Years of training sweetheart. It's how I tolerate the lot of you. ❤️

Nah, democrats would never cheat

https://rumble.com/v58uiuy-two-out-of-three-voters-think-cheating-will-affect-2024-election.html

Two Out of Three Voters Think Cheating Will Affect 2024 Election

 

44 minutes ago, Procus said:

My prediction is that the Democrats will use some sort forms of chaos as election interference since they're such a crooked, incompetent trainwreck that they can't hold onto power through legal, honest elections.  Most of the country isn't batisht crazy like the commies in CVON and would never vote to keep them in office.

 

You truly have fallen for the fear they are selling. The ability to use any sort of critical thinking has failed you. 

You probably were better off never figuring out how to use a laptop and just enjoying life. Maybe you were just always this stupid or the internet allowed your brain to melt, but damn step away from Twitter and touch grass. 

3 hours ago, DEagle7 said:

I think part of my issue is that a lot of scientific research can be framed as wasteful when presented to the lamen. One of my brothers old coworkers had 15 minutes of fame because she studies duck **** and her papers were used as an example of wasteful research by some politician.  The reality is that she uses it as a model for the genetic mechanism for establishing chirality  (they got corkscrew dongers) which is fundamentally very interesting. So you can't really subject that kind of research to the whims of non scientists.  Y'all would know more about the funding BS than me though

Alot is BS

look at the lake appadacca alligator wangs and all the epa nonsense that sparked

1 minute ago, DaEagles4Life said:

You truly have fallen for the fear they are selling. The ability to use any sort of critical thinking has failed you. 

You probably were better off never figuring out how to use a laptop and just enjoying life. Maybe you were just always this stupid or the internet allowed your brain to melt, but damn step away from Twitter and touch grass. 

Yah, because there was no Covid or George Floyd riots chaos during the last election cycle.  No precedent for that . . .

8 minutes ago, Procus said: