Debate: Should the United States defund the National Science Foundation?

From Conservapedia
This is the current revision of Debate: Should the United States defund the National Science Foundation? as edited by FergusE (Talk | contribs) at 18:30, 20 July 2011. This URL is a permanent link to this version of this page.

(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to: navigation, search
! THIS IS A DEBATE PAGE, NOT AN ARTICLE. Opinions expressed are not necessarily those of Conservapedia.
Your opinion is welcome! Please remember to sign your comments on this page, and refrain from editing other user's contributions.
New Users: Please read our "Editing etiquette" before posting

Should the United States defund scientific research?


Science has yet to fully explain many basic things, such as how gravity or magnets work. With a budget of $6.87 billion and so little to show for it and with the Bible being a rich and ready-made source of much scientific knowledge, the US should completely defund all scientific research and use that money to fund other more immediate needs. --FergusE 23:19, 17 July 2011 (EDT)

Ummmm, I know how both gravity and magnetism work. MaxFletcher 23:20, 17 July 2011 (EDT)
You might have an idea about what science says this week, but science is always changing. Secular researchers really have no idea how they work. --FergusE 23:37, 17 July 2011 (EDT)
Magnetism and gravity are very well understood forces. I think you are just pulling our legs. I am going to keep an eye on you. MaxFletcher 23:39, 17 July 2011 (EDT)
Please stick to the topic at hand. Should the United States Government be using taxpayer money to fund scientific research of dubious utility? --FergusE 23:49, 17 July 2011 (EDT)
Who decides what is "scientific research of dubious utility"? MaxFletcher 00:13, 18 July 2011 (EDT)
Well, Andrey Schlafly has labeled many areas of science as "junk science". TerryB 00:25, 18 July 2011 (EDT)
that doesn't really answer my question. And I would like to hear from the guy who thinks science can't explain magnetism. I suspect the user isn't who he claims. MaxFletcher 00:29, 18 July 2011 (EDT)
I never said science can't explain magnetism, only that it hasn't and that the United States doesn't need to be wasting billions of taxpayer dollars researching it. Scientific research has lead to abortion, the racist theory of evolution and the acceptance of perversion. It exists to draw people away from the wisdom of Christ and towards the folly of man. I'm done with this. --FergusE 01:55, 18 July 2011 (EDT)

Magnets and gravity are so simple and so basic that a 5 year old could understand it (because I learned how they both work in *GASP* the evil public schools when I was 5). You don't understand how the scientific theory works and I'm not going to sit here and explain such a basic concept to a parodist. Or maybe you're not, you sound just like some of the sysops here. TerryB 08:12, 18 July 2011 (EDT)

I'd say this person is a parodist for sure. See:Magnetism. MaxFletcher 17:42, 18 July 2011 (EDT)
Can we please stay on topic, Max? We're talking about the US wasting taxpayer money on scientific research. If research is truly that valuable, then private industry can pick up the slack. The NSF only funds about 20% of all science anyway. --FergusE 18:30, 20 July 2011 (EDT)


Of course, you'd save millions in the short-term, but how do you think the USA became the largest national economy in the world?

And to point out that science hasn't discovered the answer to some questions, therefore it should be defunded is absolutely ludicrous and displays a complete ignorance of the scientific process. If you'd made the same argument 100 years ago you'd look like a bit of an idiot today with all the advances that have been made. WilliamB1 08:36, 18 July 2011 (EDT)

If you'd made the same argument 20 or even 10 years ago you'd look like a fool toda as well