Click here to support the Daily Grail for as little as $US1 per month on Patreon

Sheldrake and Nature

Author and ‘maverick’ scientist Rupert Sheldrake has written a letter to the journal Nature, on the subject of a recent editorial regarding the involvement of the public in science funding. Sheldrake writes:

…there is also a more radical possibility, namely to set aside a small proportion of the public science budget, say 1%, for research proposed by lay people.

Read the full text at Rupert Sheldrake’s website, as well as other writings on similar subjects. What do y’all think, should the public have a say in the distribution of research funding?

  1. I’m all for it
    Scientists have had it their way for too long.There are many fields in which scientists have the training to do the research, but there are also fields in which the educated or thinking public should have some input.
    An example of science holding up progress happened some years ago when the Burgess Shale was discovered and pieces of fossils were given to various scientists around the world to examine.
    One scientist delayed making a report for many many years, and it was suspected that he had discovered something new and was sitting on it.
    After his death the fossil was examined and found to contain nothing of any interest.
    Because he would not make a report the evidence of new fossils could not be extrapolated.
    There is also the situation where a certain scientist will announce that he is researching such and such and he more or less holds a patent on that research.No one else will touch it unless there is money to be made and huge companies enter the action.
    Sometimes I cannot believe that it is 2004 and there is practically no one in the science world prepared to take on research on the paranormal and anything other-worldy.
    This is where John Mack was a hero in my book.


This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Mobile menu - fractal