Excerpt: “The public deserves an explanation for why the NSF has spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on musicals about climate change, bicycle designs, and a video game that allows users to relive prom night.”
My comment: The only explanation for how things got this bad is the acceptance of evolutionary theory. Funds spent on research to determine how we evolved into creatures that can ride bicycles could have been spent on medical research designed to provide experimental evidence of biologically-based ecological adaptations. The adaptations include those that differ in sports competitions. Clearly, those differences are not due to mutations, since they are not manifested in diseases linked to mutations that cause perturbed protein folding.
Difference in protein folding are biophysically constrained in species from microbes to man. RNA-directed nutrient-dependent DNA methylation and RNA-mediated events that differentiate cell types are manifested in all morphological and behavioral phenotypes in all ecologically-adapted species. Species that could not adapt are extinct, which is why the House science committee is concerned about NSF funding. Learning about how we evolved to be able to ride a bicycle, when that ability is an ecological adaptation, may lead us to ignore what’s important to avoid our species extinction.
Learning about the biological basis of cell type differentiation that allows the Ebola viruses to adapt to ever-changing human ecosystems is obviously more important than learning how to avoid falling off a bicycle