Re: Bringing Back Mammoths (was Dinosaur Mating Displays)

[evelyn sobielski <koreke77@yahoo.de>]

> > How much money was sunk in the Thylacine cloning
> attempt already? How much land could have been set aside as
> a reserve for *living* species? There are a few Tasmanian
> endemic marsupials which are now on the brink of extinction,
> but conservation funds were squandered for this inane
> Thylacine cloning project. Odds are that 1-2 taxa won't
> make it to 2050, not the least because of the cloning
> project which at a crucial time siphoned off funds.
> 
> I will not accept money as an argument, though, as long as
> people are wasting hundreds of billions of US dollars per
> year on useless wars. How many hours in Iraq, to pick the
> most prominent example, could the thylacine cloning attempt
> have funded?


True, but when you put this up, it is often countered with "this budget has 
nothing to do with that budget". 

But regardless, both aspects cannot be seen in isolation from each other; 
whether one would build up an argument going FROM inefficient allocation of 
science/research funding in itself TO utter wasteage in overall budgetting, or 
rather the other way around, would depend on the circumstances. 

Whether good science is underfunded *in spite of* there being money aplenty to 
fight some war or whatnot, or whether good science is underfunded *because* 
there is money aplenty to fight some war or whatnot - good science as a whole 
is underfunded. This is the salient point, and it stays the same either way.


Regards,

Eike