Reply #4: How is this related to the OP

[HamdenRice]

and where is the cost-benefit analysis. The OP is simply saying one corporation is cutting back its reporting. How is that a referendum on the position of science in society?

But the more controversial claim in your post is: "The attitude that all knowledge is worth having is disappearing..." That statement seems to avoid the cost benefit analysis, which taxpayers understandably make.

All knowledge may be worth having, but at what cost? For example, given that governmental budgets always require trade-offs, would an very expensive experiment inquiring about an obscure bit of scientific knowledge about an imagined or speculative sub atomic particle be worth trading off, say, a childrens' vaccination program that predictably decreases infant mortality?

How many dead children would you trade for an experiment in subatomic particles?

Please explain! Your position is confusing to me.

Regards,

:hi: