Open Letter to Congress on Science Funding

By John Conway | March 6, 2011 4:24 pm

Senator Dianne Feinstein
Energy & Water Appropriations Subcommittee

Senator Lamar Alexander
Ranking Member
Energy & Water Appropriations Subcommittee

March 1, 2011

Dear Chairman Feinstein and Sen. Alexander,

We write in regards to the current proposed budget cuts on science, and the impact the cuts would have on the competitiveness of this nation, both in the short and long term. The economic health and world leadership of this country depends on an unbroken cycle of innovation, rooted in our ability to attract and educate new waves of creative young scientists and engineers, each year. It is this cycle of innovation, whose continuation depends on funding for basic research, that drives both basic and applied sciences, and the creation of new technologies and treatments that define and improve the quality of everyday life.

In order for the cycle to remain unbroken, and for the nation’s position of leadership to continue, basic research needs to be supported, even when the times demand strict fiscal responsibility. One never knows where the next transformative breakthrough will emerge, or who the next young scientist will be that creates it.

The proposed cuts to the Department of Energy Office of Science, the National Science Foundation and the National Institute of Standards and Technology would result in the immediate cessation of many scientifically critical activities, due in part to the layoff of thousands of scientists and engineers. The cuts would have a severe impact on cutting-edge research in areas such as biotechnology, nanotechnology, high-speed computing, advanced materials and photonics, as well as high energy physics, nuclear physics and fusion energy sciences.

At a time when we are seeking to spark economic growth and encourage talented young people to pursue careers in science and engineering, reducing federal support for science research and education is counterproductive. It is basic research that motivates many young people to study science. Such cuts will only hurt our competitiveness, especially at a time when emerging economies such as China and India are ramping up their investments in scientific research and education, and are learning to form their own generations of young innovators.

As young scientists and our mentors, we ask that you make science a priority and fund basic research at a level that provides long term growth as an investment, both in our future and our nation’s future. There are many exciting questions that we can only address if provided sufficient resources, not only this year but in the coming years as well. The tools and techniques that we develop in pursuit of these answers will have a lasting benefit to our country and society.


1. Robert Roser, Fermilab, Batavia IL
2. Ben Kilminster, Fermilab, Batavia IL
3. Katherine Copic, Columbia University, New York, NY
4. Andrey Elagin, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX
5. Elisabetta Pianori University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA
6. Robyn Madrak, Fermilab, Batavia IL
7. Daniel Whiteson, UC Irvine, Irvine CA
8. Farrukh Azfar, Oxford, Batavia IL
9. Satyajit Behari, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore <d
10. Tom Schwarz, UC Davis, Davis CA
11. Ford Garberson, University of Chicago, Chicago IL
12. Andrey Loginov, Yale University, New Haven CT
13. Heather Ray, University of Florida, Gainseville Fl
14. Emma Alexander, Yale, Atlanta, Georgia
15. Jonathan S. Wilson, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio
16. Rob Forrest, UC Davis, Davis CA
17. Dr Charles Plager, UCLA, Los Angeles CA
18. Kai Yi, University of Iowa, Iowa City Iowa
19. Bodhitha Jayatilaka, Duke University, Durham NC
20. Matthew Heintze, University of Florida, Gainseville FL
21. Yen-Chu Chen Institute of Physics, Academia Sinica Taipei, Taiwan, Republic of China
22. Kyle Knoepfel, Fermilab, Batavia IL
23. Deepak Kar, University of Dresden, Dresden Germany
24. Alison Lister, UC Davis, Davis CA
25. Valeria Bartsch, University of Susex, Falmer UK
26. Harinder Singh Bawa, UC Fresno, Fresno CA
27. Heather Gerberich, University of Illinios, Urbana IL
28. Chang Seong Moon, Seoul National University, Seoul Korea
29. Tingjun Yang, Fermilab, Batavia IL
30. Sebastian Grinstein, IFAE Barcelona, Spain
31. Max Goncharov, MIT, Boston MA
32. Michal Kreps, University of Warwick, Coventry UK
33. Giulia Manca, University of Cagliari, Cagliari Italy
34. Mousumi Datta, Fermilab, Batavia IL
35. Bonnie T. Fleming, Yale University New Haven CT
36. Sasha Pronko, LBL, Berkeley CA
37. Efe Yazgan, Postdoctoral Research Associate, Texas Tech University, Lubbock, Texas
38. Diego Tonelli, Fermilab, Batavia IL
39. Sergo Jindariani, Fermilab, Batavia IL
40. Meghan McAteer, University of Texas, Austin TX
41. Olga Norniella, UIUC, Urbana Champaign IL
42. David Cox, UC Davis, Davis CA
43. Dongwook Jang, Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh PA
44. Justin Pilot, OSU, Columbus OH
45. Kirsten Tollefson, Michigan State, East Lansing MI
46. John Conway, UC Davis, Davis CA
47. Robin Erbacher, UC Davis, Davis CA
48. Leo Jenner, Fermilab, Batavia IL
49. Paola Garosi, University of Siena, Siena Italy
50. Xinchun Tian University of South Carolina, Columbia SC
51. Karen Bland, Baylor University, Waco Tx
52. Enrique Palencia, CERN, Geneva Switzerland
53. Joseph Walding, College of William and Mary, Williamsburg VA
54. Marcelle Soares-Santos, Fermilab, Batavia, IL
55. Prashant Subbaro, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia PA
56. Halley Brown, Fermilab, Batavia IL
57. J.P. Chou, Brown University, Providence RI
58. Sudhir Malik, University of Nebraska, Lincoln Nebraska
59. Christian Pascal Graf, UIC, Chicago IL
60. Matthew Worcester, University of Chicago, Chicago IL
61. Ritoban Basu Thakur, Fermilab, Batavia IL
62. Carley Kopecky, UC Davis, Davis CA
63. Zeynep Isvan, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh PA
64. Derek Strom, UIC, Chicago IL
65. Dr Christina Mesropian, Rockefeller University, NYC NY
66. Ayesh Jayasinghe, University of Oklahoma, Norman, Oklahoma
67. Gary Cheng, Columbia, NYC NY
68. Suneel Dutt, Panjab University, Chandigarh India
69. James Monk, UCL, London UK
70. Aaron Morris, Northern Illinois Univ. Dekalb IL
71. Jacob Linacre, Fermilab, Batavia IL
72. Ioana Anghel, UIC, Chicago IL
73. Ian Howley University of Texas, Arlington TX
74. Karolos Potamianos, Purdue University, West Lafayette IN
75. Shulamit Moed Sher, Harvard University, Boston MA
76. Jason St. John, Boston University, Boston MA
77. Bruno Casal, ETH Zurich, Zurich Switzerland
78. Gavril Giurgiu, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore MD
79. Alexander Paramonov, Argonne National Lab, Argonne IL
80. Bari Osmanov, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL
81. Jeffrey Kubo, Fermilab, Batavia IL
82. Adam Patch, Yale University, New Haven IL
83. Anna Mazzacane, Fermilab, Batavia IL
84. Michael Peter Cooke, Fermilab, Batavia IL
85. Benjamin Auerbach, Yale University, New Haven CT
86. Warren Clarida, University of Iowa, Iowa City IA
87. Ricky Fok, University of Oregon, Eugene OR
88. Samvel Khalatyan, UIC Chicago IL
89. Miguel Mondragon, Fermilab, Batavia IL
90. Federico Sforza, PISA University, PISA Italy
91. Jon Wilson, OSU, Columbus Ohio
92. Jonathan Asaadi, Texas A&M, College Station TX
93. Edward Laird, Princeton, Princeton NJ
94. Dean Andrew Hidas, Rutgers University, Piscataway NJ
95. Irkli Chakaberia, Kansas State University, Manhattan KS
96. Mark Mathis, College of William and Mary, Williamsburg VA
97. Alejandro de la Puente, Notre Dame, South Bend Indiana
98. Yaofu Zhou, IIT, Chicago IL
99. Sarah Lockwitz, Yale University, New Haven CT
100. Douglas Orbaker, University of Rochester, Rochester NY
101. Joseph Haley, Northeastern University, Boston MA
102. Steve Nahn, MIT, Boston MA
103. Harvey Newman, Caltech, Pasadena CA
104. Austin Napier, Tufts, Medford MA
105. Sarah Demers, Yale, New Haven CT
106. JoAnne Hewett, SLAC/Stanford, Stanford CA
107. Jean-Luc Vay, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Berkeley, CA
108. Tatiana Rodriguez, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia PA
109. Evan Friis, UC Davis, Davis California
110. Anyes Tafford, UC Irvine, Irvine CA
111. Avto Kharchilava, SUNY Buffalo, Buffalo NY
112. Georgia Karagiorgi Columbia University, NYC NY
113. Aaron Mislivec, University of Rochester, Rochester NY
114. William J Willis, Columbia University, NYC NY
115. Michael Murray, University of Kansas, Lawrence KS
116. Victor Yarba, Fermilab, Batavia IL
117. Florencia Canelli, University of Chicago/Fermilab, Chicago IL
118. Stefan M.Spanier, University of Tennessee, Knoxville TN
119. Pushpa Bhat, Fermilab, Batavia IL
120. James Wetzel, University of Iowa, Iowa City Ia
121. John Penwell, Indiana University, Bloomington IN
122. Igor Gorelov, University of New Mexico, Albequerque NM
123. Barbara Alvarez Gonzalez, MSU, East Lansing MI
124. Mauro Donega, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia PA
125. Angela Galtieri, LBL, Berkeley CA
126. Josehp F Muratore, BNL, Upton New York
127. Julie Managan, Rice University, Houston TX
128. Elizabeth H. Simmons, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan
129. Elisa Pueschel, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, MA
130. Ben Brau, U. Mass., Amherst MA
131. Jennifer Klay , California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo CA
132. Daryl Hare, Rutgers University, Springfield NJ
133. Daniel McDonald, Rice University, Houston TX
134. Sridhara Dasu, University of Wisconsin, Madison WI
135. Steven Blusk, Syracuse University, Syracuse NY
136. Fabrizio Margaroli, Purdue University, West Lafayette IN
137. John Strologas, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque NM
138. Nathan Goldschmidt, University of Florida, Gainesville Fl
139. Eva Halkiadakis, Rutgers, Picsataway NJ
140. Howard Haber UC Santa Cruz, Santa Cruz CA
141. Hongliang Liu, UC Riverside, Riverside CA
142. Stephen Parke, Fermilab, Batavia IL
143. Joachim Kopp, Fermilab, Batavia, IL
144. Alan Fisher, SLAC, Menlo Park CA
145. Jacobo Konigsberg, University of Florida, Gainesville FL
146. Zeno D. Greenwood, Louisiana Tech University, Ruston LA
147. Harrison B. Prosper, Florida State University, Tallahassee FL
148. Nikolai Smirnov, Yale University, New Haven CT
149. Nick Evans, University of Texas, Austin TX
150. Michael E. Peskin, SLAC, Stanford University, Stanford, California
151. Lawrence S. Pinsky, University of Houston, Houston, Texas
152. Bo Fenton-Olsen, LBL, Berkeley CA
153. Carlo Dallapiccola, University of Massachusetts, Amherst MA
154. Ron Madras, LBL, Berkeley CA
155. Paddy Fox, Fermilab, Batavia IL
156. Lance Dixon, SLAC, Menlo Park CA
157. Douglas Wright, Lawrence Livermore National Lab, Pleasanton CA
158. Ian Shipsey, Purdue University, West Lafayette IN
159. Reid Mumford, Salt lake City Utah
160. Pamela Klabbers, University of Wisconsin, Madison Wisconsin
161. Richard A. Vidal, Fermilab, Batavia IL
162. Ankush Mitra, Academia Sinica, Taipei Taiwan
163. Robert Hirosky, University of Virginia, Charlottesville VA
164. Chris Neu, University of Virginia, Charlottesville VA
165. Lina Galtieri, LBL, Berkeley CA
166. Marco Trovato, University of PISA, PISA Italy
167. Elizabeth Worcester, University of Chicago, Chicago IL
168. Leo Sabato, University of PISA, PISA Italy
169. Yu Zeng, Duke University, Durham NC
170. Yine Sun, Fermilab, Batavia IL
171. Viktoriya Zvoda, Fermilab, Batavia IL
172. Hatim Hegab, Oklahoma State University, Stillwater OK
173. Alexey Naumov, Fermilab, Batavia IL
174. Andrei Khilkevich, Fermilab, Batavia IL
175. Azeddine Kasmi, Baylor University, Waco TX
176. Robert Zwaska, Fermilab, Batavia IL
177. Alexander Romanenko, Fermilab, Batavia IL
178. Denise C. Ford, Northwestern University, Evanston IL
179. Kenichi Hatakeyama, Baylor University, Waco TX
180. Geum Bong Yu, Duke University, Durham NC
181. Tim Maxwell, Northern Illinois, Dekalb IL
182. Jun Guo, Columbia University, New York, NY
183. Liang Li, University of California, Riverside, Riverside, CA
184. Gianluca Petrillo, University of Rochester, Rochester, NY
185. Dr. Tyler Dorland, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington.
186. Jesus Orduna, Rice University, Huston, TX
187. Mark A. Padilla, University of California Riverside, Riverside CA.
188. Zhenyu Ye, Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory, Batavia, Illinois
189. Andrew Kobach, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL
190. Hang Yin, Fermilab, Batavia, IL
191. Ryan J. Hooper, Bradley University, Peoria, IL 61625
192. Ashish Kumar, SUNY Buffalo, NY
193. Kayle DeVaughan, University of Nebraska-Lincoln
194. Dennis Mackin, Rice University, Houston, TX
195. Avdhesh Chandra Rice University, Houston, TX
196. Juliette Alimena, Brown University, Providence, RI
197. Satish Desai Fermilab, Batavia, IL
198. Jadranka Sekaric University of Kansas, Lawrence, Kansas
199. Dale Johnston, University of Nebraska, Lincoln NE
200. Dr. Andrew Haas, Stanford Linear Accelerator Center, Menlo Park, CA.
201. Kathryn Tschann-Grimm, Stony Brook University Stony Brook, NY
202. Peter Renkel, Southern Methodist University, Dallas, Texas.
203. Marc Buehler (PhD), University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA
204. Oleksiy Atramentov, Research Associate, Rutgers U., New Brunswick, NJ
205. Shabnam Jabeen, Brown University Providence, RI
206. Subhendu Chakrabarti, State University of New York, Stony Brook
207. Alex Melnitchouk, University of Mississippi, University, MS
208. Michael Eads, University of Nebraska – Lincoln
209. Michael Wang, Unversity of Rochester, Rochester, NY
210. Carrie McGivern, University of Kansas
211. Diego Menezes, Northern Illinois University, DeKalb, IL.
212. Ioannis Katsanos, University of Nebraska – Lincoln
213. Trang Hoang, Florida State University, Tallahassee, IL
214. Sung Woo, Fermilab, Batavia, IL
215. Sehwook Lee, Iowa State University, Ames, Iowa
216. Maiko Takahashi, Fermilab, Batavia, IL
217. Dmitry Bandurin, Florida State University, Tallahassee, Florida
218. Leah Welty-Rieger, Northwestern University, Evanston IL
219. Amitabha Das University of Arizona
220. Xuebing Bu, Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory, Batavia, IL
221. Joseph G Haley Northeastern U Boston, MA
222. Bjoern Penning, Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory, Batavia, IL
223. Andreas Jung, Fermilab, Batavia, IL
224. Daniel Boline , SUNY at Stony Brook, NY
225. Mandy Rominsky, Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory, Batavia, IL
226. Michelle Prewitt, Rice University, Houston, TX
227. Kenneth Herner, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI
228. Mark Williams, Fermilab International Fellow, Chicago, Il
229. Yunhe Xie, Fermilab, Batavia, IL
230. Gabriel Facini, Northeastern University, Boston, MA
231. John Backus Mayes, SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory, Menlo Park, CA
232. Harold Nguyen, Univ. of California Riverside, Riverside, CA
233. Anton Kravchenko, University of South Carolina, Columbia, SC
234. Ryan M White, University of South Carolina, Columbia, SC
235. David Doll, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, CA
236. Bradley Wray, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX
237. Alexander Rakitin, California Inst. of Technology, Pasadena, CA
238. Daniel Chao, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, CA
239. Alexander Palmer, University of Texas at Dallas, Dallas, TX
240. Gil Vitug, University of California at Riverside, Riverside, CA
241. Rajarshi Das, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO
242. Chih-hsiang Cheng, California Inst. of Technology, San Jose, CA
243. Bertrand Echenard, California Inst. of Technology, Pasadena, CA
244. Liang Sun, Univ. of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH
245. Ada Rubin, Iowa State University, San Jose, Ca
246. Mikhail Dubrovin, SLAC, Menlo Park, CA
247. Andy Ruland, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX
248. Jaclyn Schwehr, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO
249. Bryan Fulsom, SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory, Menlo Park, CA
250. Chris Bouchard; University of Illinois; Urbana, IL
251. Daping Du; University of Iowa; Iowa City, IA
252. Gordan Krnjaic; Johns Hopkins University; Baltimore, MD
253. Tim Linden; University of California at Santa Cruz; Santa Cruz, CA
254. Mark Mattson, Wayne State University, Detroit MI
255. Robert Craig Group, University of Virginia, Charlottesville VA
256. Artur Apresian, Caltech, Pasadena CA
257. Donatella Toretta, Fermilab, Batavia IL
258. Kate Scholberg, Dune University, Durham NC
259. Vito Di Benedetto, Università del Salento, Lecce, Italy.
260. Eric Feng, University of Chicago, Chicago IL
261. Tami Kramer, Fermilab, Batavia, Illinois
262. Nicholas Hadley, The University of Maryland, College Park, MD
263. Paul Sheldon, Vanderbilt Univerisity, Nashville, TN
264. Daniela Bortoletto, Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana
265. Paul Padley, Rice University, Houston, TX.
266. Stanley Durkin, Ohio State University, Columbus OH
267. Kenneth Bloom, the University of Nebraska, Lincoln NE
268. Robert M. Harris, Fermilab, Batavia Illinois
269. Luc Demortier, The Rockefeller University, New York, NY
270. Greg Landsberg, Brown University, Providence RI
271. Tao Han Univ. of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin
272. Manfred Paulini, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA
273. Nikos Varelas, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, Illinois
274. Brad Cox, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA
275. J. William Gary, University of California, Riverside; Riverside, CA
276. Marcus Hohlmann, Florida Institute of Technology, Melbourne, FL
277. Daniel Elvira, Fermilab, Batavia, IL
278. Jun Miyamoto, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA
279. Wesley Smith, U. Wisconsin – Madison, Madison, WI
280. Norbert Neumeister, Purdue University, W. Lafayette, IN
281. Bruce A. Barnett, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD
282. David Saltzberg, UCLA, Los Angeles, California
283. Cecilia E. Gerber, University of Illinois, Chicago, IL
284. Robert Clare, University of California, Riverside, Riverside, CA
285. Alan Weinstein, Caltech, Pasadena CA
286. Hans P. Paar, University of California, San Diego
287. Edwin Norbeck, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA
288. Claudio Campagnari, University Of California, Santa Barbara, CA
289. Yasar Onel, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA
290. Ren-yuan Zhu, Caltech, Pasadena, CA
291. Colin Jessop, University of Notre Dame, South Bend, IN
292. Christopher G. Tully, Princeton University, Princeton, NJ
293. Marc Baarmand, Florida Institute of Technology, Melbourne, Florida
294. Liz Sexton-Kennedy, Fermilab, Batavia, IL
295. Dimitri Bourilkov, University of Florida, Gainesville
296. Guenakh Mitselmakher, Universtity of Florida, Gainesville, FL
297. Yuri Gershtein, Rutgers, Piscataway, NJ
298. William T. Ford, University of Colorado, Boulder, CO
299. Pierre Ramond, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL
300. Richard Lander, University of California, Davis, Davis CA
301. Jim Alexander, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York
302. Pete Markowitz, Florida International University, Miami, FL
303. Frank Wuerthwein, UCSD, La Jolla, CA
304. Cecilia Gerber, Univ. of Illinois-Chicago, Chicago, IL
305. Mitchell Wayne, University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame, IN
306. Kaori Maeshima, Fermilab, Batavia, IL
307. David Stickland, Princeton University, Princeton, NJ
308. Peter Elmer, Princeton University, Princeton, NJ
309. Lothar Bauerdick, Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory, Batavia, IL
310. Igor Vorobiev, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA
311. Frank Geurts, Rice University, Houston TX
312. Vasken Hagopian, Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL
313. Sharon Hagopian, Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL
314. David E. Pellett, University of California, Davis, Davis, CA
315. Richard Breedon, University of California, Davis, Davis, CA
316. Dick Loveless, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI
317. Anders Ryd, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York
318. Vivek Sharma, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, Ca
319. Tim Doody, Fermilab, Batavia IL
320. Joe Incandela, UC Santa Barbara, Sanata Barbara, CA
321. Stanley J. Brodsky, Stanford University, Stanford, CA
322. Douglas Glenzinski, Fermilab, Batavia, IL
323. Marj Corcoran, Rice University, Houston, TX
324. Duncan Carlsmith, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI
325. Philip Baringer, University of Kansas, Lawrence, KS
326. Jon A Bakken, Fermilab, Batavia, IL
327. Lawrence Sulak, Boston University, Boston, MA
328. Robert Harr, Wayne State University, Detroit MI
329. Virgil Barnes, Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana
330. George Alverson, Northeastern University, Boston, MA
331. Don Reeder, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI
332. Michael Schmitt, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL
333. Kamal K. Seth, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL
334. André de Gouvêa, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL
335. Brian Heltsley, Cornell University, Cornell, NY
336. Suharyo Sumowidagdo, University of California, Riverside, Riverside CA
337. Weimin Wu, Fermilab, Batavia, Illinois
338. Andriy Zatserklyaniy, University of Puerto Rico, Mayaguez, Mayaguez, PR
339. Philip D. Lawson, Boston University, Boston MA
340. Alexei Safonov, Texas A&M University, Colleeg Station TX
341. Christopher Neu, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, Virginia
342. Petar Maksimovic, The Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD
343. Keith Ulmer, University of Colorado, Boulder, CO
344. Selcuk Cihangir, Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory, Batavia, IL
345. William Tanenbaum, Fermilab, Batavia, IL
346. Christopher Justus, University of California, Santa Barbara, CA.
347. Edmund Berry, Princeton University, Princeton, NJ
348. Aran Garcia-Bellido, University of Rochester, Rochester, NY
349. Remigius K Mommsen, Fermilab, Batavia, IL
350. David Stuart, University of California, Santa Barbara, CA
351. Salvatore Rappoccio, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD
352. Tia Miceli, University of California Davis, Davis CA
353. Sinjini Sengupta, Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas
354. Sorina Popescu, Fermilab, Batavia IL
355. Andrew Askew, Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL
356. Frank Chlebana, Fermilab, Batavia, IL
357. Nhan Tran, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD
358. Ted Kolberg, University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame, IN
359. Julia Yarba, Fermilab, Batavia IL
360. Kirk Arndt, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN
361. Jeffrey Temple, University of Maryland, College Park, MD
362. Robert L Stone, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ
363. Aram Avetisyan, Brown University, Providence, RI
364. Dorian Kcira, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, CA
365. Valentin Kuznetsov, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY
366. Nancy Marinelli, Univ. of Notre Dame – Notre Dame, IN
367. Jacob Anderson, Fermilab, Batavia, IL
368. Seth Cooper, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN
369. Andres Florez, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN
370. Yuriy Pischalnikov, Fermilab, Batavia, IL
371. Seema Sharma, Fermilab, Batavia IL
372. Alexi Mestvirishvili, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA
373. Yuyi Guo, Fermilab, Batavia IL
374. Jorge L. Rodriguez, Florida International University, Miami, Florida
375. Oliver Gutsche, Fermilab, Batavia, IL
376. Jeffrey Kolb, University of Notre Dame, South Bend, IN
377. Francisco Yumiceva, Fermilab, Batavia, IL
378. Roy Joaquin Montalvo, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX
379. Steven Lowette, UCSB, Santa Barbara, California
380. Igor Vodopiyanov, Florida Institute of Technology,Melbourne, FL
381. James Zabel, Rice University, Houston, TX
382. Yuriy Pakhotin, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX
383. Jason Gilmore, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX
384. Weiren Chou, Fermilab, Batavia, IL
385. J. Kandaswamy, SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory, Stanford, CA
386. Jordan M. Tucker, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA
387. Hongxuan Liu, Baylor University, Waco, TX
388. Christoph Paus, MIT, Cambridge, MA
389. Armando LANARO, University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin
390. Tiesheng Dai, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan
391. Chi M. Lei, Fermilab, Batavia, IL
392. George S.F. Stephans, MIT, Cambridge, Massachusetts
393. Ye Li, Northwestern University, Evanston IL
394. Will Flanagan, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX
395. James Gainer, Northwestern University, Evanston IL
396. Kunal Kumar, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL
397. Bernadette Heyburn, University of Colorado, Boulder, CO
398. Don Summers, University of Mississippi, Oxford, MS
399. Eric Vaandering, Fermilab, Batavia IL
400. Dimitris Varouchas, LBNL, Berkeley, CA
401. Burton DeWilde, Stony Brook University, Stony Brook, NY
402. Josh Cogan, SLAC/Stanford, Palo Alto, CA (voter in Indianland, SC)
403. M. Saleem, University of Oklahoma, Norman, OK
404. Paul Jackson, SLAC/Stanford University, Menlo Park, CA
405. Devin Harper, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI
406. Mark Oreglia, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL
407. Darren Price, Indiana University, Bloomington IN
408. Kevin Finelli, Duke University, Durham, NC
409. John Stupak, SUNY Stony Brook, Stony Brook, NY
410. James Degenhardt, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA
411. Dilip Jana, University of Oklahoma, Norman, OK
412. Krzysztof Sliwa, Tufts University, Medford, Massachusetts
413. Hayes Dee Meritt, Ohio State University, Columbus, OH
414. Steven Farrell, University of California, Irvine, CA
415. Joseph Tuggle, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL
416. Tetteh Addy, Hampton University, Hampton, VA
417. Lashkar Kashif, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI
418. Ning Zhou, University of California, Irvine, CA
419. Seth Zenz, University of California, Berkeley, CA
420. Michael Werth, University of California, Irvine, CA
421. Jianrong Deng, University California, Irvine, CA
422. Dominick Olivito, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA
423. Joshua Moss, Ohio State University, Columbus, OH
424. Zachary Marshall, graduate of Calech, Malibu, CA
425. Andrew Nelson, Iowa State University, Ames, Iowa
426. Tim Andeen, Columbia University, New York, NY
427. Robert Calkins, Northern Illinois University, DeKalb, IL
428. Caleb Lampen, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ
429. Kevin Slagle, University of California, Irvine, CA
430. Louise Skinnari, University of California, Berkeley, CA
431. Fayez Mahmoud Abu-Ajamieh,Northern Illinois University, Dekalb, IL
432. Lauren Tompkins, University of California, Berkeley, CA
433. Kevin O’Connell, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA
434. Maxwell I. Scherzer, University of California, Berkeley, CA
435. Danial Slichter, University of California, Berkeley, CA
436. Woochun Park, University of South Carolina, Columbia, SC
437. Jae Jun Kim, University of South Carolina, Columbia, SC
438. Matthew Relich, University of California, Irvine, CA
439. Scott Aefsky, Brandeis University, Waltham, MA
440. Reza AmirArjomand, University of California, Irvine, CA
441. Shannon MacKenzie, University of Louisville, Louisville KY
442. Fabien Tarrade, Brookhaven National Lab, Upton, NY
443. Chad Suhr, Northern Illinois University, DeKalb, IL
444. Xin Qian, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, CA
445. Jedrzej Biesiada, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Berkeley, CA
446. Corrinne mills, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA
447. Brokk Toggerson, University of California, Irvine, CA
448. Stephanie Majewski, Brookhaven National Laboratory, Upton, NY
449. Rajivalochan Subramaniam, Louisiana Tech University, Ruston, LA
450. Andre M. Bach, UC Berkeley & Lawrence Berkeley National Lab, Berkeley, CA
451. Hideki Okawa, University of California, Irvine, CA
452. Zhen Yan, Boston University, Boston, MA
453. Robert Harrington, Boston University, Boston, MA
454. Emily Thompson, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, MA
455. Christopher K. Vermilion, University of Louisville, Louisville, KY
456. William Edson, State University of New York at Albany, Albany, NY
457. William S. Lockman, University of California, Santa Cruz, CA 95064
458. Dmitri Smirnov, Brookhaven National Laboratory, Upton, NY
459. James Saxon, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA
460. Matthew Hickman, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA
461. Kurt Brendlinger, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA
462. Bradley Dober, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA
463. Alex Long, Boston University, Boston, MA
464. Chris Potter, University of Oregon, Eugene, OR
465. Peter Radloff, University of Oregon, Eugene OR
466. W. Thomas Meyer, Iowa State University, Ames, Iowa
467. Usha Mallik, The University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA
468. Simona Malace, Jefferson Lab, Newport News, VA
469. German Colón, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, MA
470. Therese Jones, University of California, Berkeley, CA
471. Jessica Metcalfe, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, NM
472. Anze Slosar, Brookhaven National Laboratory, Upton NY
473. Sarah Newman,University of California, Berkeley, CA
474. Shirley Ho, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Berkeley, CA
475. Kyoko Yamamoto, Iowa State University, Ames, IA
476. Eyal Kazin, New York University, New York, NY
477. Alexander Tuna, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA
478. Regina Caputo, Stony Brook University, Stony Brook, NY
479. Alfred Goshaw, Duke University, Durham, NC

  • randommuser

    There are several repeats:
    Anton Kravchenko,
    Ashish Kumar,
    Avto Kharchilava,
    Hatim Hegab,
    Hongliang Liu,
    Igor Gorelov,
    Michael Murray,
    Michael Peter
    Steve Nahn,
    Victor Yarba,

    I didn’t check thoroughly. So some may be missed. Better correct now to avoid embarrassment later.

  • Wetuski

    They don’t care about science, if they did they wouldn’t have cancel the partical accelerator in Texas back in 1993, or constantly deny climate change, or constantly try to push creationism/ intelligent design in schools.
    This new budget isn’t about caring about science or education either, Reps are trying to bring down the economy so it’ll look bad on the president (bad economy is blamed on the president always regardless of whether or not it’s their fault) and do favors for the ones that pay them, while Obama/Dems are incompetent just trying to find middle ground with an incredibly stupid idea.

    They’ll take one look and just laugh, not get anything important about what they’re doing, and/or not care unless you can show it’ll somehow contribute to our “national security” nor do they care if you’re not some large society destroying corporation shoveling money at them like there’s no tomorrrow!

    This may not apply to all of them but you know it applies ot a majority which hold control over what does and does not happen…I’d be signing that open letter too though if I were you, in vain…

  • spyder

    I might suggest sending letters like this to China, India, Japan, Singapore, Taiwan, Germany, etc.; where the money for research and study will be forthcoming. The US is a safe harbor for the very wealthy, most of whose money comes from the production of energy resources. They ship energy around the world, invest and insure the wealth through the largest financial institutions, and feed a pittance of manna to the locals for their compliance. For every Buffet and Gates there are dozens of Koch brothers, T.Boone Pickens, and the Waltons.

  • Scott

    One of the lessons thats become abundantly clear recently is that when a political system becomes so corrupt, rigid and unresponsive that it cannot meet the most basic demands of its people, it becomes necessary to actively demand something else. First through demonstrating and, if necessary, through escalating forms of nonviolent obstruction and disobedience. This is true in mostly open societies as much as in overt tyrannies.

    People, the time to do something about this is now. If people living in the most brutal police states on earth can win real change, then I think we can too. Voting and the usual mechanisms are not functioning. Both parties have totally failed and the few that actually want to do the right thing are hopelessly swimming against the tide of a broken system. We should stop hoping that choosing the least-worst party is going to fix anything. We really need to try some new methods, and Id highlight US Uncut as one model that has the right idea. ( ) This isnt really that complicated!

    If we do nothing, we die.

  • John

    Dr. Reason, your comment – and you – are gone from here.

  • John

    randouser – thanks! I think that some folks were a bit over-enthusiastic and responded to two different emails. I wrote a program to remove the duplicates.

  • Maldoror

    I met Boris Kayser from Fermilab a few weeks ago, who came up with a great analogy that even US Senators can understand: If you want to make a plane more efficient by reducing its weight, it is not a good idea to remove its engines!

    Then again, with such a large part of the population ignorant and even hostile to science I am quite pessimistic about this. Perhaps it is a bit too extreme to surmise that republicans willingly sabotage the economy to hurt a Democratic president (any effects will be felt mostly by Obama’s successors), but these days who knows…

  • Peter Coles

    What is happening in the US is sadly reminiscent of the situation in the UK over the last few years. However, the Science is Vital campaign is one positive movement to have emerged from attempts to cut funding for basic research over here. I suggest you check out their website:

    I wish you well in the struggle against the Forces of Darkness.

  • clericpope

    If somehow John Stewart or Colbert could get to know of this. Given Obama’s state of the union speech this makes no sense. But hey I am not even from the U.S so may be it makes to you guys.

  • Phillip Helbig

    Couldn’t such a call to action leave out the “leadership” stuff? The US is a big country, and as a result of that is the “leader” in many areas. But even if it is not the leader, for whatever reason, science is still worth doing. It also sounds rather jingoistic, which seems out of place in a world where, for better or worse, international collaboration in science is the norm.

  • Nex

    Conflict of interest.
    No data offered to support the assertions.
    Everyone heard all those talking points before.

    All in all not particularly likely to succeed.

  • Jeff Burgess

    God damnit, it is time to get out before the fall of the American Empire!

  • A.N. Other Important Scientist

    How can others add their names to this list ?

  • Blunt Instrument

    Dear Mr. Roser, et al.,

    I’m sorry, but we simply need more money for our program of ‘panem et circenses’. Now please go back to stuffing your face with junk food and watching Charlie Sheen meltdown on the Internet.


  • Joseph J Veverka

    Think the scientist should go ask the top 2% of the wealthest citizens for the dough and stop asking the American tax payer for a handout. The top 2% just got 90 BILLION in tax credits to piss away on whatever they want with NO strings attached. Since the science grants go to the scientist and the fruits of their labor end up in the private sector the initial funds should come from the private sector. Like to see you guys get a dime from them. In case you haven’t heard the tax payers are jammed up and 1 out of 4 have lost their homes.

  • Anonymouse

    The scientists who signed this letter do research that is not funded by the private sector, because it doesn’t actually line their coffers, at least in the short term. So the “fruits of their labor” part of your comment is simply not true.

    It always amazes me how incredibly easy the top 2% find to pit two of their victims (in the case Veverka, who seems to be suffering from the negative effects of the poor current economy) against each other (he somehow lashes out at scientists who are facing funding cuts as the same architects of that down-turn greedily suck up even more profit at the tax-payers expense). We need to use our brains and go after the true villains here. Fighting among ourselves is just playing into their hands, and they are laughing at us all the way to the bank.

  • lacapote

    I work in research and could never undermine the proper funding science but the absolute waste I see in science is absolutely appalling… One that comes to mind is the now 3rd return of a bad fiction movie, the return of personal genomics. Arrrggggg… The day science finds a simple cure to malaria, dehydration, cholera and basic childhood disease (why don’t you throw in there a few million fat oversized american in the lot) si the day science will become noble, in the meantime, let the diabetes sore while with fight it with medication rather than common sense. Go on keep throwing money at it….

  • Low Math, Meekly Interacting

    Not tying the need for funds to defense is a tactical error. The current teabagger ethos is all basic research is a luxury, while if profit-driven, the govt. should have no role in funding it. I.e. govt. has no place in basic research. Industry can do it better. And if industry doesn’t want to do it, then it is intrinsically worthless.

    About the only wedge one can drive in that argument is the need to keep a competitive edge in technology that could be used to do harm to Uh-murricka. Just like we don’t privatize our fighting forces, we don’t privatize our thinking forces, perhaps.

    Otherwise, forget it. If the teabaggers win control of the Senate, get used to high-minded irrelevance.

    I say this as one who is utterly disgusted by the argument I’m making.

  • The Cosmist

    The anti-scientific climate in the US government is a reflection of the anti-scientific culture of the country. Scientists have no one but themselves to blame though; cultures are Darwinian struggles between competing memes, and scientists simply haven’t been fighting hard enough for their memes. Scientists need to take the gloves off in America and engage in a more aggressive brand of evangelism if they are going to rely on money from the public trough. To sit back and assume that rationalism will carry the day isn’t good enough any more in a country where very aggressive irrationalists have so much power and influence!

    Modernity is under attack worldwide, and the passive liberalism of most scientists simply isn’t going to cut it in a world beset by rapidly proliferating bin Ladens and Palins. In a very Darwinian sense, modernity may be losing the battle against the fecund forces of darkness and needs to change tactics. Some hold up secular, scientific Europe as a model for America, but Europeans are rapidly depopulating themselves and are being forced to import people from generally less secular cultures, which threatens the foundations of their post-Enlightenment culture.

    One answer to this dilemna, as I see it, is for people in the modern world to adopt a new kind of “cosmic religion” of the kind Einstein and Sagan spoke of, which has an inspiring, aggressive agenda that can meet and defeat the agendas of the reactionaries head on. Modernity has effectively become suicidal with its current ideology, and may need a “Mohammed of science” to beat back the encroaching darkness. Anyway, this is what I’m trying to do with a religion I’m founding called “Cosmism” – a cosmic religion with an aggressive, uncompromising agenda for humanity that is informed by science rather than mysticism.

  • Joseph J Veverka

    There is only one science project worth funding , the one that products a “turth serum” for all Senators and Congreemen take at their oath of office ceremony. We would be forever indebted to that person

  • TedL

    This letter is poorly written. Start with the third paragraph but write with conviction and strength. For example, “The proposed cuts … WILL CAUSE,” not “would result.” The first two paragraphs are unnecessary “throat clearing,” with references to ill-defined concepts.

    Instead of this:
    In order for the cycle to remain unbroken, and for the nation’s position of leadership to continue, basic research needs to be supported, even when the times demand strict fiscal responsibility. One never knows where the next transformative breakthrough will emerge, or who the next young scientist will be that creates it.

    Try this:
    Our nation’s continued role as the world leader in technological innovation requires investments in American minds and institutions, even in lean times.

    My point: The clamor for tighly budgeted dollars will drown all but the clearest and most compelling messages.

  • Curious Wavefunction

    That’s an admirable letter but here’s the kind of reply I expect:

    Dear Dr. Conway,

    You don’t understand. We are politicians. We look not at our country’s long-term interests (like we used to do a long time ago) but only at our own short-term, narrow, vested self interests. And the people who voted us in will largely buy what we say hook, line and sinker so we are safe.

    Good luck
    Dianne and Lamar

  • Jeff

    I am all for increasing federal spending on basic science research (heck, let’s shave a bit off the defense budget and use that to double basic science). At the same time, there needs to be some accountability to the taxpayer for the research money. I’ve seen too many grant proposals written to the biases of the grant committees, too many junior researchers overly focused doing fashionable research that will appeal to tenure committees, too many senior faculty falling asleep in seminars and taking sabbaticals at Lake Como.

    John, the letter mentions that budget cuts would mean “immediate cessation of many scientifically critical activities.” I’ll wager that means many hard-working graduate students, postdocs, and untenured faculty would meet the chopping block to balance the budget, but that tenured faculty member (the one who’s never in his office and hasn’t published a peer-reviewed paper in five years) will get to keep his sinecure. Meanwhile, that sinecure salary might equal two junior faculty salaries, four postdoc salaries, or eight grad student stipends.

    I think the current political fervor for budget austerity is an opportunity for a frank discussion about how the taxpayer dollar could best be used to advance scientific research (and the benefits that derive therefrom) and to advance careers for young scientists. I think that means a reappraisal of at least the grant process and the tenure system.

  • tim rowledge

    Since the private sector is more than a little risk-averse (what, you thought that all those CEOs and venture capital folk made their billions for taking risks? Bite your tongue, silly) the only plausible source of funding for basic research is government money.
    It benefits the economy directly by supporting the people that do the work and the people they spend money with. Hell, around half of it will go straight back in taxes!
    It provides a way of keeping a cadre of educated people around. That has its uses; if you can’t see the benefits I suggest you might want to get more education.
    It provides knowledge that private sector businesses can use to make money with. That generates more employment, profits and ought to result in taxes if only the congress would stop cutting taxes on businesses all the time. It ought to produce even more money if the govt. patented the knowledge and required license fees. but I suppose that would be ‘robbing the poor downtrodden oligarch’.

    If you don’t have a good flow of knowledge from basic research, pretty soon you won’t have a good flow of the resources essential to your basic needs. Then you die.

  • Gary M

    It never ceases to amaze me how many self-professed smart people just can’t quite figure out how to also earn income to support themselves and their favorite activities, just like the rest of us do.

    “Oh, I’m way too busy doing really important, hopefully, scientific stuff to fetch my own lunch. That’s why I have Grad gofers.”

    “I’m superior, but need to exist on expropriated welfare. I’m special.”

    For 25 years I had to work with/for such functional incompetents.

    For 16 years I’ve worked for myself. They’re all still begging for child support.

  • Anonymous

    Gary M, please explain how Professor Conway can earn $10 Billion (more or less) “on the side” to build the large hadron collider. You seem to have a pretty high opinion of your own intelligence, judging from your last two comments. What do you do to increase the over-all knowledge with the extra money you make? What’s that, you go on vacation at the mustang ranch in Nevada?

    Oh, that’s right, only scientists should spend their extra cash to do research for the good of humanity in their spare time.

    So tell me, in your vision of how things should work, who exactly is living off of whom?

  • Wetuski

    Incompetence shown by people like Gary M. never ceases to amaze me, it’s people like this, which seems this time as part of the libertarian kind of ignorance, that are the problem with our country. Nothing but selfish children that refuse o help society and complain if one cent of their paycheck goes to help an old sick person. Even worse is that these ideas are being strongly promoted by business leaders, like the Koch brothers, as it helps them not have to pay or be accountable for anything if they can get a mob of mindless morons screaming “FREEDOM” all day for less taxes and less spending on everything.

  • lacapote

    I am a scientist and I am constantly amazed by the amazing lack of collaboration and accountability in the amazing liberal world of science. I am as left wing as anyone could be in the US, in fact I am Swedish but I have never been so shocked at the absolute ridicule scientific approach of someone like Collins for example… give that guy is cheque now… man if he was running a company, it would be so wasteful… ridicule. It is true there are tons of scientists who claim they can manage their millions in funds. Most scientist I know have a hard time with personal hygiene, and you expect them to be able to manage millions… Just last week I had a colleague who bought a 600K Pac Bio sequencer, the damn thing doesn’t even work… shame, he bought it just to enlarge his tiny intellectual penis.

    You should be ashamed for asking money to keep sequencing gibberish, everyone knows cancer genomics is a nightmare, is only a part of the cancer revolution and is rarely clinically applicable. If every fat american stopped eating sugar an salt today, maybe we would save about a billion in research and pills… Why can’t scientist say that to the public instead of building crazy useless genome centers…

  • B

    If I started advising Congress on the true nature of quantum mechanics I would be ridiculed by the physicists at Cosmic variance.

    Then why do physicists think they can toss around economic terms like competitiveness and growth when they know nothing about economics?

  • Anonymous

    Actually, B, as far as one can tell you could be probably ridiculed for advising either on Quantum Mechanics or Economics.

    There is a lot of data which supports the claims of competitiveness and growth. Look around and you’ll find it. A lot of links from this site itself would be a good place to start…

  • John

    B (#29): I personally know many, possibly even half, of the people who signed this letter. These are true intellectuals, devoted to a lifetime of learning, and not only in their chosen field. These scientists read, read, write, and interact with colleagues at their universities and at the national labs. The vast majority have travelled to many countries, understand different cultures and economies, and have a far deeper appreciation of America’s standing in the world than the average person.

    I think you owe the signers of this letter some respect. They have foregone huge corporate salaries, and work for you and the betterment of your children’s lives. Congress could use the advice of people like this.

  • lode

    Science, public education, planned parenthood and child nutrition programs need to be cut so we can fund huge tax breaks to billionaires. Trickle down economics has been so successful in creating millions of jobs in America over the last 8 years that we need to extend them for two more years.

    A majority in congress believe the earth is 6000 years old, there is no climate change, evolution is a lie and should not be taught in schools and trickle down is sound economic policy. Your sending these congressman a letter?

    Ballot box is the only way to fix the mess we are in.

  • B

    John (#31) said, “I think you owe the signers of this letter some respect. They have foregone huge corporate salaries, and work for you and the betterment of your children’s lives. Congress could use the advice of people like this.”

    I’m in academia. Don’t give me that self-sacrificing crap. It’s a great life they have. Many many more PhDs are produced than there are positions in research universities and national laboratories. For every one of them, there are three envious graduates wishing to take their place.

    Worshiping teachers, researchers, doctors, etc. is ridiculous. They’re not this century’s version of the greatest generation. They’re just regular people. Physics is your passion and you don’t want to see the money dry up. Simple as that.

  • B

    Furthermore, John, the penultimate paragraph should have set off alarms for any intellectual trained in economics. It says:

    “Such cuts will only hurt our competitiveness, especially at a time when emerging economies such as China and India are ramping up their investments in scientific research and education, and are learning to form their own generations of young innovators.”

    That’s not a bad thing, that’s WONDERFUL. Since you won’t believe some stranger on the internet, I dug up an article for you.

    Here is the winning portion:

    “Amazingly, there are only about 6 million scientists and engineers in the entire world, nearly a quarter of whom are in the U.S. Poverty means that millions of potentially world-class scientists today spend their lives trying to eke out a subsistence living, rather than leading mankind’s charge into the future. But if the world as a whole were as wealthy as the U.S. and were devoting the same share of population to research and development, there would be more than five times as many scientists and engineers worldwide.”

    I look forward to your apology about this “competitiveness” nonsense when a Chinese/Indian drug innovation saves the life of your friend or family member in 30 years.

  • Wetuski

    I am going to guess that B is a austrian economist or of some libertarian type of thought, but if not, either way he is a total *** as his attitude shows.
    Playing intellectual superiority over a list of not only hundreds of physicist on this list but against some of the most prominent economist such as Stiglitz and Dean Baker who advise high spending in areas for research in science and not only this but using a quote in such a silly way to somehow prove you’re illogical reasoning and shows how incompetent you are of how the system, science, and the world works.
    It’s people with attitudes like yours that are part of the problem.

  • Anon

    “82. Adam Patch, Yale University, New Haven IL”

    Somebody on the Internet is wrong!! New Haven is not in Illinois.

  • John

    B: The bottom line is that 479 people have put their names and institutions out there in support of this. Are you willing to put your real name and institution here in opposition to it? If not, then perhaps we should just remove your comments. You have until noon Thursday, Pacific time.

  • B

    I don’t blog so I don’t care to make my identity known. It was your choice to blog under your real name and the choice of those men and women to sign that letter. And it’s perfectly standard for people to criticize you anonymously. That’s why journals have referees after all.

    I was certainly snarky with my reply. You were condescending with yours. How dare lowly “B (#29)” question the worldly and wise intellectuals working to save me in spite of my ignorance. Where was my respect!?

    But my arguments still stand. Deleting my comments won’t diminish them. So delete them, dismiss them but keep them here for your readers, or rebut them. Regardless, it won’t harm my opinion of you. As I said already, I don’t see you (or your co-signers) as the self-sacrificing hero working for my children’s betterment. You’re human and you’re allowed to be just as petty as the rest of us.

  • John

    B, I apologize if you took my tone to be condescending. But let’s go through some of your statements:

    1. Respect is not worship. If you have any respect for anyone, I think you might consider respecting the 479 signers for what they have accomplished and more importantly why they accomplished it. And they are working for your children’s betterment, whether you think so or not.

    2. If you lack a sense of sacrifice as an academic, perhaps you made poor life choices. Just about everyone I know in academia has that sense of serving their fellow man, and, yes, sacrifice. We are not in this for the money, that’s for sure. We do have some pretty cool toys though.

    3. If there are are three PhDs envious of every academic, then it’s because they weren’t as talented or didn’t work as hard, or any number of other reasons. There is no guarantee that if you get a PhD, you get an academic job.

    4. If we fail to compete effectively in the global economy, our standard of living will decline, as it has begun to. We enjoy a lot of technology and scientific advances that came from other countries. This is a good thing, yes, but the signer refuse to accept that we should just give up in the U.S.

    5. Your original statement, that a bunch of physicists had no business advising members of Congress, was what started the whole flame war. My reply was an effort to communicate that yes, they do, and in the letter here they did so in a very clear and reasoned way.

  • Curious Wavefunction

    -I look forward to your apology about this “competitiveness” nonsense when a Chinese/Indian drug innovation saves the life of your friend or family member in 30 years

    38: You may be right that there may be an Indian/Chinese drug that saves American lives and that’s just fine. But you failed to understand a simple fact- John is an AMERICAN. I don’t see a good reason why he should care less about America’s competitiveness just because China or India can pick up the slack. The letter is to the American Congress, not to the World Congress. China and India are welcome to provide scientific innovation, but Americans still need to first and foremost care about the decline in science and innovation in their own country. It’s not that hard to appreciate.

  • A physics undergrad

    It’s almost as though if we had fewer social[ist] programs, then we’d have the resources to invest in programs that actually help [science] people.

  • hsearles

    If all of this research is so undeniably good for mankind, then physicists should have a very easy time getting donors to voluntarily support such enterprises instead of having to be dependent on the tax payer.

  • Anonymous

    By that logic, anything good for humankind should have no problem getting supported by donors. I wish that was the world I lived in, but it doesn’t feel like I do.

    So Hsearles, what kind of research do you donate to, since I trust anyone who would ask such a question would be doing his or her fair share?

  • Joseph J Veverka

    I think it cowardly to repond to comments with a harse critical point of view while you address yourself as “Anonymous Says”.

  • AnonymousStudentT

    Sigh. Wish I had known about this – I would have signed.

  • Anonymous

    @44 Joeseph:

    Yeah, because hsearles is definitely a moniker for someone who has uniquely identified him or herself. Yes, the him or herself is annoying, but I hope you get the fact that I can’t even identify his or her gender, let alone anything else.

    And I think his or her silence speaks loud enough. His argument was so badly thought out that he or she didn’t respond to defend his or her point of view.

  • Terris Linenbach

    As a California resident, I would like to apologize not just to my fellow Americans, but to the world for Senator Feinstein. Like Hillary, she’s the white female version of Barack Obama, an archetype for Democrat dunderheads in general. So it goes. Of course, Republicans are far worse – intentionally treasonous – but that is a different matter. Unlike Boehner, Feinstein has a brain and therefore has no excuse. Guilty.

  • Lila Sovietskaya

    What can the government cut? Any cut anywhere costs something to somebody. The money that a person does not spend is lost revenue to somebody. Obviously science needs to be supported, otherwise what you save now, you must buy from somebody else at higher price. What do you cut? You cut somebody else budget. Who is somebody else? You are somebody else. The alternative to cuts is borrowing money that you cannot pay back, unless you devalue the currency, or go bankrupt. Imagine what would happen if those who owe American debt in the form of Treasury bonds try to see them to get cash. Where has your One-Trillion dollars gone? What did it purchase? There is no money for Science, however in a short time there was $600,000,000 to spend on no-fly zone for Libya.


Discover's Newsletter

Sign up to get the latest science news delivered weekly right to your inbox!

Cosmic Variance

Random samplings from a universe of ideas.

See More

Collapse bottom bar

Login to your Account

E-mail address:
Remember me
Forgot your password?
No problem. Click here to have it e-mailed to you.

Not Registered Yet?

Register now for FREE. Registration only takes a few minutes to complete. Register now »