some of my colleagues attended, wish i could have done

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-11508105

cutting science funding IS a false economy

oh and

Sign the Petition

Seems like a good turnout – Colin Blakemore in that link comes across very well in the media I think, he’s a good advocate for science. Paul Nurse as the new head of the Royal Society is also an excellent, media savvy, guy to articulate the case for science.

Bottom line, though, is the political fallout from cutting back the science budget is almost nil – even though it’s peanuts in the first place. I’m expecting bleak news on the 20th.

In light of this it was brilliant timing to give the medicine and physics Nobel pries to Uk researchers, particularly to Geim, given that he emigrated to come here. Pity we couldn’t make it a trio with chemistry, although Heck getting that one put a genuine smile on my face (I’m an organic chemist).

Science? What manner of the Devil’s work is that?

WITCHCRAFT!

BURN HIM!

The funding to save the motor industry came out of the Science part of the Dept of trade and industry apparently and is believed to be one of the reasons why nuclear physics has already had to take such a massive hit. We will loose a generation of scientists very few of my peers have managed to get post docs. Science is really hard this is such a joke.

It’s one of the things the UK does exceptionally well at. As we manufacture very little, good ideas and research is one of the few things we can produce and export. Many large companies have research bases in the UK to tap into our expertise.

I’m biased though as I work in R and D as a chemist.

And here, presenting the case against, ICP…

1-0 science, I think.

signed.
Science is very important and is something we do well in our country.
Thats not to say that all “science” should be funded carte blanche, but 1st rate science should be supported enthusiastically.

I work for a national analytical service open to researchers from academia. (We were involved in some of the Graphene work that won the Nobel price)

Our latest £6 million grant was for 3 post docs and some new equipment to make us internationally competitive. We’ve been offered 35% less than we asked for, but we are expected to deliver the same level of service as per the grant request.

Consumables needed to keep the current equipment running form the largest chunk of our outgoings (£4.5 Million over 5 years!), which (if my maths is right!)is more than what’s left of our grant after the deductions! We can’t afford to get new kit, upgrade existing machines, or pay the wages of extra postdocs required to run the service.

I think we were quite lucky getting 65% of what we asked for, and I find that very depressing.