Well if you are so sure about which other funded programs would inspire and stimulate the average individual to wonder about the big picture at scale, toss that out for a comparison then. either way, valuing it solely the way you laid out in your article would still be incomplete valuation of the program. It turns your argument into one of conservative fiscal responsibility, which is also outside of the skeptical point of view within science.


Skeptical point of view is fine, but it’s just not the only point of view in a national survey.

If one were to make it the only point of view, that doesn’t make one a skeptic, it makes one an ideologue.