Governments should not fund any scientific research whose consequences are unclear.Write a response in which you discuss your views on the policy and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, you should

Should government abstain from funding scientific researches which aftermaths are uncertain? Although at the first glance this policy seems to be reasonable, as far as I am concerned it would bring a devastating effect on science and humankind development. Therefore, I strongly oppose the proposed policy.

To begin with, government's money is one which was collected via taxes; from this prospect it seems to be reasonable to reassure that spent money brings a positive result, in particular, because the amount of money which government possesses is limited and thus each dollar spent on a futile research might have been allotted to public services, defense, art and other unquestionably useful purposes. In other words, the benefit of proposed policy which is aimed to secure our money and avoid useless expenditures is obvious. So, why should government fund researches which may not bring clear results?

Firstly, the nature of scientific research assumes that one is conducted whereas some uncertainty exists, moreover, than the unclearness bigger than more fundamental the research is. Consequently, the fulfillment of the proposed policy would hurt fundamental studies in the first turn. You may ask: so, why should I care? This type of researches allows us to discover new principles, laws and technologies. These new findings are mainly useless for average public but at the same time, other scientists base their studies on those researches. Hence, fundamental researches create foundation for future studies, to illustrate the idea, we may look at a cell or smart, which you routinely use. The item is the result of fundamental researches of Russian and American physicist which were made decades ago, and without those studies a cell phone will be unthinkable and impossible as well as many other devices which are based on similar technology.

Secondly, often researches whose results are unclear aimed at the grave problems of today, therefore, the implementation of proposed policy may lead to the situation that in the nearest future we will not be able to cope with new, growing issues. For example, some scholars foresee that in the near future we face a grave threat because of climate change and growing population. To tackle those predicted problems we need to fund researches which perhaps may solve the problems even if the output of them is unclear. For example, the planet's temperature is growing slowly but steadily and soon it will be high enough to change climate patters, in India, for instance, monsoons may change their rhythm and severe draught may hit the country, today botanists and genetic engineers try to create new species of wheat, corn, rice which may survive and prosper in future more harsh conditions. Although the aftermaths of such projects are unclear, we ought to fund such researches in order to fight future problems.

In conclusion, I completely concur that country's money should be spent wisely, at the same time, stopping funding of researches whose consequences are unclear is improper and even dangerous. An implementation of the policy may hurt scientific development and undermine our ability to combat oncoming problems.