Quote:
|
Originally Posted by screener
cricket tragic, it is not that I theorize conspiracy, it is that I recognize the faults of the powerful. Why would the powerful, those who are left having the money to fund research at universities, withdraw that funding in the light of minor detractions from their perfection? I suppose it is deep insecurities.
|
The powerful have faults just like the rest of us simply because they are human. Probably the only difference is that the powerful’s faults have a bigger individual impact than yours or mine. That is why there is regulation. It remains true that the vast majority of funding for Universities comes from State and Federal Government programs and from tuition fees. Alumni provide quite a lot of money to some Universities – they are often quite powerful within Universities, but I am guessing they are not who you mean. For most Universities, corporations are very much miniscule players, so it is a bit hard to see how corporations can influence funding for Universities all that much.
Even at UC Berkeley, Novartis’ $5 million per year funding was a drop in the bucket. UC Berkeley’s budget during these years was more than $1.2 billion per annum making Novartis’ contribution less than 0.5%.
Now corporations might decide that they no longer want to fund particular research, as Syngenta did at UC Berkeley. These are commercial decisions made by corporations and those people then need to source funds from elsewhere.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by screener
I don't know that sock puppets are banned, perhaps Adi can fill me in, I have had word that a second identity is only allowed in exceptional circumstances.
|
http://www.theenvironmentsite.org/fo...-accounts.html
Personally, I am not that fussed if James wants to play ‘silly buggers’ on the forum, but when one of his identities continues on a campaign that his other identity has started, don’t be surprised if I get a bit more terse than usual.