Will it retest $2.60 again?, page-89

Have you checked the state of science in the western world lately? Science can't be done without grants, where else does science get funding from? Many grants are issued by the government (NHMRC for example) and they are competitive as hell to get. Half of a scientists job is to write grant applications to get some funding but the work itself has to stand up to rigorous scrutinisation to be taken seriously. Successfully challenging that status quo (and changing it)tends to make you famous as a scientist, it's the dream really! By your logic, anyone who receives money for services provided isn't to be trusted. Being a scientist is a shitty road to take for the money, there's little job security and many survive on 6-12 month contracts. There's plenty of scientific evidence that is published in reputable journals, are you implying the whole scientific community is fraudulent? Are you also an anti vaxxer? I've noticed that both anti vaxxer and climate deniers like to implicate dishonesty and corruption in science in order to discredit the process, it's as lazy as it is cheap. In my experience I have never seen any castigation of a student for challenging the status quo, and there is very little left wing crap preached in the course of my many years of scientific study. I am certainly not a labor voter or left wing in any regard and tend to shoot down crap from left and right when it's crap. That being said there are some questionable courses taught in arts and social science degrees, but STEM is relatively free from that crap. Most of the professors i know are in pretty decent money and hold investment properties and shares. You really discredit yourself with sweeping negative statements about higher education based on your narrow perspective. If you want to talk logic then let's examine the argumentative logical fallacy you have employed, the ad hominem, where you attack a persons motive or political leaning instead of the idea itself.