In the American weekly Science on November 17, Gingrich published a closely thought, densely written article calling for huge investment in things of the mind. We might have assumed that the United States is so far ahead in science and its high-tech applications that the country could afford to coast, but Gingrich wanted more and more. We need a science budget for the next generation based on opportunities rather than on bureaucratic and political infighting in Washington. We must begin to find a new generation of large projects that could create great breakthroughs. And then he went a-roving in search of adventurous and risky enterprise.
Money needs to be available for highly innovative 'out of the box' science.
Peer review is ultimately a culturally conservative and risk-avoidance model. Each institution's director should have a small amount of discretionary money, possibly 3 to 5 per cent of their budgets, to spend on outliers. For outliers read bold thinkers who produce wild cards. He cited one outfit that runs educational cruises for teachers and students in the San Francisco Bay area. Students collect data on temperature, UV radiation, water clarity and such to help identify plankton damage at different times of the year.