I agree with what you've said.
That and the insistence of transparency so that a determination can be made if any arguments proposed for continuing some of the more odd studies are not based on sunk cost fallacies.
I suggested people do their own research (fact checking).
Of course I was met with knee-jerk reactions and generalizations like "no need to cut science funding to help the needy!"
Ironically, it was the theist in the house that demonstrated the willingness and reasonableness to examine this further.
![Clap :clap:](https://www.booktalk.org/images/smilies/ges_clap.gif)
But my initial point/suggestion still stands.