Thomas Levenson makes a strong case for funding science even in the absence of tangible immediate payoffs (“Let’s waste more money on science’’). This message is particularly relevant given the antiscience stance of the incoming Trump-Pence administration.

There is, however, another side of the issue, not addressed by Levenson. There must be standards regarding which forms of science, or which scientists, to fund. In the absence of such standards, in theory, all proposals would be given equal weight, and with finite resources, all would be funded at low levels.

Such standards would also serve to counter arguments (I can hear them already) that scientists are simply seeking more money, regardless of the payoff.

A given set of standards may have flaws, but having no standards as to where funds should be spent is likewise flawed.

William Vaughan Jr.

Chebeague Island, Maine