Snarky, but true point. Also consider that scientific efforts geared towards attracting funding tend to be the ones that get funded.

This hasn’t always been the case so it’s fair to consider what circumstances might foster a better situation, where research can be directed to areas most promising to add progress and value to society at large.

I honestly find it rather interesting how much it is possible for scientific research to gain funding though it be completely bereft of any practical benefit for mankind, or profit margin.

Consider palæontology as an entire field; there is no financial benefit nor practical application to be had for it, yet it seems to find ways to attract funding all the same, most likely because it does have a habit of generating spectacular news articles which sponsors would probably enjoy the publicity of.

But there is truly no practical benefit for mankind to be had in trying to answer to what extent various dinosaur species were endothermic and feathered.

> But there is truly no practical benefit for mankind to be had in trying to answer to what extent various dinosaur species were endothermic and feathered.

Except we’re an insatiably curious species and it sates our curiosity.

It's a good example of how curiosity is sated not by truth, but by anything purporting as such.

The image of dinosaurs that became canonically entrenched in popular culture is almost certainly completely wrong, but the truth is of little consequence, exactly because it is not used for anything that might depend on it's veracity.

It really does not matter whether it be accurate or completely false, for this purpose.