[criddell]

And every dollar spent looking for life on Europa could be spent on preserving endangered life on this planet.

The device has intrigued many of your more curious colleagues. You never know what can be learned by solving this particular puzzle. The solution might be in the field of physics, science journalism, or maybe psychology. Either way, knowing more is better.

[Steuard]

> The device has intrigued many of your more curious colleagues.

It really hasn't. Every single time that I've seen a colleague (or a colleague of a colleague) comment on this research, they've been talking about either specific flaws in the experimental setup, specific flaws in its theoretical basis, or general concerns about unfounded ideas getting broad attention.

Spending dollars looking for life on Europa and spending dollars on preserving endangered life on Earth are both fantastic goals, with some reasonable hope of a positive impact on humanity in one way or another. I have not yet thought of a way in which spending dollars on this EM Drive idea has any upside like that. (Surely we can learn about science journalism and humans' psychological reactions to science news just as well by studying how people react to exciting stories about actual, mainstream science!)

[Zardoz84]

Or we can stop wasting money on military and using on preserving endangered life on this planet or simply to produce enough food so no body would be hungry again.

I prefer cut money to military...

[criddell]

I was trying to make the point that it's silly to argue "the money could be better spent on..." because there's no end or correct answer. You're response demonstrates that.

I certainly don't think we should cut funding to basic research. I'm happy that some very smart people are looking closely at this device because I do think there's something to be learned here even if it isn't in the field of physics.