The other issues you raise are largely centered on logical fallacies, which many people in general are unaware are poor means of arguing.. After all, all human endeavors are made possible by some form of financial support; it's a red herring to point to science funding (which is modest compared to business profits or defense spending, which often benefits private industry). People mistake scientific consensus to mean "top down assertion of a fact," which is far from the same thing; these are falsely equivocated.

A key problem, besides values issues, has to do with the average citizen mistaking science for a collection of facts; it is not. It is a process by which reliable facts are established, but the facts are only as good as the process. There is no room for authority; only assessment, verfication, and refutation.