SCIENCE News: 

​Amidst the many attention-grabbing headlines of 2026, there is a recent one that may have flown under the radar but shouldn’t have. On April 24, the White House dismissed the entire 22-person board that oversees the National Science Foundation (NSF). The NSF is an independent federal agency that supports science and engineering in all 50 states and U.S. territories. 

To discuss the impact of the NSF more broadly, its significance for university research, and the likely consequences of this move, UC Riverside News turns to a distinguished faculty member who has extensive experience with the organization.

Tim Lyons is a distinguished professor of biogeochemistry at UCR. He serves as the director of UCR’s Alternative Earths Astrobiology Center and the Wilber W. Mayhew Endowed Chair in Geo-Ecology. Lyons holds a doctorate from Yale University, and is a fellow of the American Geophysical Union, the Geological Society of America, the Geochemical Society, and the American Association for the Advancement of Science. These are his thoughts on the NSF news. 

Q: What is the National Science Foundation, and why has it historically been critical for university science and research?

A: The NSF was established by Congress in 1950 to promote science, improve national security through innovation, and advance national health and prosperity. It fulfills this mission mainly through making grants to places like UCR.

There are other federal agencies that fund science, but many of those prioritize more-applied research, and often with specific targets in mind. The National Science Foundation, while also seeking a wide range of impacts that extend to strategic, economic, and quality of life themes, is at its historic core the go-to agency for basic (blue-sky) research. Often times, basic research translates into concrete discoveries. 

On their website, you can see examples of how their open funding opportunities have yielded major advances in biotechnology; computing, including early advances that led to the development of AI and the internet; milestone discoveries in astronomy such as those made possible by their support of ground-based telescopes; and closer to my home, climate change, ocean drilling, geohazards including earthquakes, and studies of life on Earth extending back billions of years.

No other agency has as many different gateways to funding and opportunities for collaborative research across wide-ranging disciplines, spanning from small to large-team projects that demand thinking way beyond the comfort zones of individual scientists. In many ways the NSF is THE go-to agency for big ideas with potential for game-changing results.

Q: What is your own experience with the NSF?

A: My personal NSF journey started early and arguably made me what I am today. My graduate studies at Yale were funded by a grant proposal I wrote with my advisor for investigations of the modern oceans. As a postdoc at the University of Michigan, I was successful with another award that I brought with me to my first faculty position, where I soon landed an important NSF CAREER Award.

For the decades that followed, I had continuous NSF support, often with multiple awards, and these grants supported the training of many dozens of graduate students and postdocs who are now leading scientists at universities and institutes throughout the world.

Q: In your view, is the firing of the advisory board something people should pay attention to, and if so, why?

A: This firing weakens the agency. The sad reality is that attacks on NSF, science, and scientists are making career trajectories like mine far less certain if not impossible for many extraordinary next-gen researchers in the U.S. And with that decline so goes global leadership and our ability to serve society in so many ways. Once gutted, it could take a generation or more to rebuild. I hope we can rise up soon and look down on what we are losing.

Sadly, I feel the NSF-ethos drifting away as their budget shrinks and restructuring blurs their landscape, including threats now for massive cuts for the next fiscal year and targets on specific research areas that will haunt us for generations. In the process, we are politicizing arguably America’s greatest superpower, its drive to lead in creative, impactful, often monetizable innovation. We have long been the shining intellectual light on the hill that has attracted the best and brightest from around the world. It is no wonder that hundreds of Nobel Laureates have been funded through the NSF.

Q: Can you think of any historical examples that are similar to what’s happening now with the NSF?

A: I am burdened by the thought that our current attack on science has played out before. One only has to look at Nobel Prizes awarded before and after World War II. Germany not surprisingly dominated the pre-war list for science in particular, and the collection of scientific advances and scientists blows the mind. But from a war that led to destruction of infrastructure, loss of scientists through escape and death, and complete devaluation of peaceable pursuits, they never quite recovered. Yes, scientists based in Germany still win prizes, but the post-war big kid on the block, as quickly becomes clear from a glance at the Nobel list, became the U.S.

Most notably, this greatness in science drove our economy and elevated global admiration for what is possible with the right people and attitudes. Scientists flocked to our centers of research, not just American-born, but from around the world.

The German economy is now facing declines unequaled since WWII in part because they gutted too much of their openness to leadership opportunities in emerging fields (think Silicon Valley on our end). They put too many eggs in too few baskets. Now, sadly, many there see weapons manufacturing as a path to economic survival as they retool away from making the best cars on the highways and other engineering marvels.

I fear that we are facing the same trajectory, with bullseyes on our universities, widespread brain drain, and devastating cuts to agencies, perhaps the NSF most notably, that make the prospect of next-gen leadership and path defining hard to envision.

China is seizing this window, with massive commitments to scientific research, green energy leadership, and workforce development so that studying and working in the West—while also contributing to our excellence—has become far less attractive and necessary for their emerging scientists.

​Link to the full Q&A here.

About UC Riverside

The University of California, Riverside is a doctoral research university, a living laboratory for groundbreaking exploration of issues critical to Inland Southern California, the state and communities around the world. Reflecting California’s diverse culture, UCR’s enrollment is more than 26,000 students. The campus opened a medical school in 2013 and has reached the heart of the Coachella Valley by way of the UCR Palm Desert Center. The campus has an annual impact of more than $2.7 billion on the U.S. economy. To learn more, visit www.ucr.edu.