Indeed, the whole article comes off as strawman-ish. Nobody [to first approximation * ] ever says something like "I mean, seriously? Scientists?! What have they ever done for me?" because, well, that attitude is quickly discredited by a moment's thought.
Now, what you will find is people with attitudes like
1. Useful sciencey things like MRIs and clean water are important, but a lot of what's going on is just a pointless waste of time and money (seriously, you spent how much to figure out the internal mass distribution of Jupiter?), or
2. Science has done all sorts of bad things to the rainforest and stuff!
3. Yes well, science is very important, but we have major budget problems so it's inevitable that pure research budgets need to be cut, or
4. Why are we spending all this money on [huge science project of little practical utility] when [far more urgent and heartrending problem]
But these are much more difficult arguments than the one which Phil Plait appears to want to have with the imaginary dude in his head.
Now, what you will find is people with attitudes like
1. Useful sciencey things like MRIs and clean water are important, but a lot of what's going on is just a pointless waste of time and money (seriously, you spent how much to figure out the internal mass distribution of Jupiter?), or
2. Science has done all sorts of bad things to the rainforest and stuff!
3. Yes well, science is very important, but we have major budget problems so it's inevitable that pure research budgets need to be cut, or
4. Why are we spending all this money on [huge science project of little practical utility] when [far more urgent and heartrending problem]
But these are much more difficult arguments than the one which Phil Plait appears to want to have with the imaginary dude in his head.