Slashdot Mirror
Do We Really Need a National Climate Service?
coondoggie writes "I suppose it's natural for Washington to try and wrap issues up in a tidy legislative package for bureaucratic purposes (or perhaps other things more nefarious). But one has to wonder if we really need another government-led group, especially when it comes to the climate and all the sometimes controversial information that entails.
But that's what is under way. Today the House Science and Technology Committee's Subcommittee on Energy and Environment held a hearing on the need for a National Climate Service, that could meet the increased demand for climate information, the committee said.
The NCS would provide a single point of contact of information climate forecasts and support for planning and management decisions by federal agencies; state, local, and tribal governments; and the private sector."
Meanwhile, in Louisiana, Governor Bobby Jindal mutters something about all this wasteful government spending.
"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it. - George Santayana"
National Climatic Data Center, Asheville NC The only problem is that the charge $$$$ for the data that has already been collected at taxpayer expense.
Way to go. We already have a national weather service. Why would you encourage the government to create yet another redundant service.
I thought tracking weather involved tracking the history of weather, which would lead me to believe that it would take a small investment into the national weather service to create a climate forcasting/monitoring service. Oh wait, NOAA's NWS already tracks climate.
Or the University System. Who has really lost their way. In a more perfect world the University's who are doing a lot of this research should be communicating with each other and as well with open, non-confrontational dialogs with other companies R&D. As well getting proper funding from these companies and the governments to work on/get better understanding of the problem.
However real life sets in and Universities need to focus on being grades 13,14,15 and 16 to meet the educational demands for jobs outside. Their research is focused on what can be patented and sold, or breakthrough enough to get public interests. Not a bunch of underpaid grad students looking at a bunch of swirls on a computer screen and predicting that the swirl will go 400 miles North West in 3 days.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
a better state than how they got it
What if I don't agree with what greenpeace is shoving down my throat as 'a better state'?
One could argue that all Halliburton wants to do is leave the world in a better state... as defined by them- really the same goal as greenpeace, just different definitions of 'better'.
Altruism... yeah, I'm sure thats greenpeace's only motive...
Even if altruism was their _only_ and _focused_ mission, there is a whole school of thought (I don't subscribe to it, but it exists, and is valid as any other) that contends altruism leads to suffering, and only hurts in the long run.
The difference is merely in time scale. They use most of the same data for starters and the same knowledge and skills. If there is a National Climate Service that is distinct from the National Weather Service, it should be under the NOAA.
The edges of American politics can be confusing, especially when one colonizes an apolitical site like Slashdot. You may find my definition of "Libertarian" from the Bestiary of Geekdom helpful: