Slashdot Mirror


Trump To Scrap NASA Climate Research In Crackdown On 'Politicized Science' (theguardian.com)

dryriver quotes a report from The Guardian: Donald Trump is poised to eliminate all climate change research conducted by NASA as part of a crackdown on "politicized science," his senior adviser on issues relating to the space agency has said. Nasa's Earth science division is set to be stripped of funding in favor of exploration of deep space, with the president-elect having set a goal during the campaign to explore the entire solar system by the end of the century. This would mean the elimination of NASA's world-renowned research into temperature, ice, clouds and other climate phenomena. [NASA's network of satellites provide a wealth of information on climate change, with the Earth science division's budget set to grow to $2 billion (PDF) next year. By comparison, space exploration has been scaled back somewhat, with a proposed budget of $2.8 billion in 2017.] Kevin Trenberth, senior scientist at the National Center for Atmospheric Research, said as Nasa provides the scientific community with new instruments and techniques, the elimination of Earth sciences would be "a major setback if not devastating." "It could put us back into the 'dark ages' of almost the pre-satellite era," he said. "It would be extremely short sighted."

7 of 667 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Some of you, remember you voted for this. by Jzanu · · Score: 5, Informative

    All space-based instrumentation falls squarely in the realm of NASA's expertise. Who knows more about scanning the atmospheres of planets than NASA?

  2. Re:Quit blowing smoke! by speedplane · · Score: 3, Informative

    And quit reporting supposition as fact. Enough already!

    Totally agree. The Trump administration is "poised" to eliminate climate science, quote from campaign advisers, and concerned scientists make up this article. Come back when you have something to report.

    --
    Fast Federal Court and I.T.C. updates
  3. Please get informed by XB-70 · · Score: 4, Informative
    I am not pro or anti Trump but this story is full of shit. Here's why: Trump is proposing to MOVE climate research etc. to the EPA, NCAR and other agencies, NOT eliminate it. NASA will focus on hard space research. The dollars spent will not change - just the agencies.

    Secondly, the goal is to de-politicize the research so that dissenting viewpoints can be presented along with majority viewpoints.

    This is the basis of the scientific method, not of trying for outcomes that are political.

    Don't ever forget the story of Dr. Barry Warren who discovered the cure for most ulcers. Because Big Pharma stood to lose millions, his research was quashed. It wasn't until he gave himself an ulcer and cured it that the story got out.

    Same goes for climate: let's focus on proper, scientific research and NOT on opinion and emotion. This way we can arrive at empirical evidence to support solutions to climate change. Don't ever forget, it was NIXON who created the EPA. Trump may surprise with his pragmatic approach... on the other hand, he may not! LOL

    --
    *** Don't be dull.***
  4. Re:HAHAHAH by SETIGuy · · Score: 3, Informative

    You do realize that most of what you posted is a lie, right? Of course you do. Lying is what you do.

    The earth has been cooler for the entire period during which anything resembling human beings evolved. Antarctica wasn't in its current position when it was warmer than it is now. And, without human carbon releases the planet maintains a relatively temperate climate over long periods of time through the action of the carbonate-silicate cycle. Of course when you dig up half a billion years worth of stored organic carbon and burn in in a century, the carbonate-silicate cycle ain't gonna fix that.

    And of course, continuing to release more CO2, that's your fault, not mine.

    NASA is doing climate research because 4 decades of political leaders decided NASA should be doing climate research. If you are deluded enough to think Trump is just going to move things around to NOAA rather than eliminating inconvenient research, you deserve what you get. Good luck with that.

  5. You're a "fake" newspaper by Okian+Warrior · · Score: 4, Informative

    Hey, go for it!

    In fact, why not eliminate the middle bits and just cut to the chase. In your next issue, just put:

    "TRUMP IS INSANE"

    Because he's not insane. He's a buffoon, and so pathologically needy that he will say virtually anything to anyone, but that's not news. We don't run a celebrity gossip site. And this particular story is about his advisor, not Trump himself. You see, we report actual news. Which was my original point.

    What we do run is a newspaper in a part of the world that is already feeling the effects of climate change, with direct and tangible economic and social impacts. So when a top climate denier says that he intends to cut the legs out from under an integral part of the climate science community, and claims to be acting to stop political interference with climate science.... That gets a big headline. We're running it tomorrow.

    And yes, editors do sometimes talk like that. In jest, but mostly because if you can't maintain your gallows humour, you won't be an editor for long.

    Hey, go for it!

    In fact, why not eliminate the middle bits and just cut to the chase. In your next issue, just put:

    "TRUMP IS INSANE"

    Because he's not insane. He's a buffoon, and so pathologically needy that he will say virtually anything to anyone, but that's not news. We don't run a celebrity gossip site. And this particular story is about his advisor, not Trump himself. You see, we report actual news. Which was my original point.

    What we do run is a newspaper

    ...

    Nope.

    I don't know what you're running, but it most definitely isn't a newspaper.

    Firstly, this is an advisor making suggestions to Trump, not Trump himself.

    Secondly, the person making the suggestion is an outside advisor, not a member of the transition team.

    Thirdly, the recommendation is to let NASA deal with space-going issues and have other parts of government do climate research. It's not advocating just dumping the research.

    And finally, other members of the government have suggested this move in the past, including Ted Cruz.

    (source)

    Trump has not said or done anything on this yet, he's only vaguely and tangentially involved, and it's not even clear that the adviser has even made his case to Trump yet.

    It took me all of 1 minute to dig down and find the actual story, and summarize it truthfully. I've done what any good editor should do, and what you didn't do. Report fairly and accurately.

    And yet you want to put 4 inch headlines saying how insane he is. Oh, excuse me, that was in jest. You want to say he is a buffoon.

    You think you're a newspaper, but you're one of the "fake news" problems we keep hearing about.

    Let me be specific: You are in no way running an actual newspaper, you're simply a troll publication like National Enquirer.

    (I expect you'll next be telling me "Bat Boy Lives!!!")

  6. Re:Quit blowing smoke! by oji-sama · · Score: 5, Informative

    No. That's a lie. He never said that.

    Right...

    "The concept of global warming was created by and for the Chinese in order to make U.S. manufacturing non-competitive."

    https://twitter.com/realdonald...

    and

    "We should be focused on clean and beautiful air-not expensive and business closing GLOBAL WARMING-a total hoax!"

    https://twitter.com/realdonald...

    --
    It is what it is.
  7. Re:HAHAHAH by silentcoder · · Score: 5, Informative

    And of course - flagrant self contradiction:
    "The fraud is (mostly) not coming from scientists"
    Anything you've heard about climate change from a political group (any UN body, for example) is automatically a lie.

    These two sentences flat out contradict each other - because the primary UN body that says things about climate change is the IPCC which is just about entirely staffed by scientists.

    Of course, it all hinges on his attempt at deceptively claiming the IPCC is actually a political body.

    --
    Unicode killed the ASCII-art *