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."
Changing your political stance isn't lying. When you ignore political and legal statements, she didn't tell that many lies. Every fact-checking group found Trump to be more lie-filled than Clinton. He was more believable, but never told the truth.
Learn to love Alaska
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
Yeah, the EPA he wants to disband, the NCAR which makes research he ignores, and the NOAA that he refuses to fund. Without any satellites of any kind. Expecting a space agency to somehow train itself without ever using Earth's climate as a model. Because Trump is the kind of person who enjoys research and hearing other people's opinions.
I say this politely, but I strongly urge you to take a serious look at Trump and his advisors.
"Set a man a fire, he'll be warm for the rest of the night. Set a man afire, he'll be warm for the rest of his life."
I wouldn't worry. The Chinese may be a one party state, but they don't allow the stupid peasants to elect the leader. In many respects they already have the moral high ground over the USA. It would not be surprising if they replaced NASA and used the information to their own advantage. Just wait and see, this is going to be the century of China now that the USA has failed with the election of a member of the 1%.
Facts are history now plebs have politics for religion on social media.
So your argument comes down to exactly how "close" the quoted advisor is to a still-forming administration. -- so not fake news. i.e. the quote was not made up, the person does exist, and he is related to the nascent Trump administration in the way stated. I'm also happy to hear that you agree that cutting NASA's climate science budget would be extremely important news if it came from the mouth of someone close enough to the administration -- let's just agree that some more cautious people might worry that we don't actually know who those people are and are not quite yet.