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."
I guarantee you have no fucking idea how time series analysis works - and don't fucking cheat and google it. That's not learning it just acting like you've learned. Go read some fucking textbooks you god damn idiot.
Translation: I'm a coward who doesn't want to hear bad news
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
All space-based instrumentation falls squarely in the realm of NASA's expertise. Who knows more about scanning the atmospheres of planets than NASA?
Just remember Mr. Right Wing dumb ass, you're on the same planet as everyone else. Even if it is another universe.
Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
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
The laws of physics are not bound by political ideology.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
And how do you propose to develop and launch the satellites?
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
Fuck Trump, fraudulent fake ass daughter-fucker.
Wannabe daughter-fucker. Accuracy matters, you know.
Can we report that Trump says climate change is a hoax?
You are welcome on my lawn.
Just remember Mr. Right Wing dumb ass, you're on the same planet as everyone else. Even if it is another universe.
He is what, around 70? To him climate change is fiction. He said as much before his latest flip flop half flip. He will be dead long before it matters to him and since everything about Trump world seems to revolve around him, I doubt he really cares.
If he had any decency he would apologize for all the crap he did to get elected and then beg the electors to end this nightmare. I'm sorry, but it just makes me sick to know that the person we elected to rule us is this lacking in fundamental ethics. Anyone who is willing to do _anything_ and to hell with truth, honesty, or any of the rest is someone we sure as hell should not have let win. Before someone says Clinton lies too, I suggest you look at the breath, scope, and repetition of Trump's. Clinton may have been uninspiring, but I'll take uninspiring over this.
I still remember the massive crowds that were chanting, ``Lock Her Up!''. They meant it, but he was clearly just using them and all the rest. Disgusting. It was obvious he was lying at the time, but the idiots just lapped it up. I think if I ever visit a foreign country I'll have to make up a story about which country I'm from. Some research on Canada can't be a bad idea.
That anthropogenic climate change is real and caused by humans is undisputed and has been undisputed (by the scientific establishment, crackpot conspiracy bloggers dont count) for decades. Thats not actually whats being researched. What is being researched is how bad it is, what sort of time line we are looking at, what mitigation strategies do we have, are those mitigating strategies we already have working, what are the current effects, and how do we respond to the growing deleuge of problems already starting to occur.
Its *suicidal* to defund the most important agency in the world covering it.
Excuse the Unicode crap in my posts. That's an apostrophe, and slashdot is busted.
You're too late. Today he announced an evangelical woman who hates public schools as the Secretary of Education.
This is like in Civilization IV where the game tells you, "Your Golden Age has now ended".
You are welcome on my lawn.
Yes, but where will climate change cause flooding, where will it cause draught, how much water can utilities, dams and shippers expect, how tall does this seawall need to be, and where will the best places be to build are all very important questions. Regardless of global warming being caused by man or not, better predictive models help humans plan.
Shutting down NASA Earth Science moves it over to NOAA.
...Where it should be. NASA is aeronautics and space, NOAA is oceanographics and weather. Climate is not aeronautics or space, but IS weather.
Still no "funny" mods? If I ever saw a mod point to give, I think I'd have been more likely to give "funny" to some of the "insightful" ones.
Minor substantive reply on this comment: The Secretary of Education is much more powerful than most people realize. A LOT of Trump's votes came from people indoctrinated by the public schools, which were largely reoriented by Bennett back in the Reagan days. Yeah, the same hypocrite who wrote books about "virtue" while losing millions of dollars due to his gambling habit. He's still around, he's still a right-wing lunatic, and he supported the Donald, too. Back in the Reagan days he helped divide the public schools into a tiny elite track, basically a new kind of lottery that sustained the hopeful fantasy of parents too poor to afford the good private schools, while most public schools were reoriented as obedience training for future wage slaves, prison inmates, or worst of all, Trump voters. (He also boosted the bad private schools of religious stripes.)
Reminds me of the Trump-era investment advice. Plastics are for losers. You should invest in makers of wife-beater T-shirts, anti-anxiety medications, and the for-profit prisons.
Freedom = (Meaningful - Coerced) Choice != (Speech | Beer^2), and sad sock puppets' bad mods avail them naught.
You are wrong. Weather satellites for Earth fall under NOAA, not NASA.
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.
The advisor designated to oversea future planning related to NASA says, 'we're going to cut a $2+ billion NASA program that not coincidentally provides critical baseline data to climate scientists because politicians shouldn't meddle with client scientists.'
May I offer my professional opinion, as someone who runs a newspaper: That is something to report.
That's not just any old thing to report. That's something that you report in the World News section. Above the fold. With a 4 inch headline. And an entire editorial department asking the reporter, 'Really he said that? Because no sane person would say that. He's that fucking dense? Yeah? He did? Okay, fine. Zane, drop a hundred words from the second item. We're just going to print WTF fifty times below this article.'
Seriously, if you think this is a reasonable, unremarkable pronouncement from a member of the presidential transition team, you are not entirely sound in the head. I mean that in all sincerity. Get checked. Because you're not thinking rationally.
Crumb's Corollary: Never bring a knife to a bun fight.
Because the planet we are on isn't a part of space.
Weaselmancer
rediculous.
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.***
Well, I think NOAA - National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration - might be a better fit than NASA. NASA is more about aeronautics and space and NOAA focuses on the conditions of the oceans and atmosphere. So given a choice between the two - I'd say anything related to climate research would best be served in NOAA.
Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
Come back when you have something to report.
You're not paying attention, and I doubt you ever will.
Sorry, maybe I'm the one who isn't paying attention.
If it weren't for deadlines, nothing would be late.
Jzanu was gentle.
I would have said, "... you goddam major fucking batshit crazy under-educated piece of whale shit."
You guys. Stop holding back.
I would have said, "FUUUUUUUU-UUUCKK YOOOOOUUUU you gormless little spit-dribbling, smegma-gobbling, louse-brained, FAS patient. I've seen nematodes smarter than you. You couldn't calculate the number of fingers your mother used to scrape your father's cum out of her arse when she conceived you. You couldn't analyse the club your mother beat you with because you were too fucking stupid to shit anywhere but in your own shoes. In conclusion: fuck yourself. Fuck you from your your cum-encrusted New Balance sneakers to your shit-stained khakis... all the way to that Dap-smeared monstrosity you call your head.
Also: Fuck you.
HTH. HAND
Crumb's Corollary: Never bring a knife to a bun fight.
for pointing out your shortcomings and then try to blame them for the damage causes by your little hissy fits?
but after that we can hamstring him with a Democratic congress (don't forget to vote in your primaries or you'll get Blue Dogs).
And barring a war he's a 1 term president with 8 years of democrats to follow. That'll stop the bleeding. If you want the damage undone then you'll need to give the Dems a super majority in the senate and probably some state legislatures.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
Don't tempt him to rewrite physics books. He appears to be willing and able, since ignorance is on his side.
Too late. No doubt his nominee for Department of Education will do it for him.
If it weren't for deadlines, nothing would be late.
for example by clarifying that corporations are NOT human beings, but only legal fictions that must sometimes have limited treatment as juridical persons
You do realize that the current legal state of things, right? It's also true that a tightly held corporation (not publicly traded, few owners) gets treated like a partnership, and thus covered under the same first amendment protections that any small group of people has.
That's what cases like Citizens United (a corporation that existed only to pay for a film critical of Hillary - which is the only reason she's against it) and Hobby Lobby centered on.
Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
Ahh, the ol' Bugs Bunny rabbit season bit.
If you think I voted for Trump because of this post, you're wrong. I voted for Dr. Jill Stein of the Green Party. Again.
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.
Support SETI@home
The answer to all of your questions will be found by simply paying attention to where the new Trump hotels, Trump golf courses, Trump casinos, and Trump universities appear during the next four years.
So simple.
This whole situation makes me happy to be 50 and have some health problems. Maybe, assuming things go really bad, I'll be able to get out of here honorably.
For educated people this is scary. At this point I cannot even try to explain the complexities of certain subjects to people. The anti-intellectualism runs so deep that just being an intellectual brands you as an outsider. This is not good for our society.
This is a dangerous time for smart folks. I could have easily ended up a climate scientist. Though in my case I chose systems engineering with radio as a hobby. Both rely on physics. Both require knowledge of real science.
The rhetoric I'm hearing could land some very competent and gifted scientists in some kind of detention. Defunding comes first- silencing comes second.
The American century has certainly closed.
Another consultant who stuck it out.
"We are the Priests, of the Temples of Syrinx..."
Cite the margin of error and where it is seen as "huge", and more importantly where those margins invalidate the data. And no, a blog is not a citation.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
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.
Crumb's Corollary: Never bring a knife to a bun fight.
https://www.nasa.gov/pdf/1968m...
Mission I: To Understand and Protect Our Home Planet
Mission II: To Explore the Universe and Search for Life
Mission III: To Inspire the Next Generation of Explorers
That was interesting.
You apparently didn't notice that Trump was elected by a minority of the voters, the Republicans in the House of Representatives were elected by a minority of the voters, and the Republicans in the Senate were elected by a minority of the voters.
It's not surprising. Authoritarians rarely have much regard for the will of the majority
Dude, the difference between the majority and the minority is about 1.4%. Can you please downshift a couple gears with your authoritarian minority bullshit? You make it sound like it's the apartheid or something.
Or even better. Why don't you move to a small state like New Hampshire or Wyoming, then you could tell us how you'd feel about having all the federal decisions made by California and New York people since they have millions more people.
lucm, indeed.
First .. Should NOAA be running the studies, and be supported by satellites run by Nasa, Funded thru NOAA? Arguable.
Second .. Is climate change real, or does the President-Elect know more about worldwide weather fluctuation than all the scientists (ok 95% of them), the same way he knows more about war than generals?
Honestly, I am having trouble keeping all the truthiness our President-Elect pushes out. Can we agree that he said a lot of things to get him elected, What is your favorite contradiction?
Time for a new Political party in the US (or two!) One is off the rails Other cant pony up a leader.
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!!!")
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'm not being dis-ingenuous, I'm prioritizing. I think NASA should focus on space, and leave the earths climate to NOAA and the earths geology to USGS. I think NASA is so unfocused right now, we have to turn to a super-power we already beat in space to help us get our astronauts to a station we largely paid for. And the saddest part: thats the most exciting thing happening above our atmosphere for me to tell my children about.
I normally love order but if I can't have order then chaos is pretty awesome as well. Trump is the King of chaos, I have a feeling we're going to see some really spectacular chaos!
What does ANY of that have to do with warming caused by greenhouse gases?
I don't think that another 20 years of $2B research is going to solve anything
Most of NASA's expense isn't about 'research', it's about providing data for people to analyze.
We do need that data, believe it or not.
No sig today...
They wanted to "send a message". Like a suicide attempt being a cry for help and just as ridiculous.
He'll shake things up alright, probably enough that speaking Mandarin is going to be a good career move for any job more involved than Walmart greeter.
The minority Trump is going to consider when he decides things is a hell of a lot smaller than the half of the patheticly low number of people that bothered to turn up to vote. We are talking about an extreme edge of a political party here and not the voters.
That's why phrases like "authoritarian minority" come up - Trump is not choosing the finest people for a role from all of the USA but instead from a tiny bunch of cronies who will act for a tiny part of New York and tell the rest of the place to go to hell. It's "heck of a job Brownie" territory instead of Reagan and most of the rest choosing people by ability.
He's naming a guy who believes climate change to be in charge of the environment
He's naming a creationist to be in charge of education
He's naming a racist anti-gay to be in charge of interior
He's also designing a special uniform for his people.
Americans, what does it feel like to live in the early 1900s? Or maybe that's more like the 1800s?
I'll bet it's like George W. Bush saying he wanted NASA to get people to Mars. Turns out you can't do it by just yelling at them and cutting their budget.
Yes, because when I want to learn about climate science, I don't turn to climatologsts, I turn to former TV weathermen funded by the Heartland Institute.
Wingus, Dingus! Listen up!
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.
No need to guess - that's already happening. The chairman of the congressional science committee (a rabid anti-science denier from the red side of the aisle) has been hounding NOAA for ages trying to force them to stop publishing results that he doesn't like.
The republicans are getting sick and tired of scientists constantly reporting that the their bullshit climate science denial is... well bullshit. They don't want to stop spreading bullshit (there's lots of sweet campaign donations in the spreading of this particular bullshit) so instead... they are trying to silence the scientists.
It's quite ironic to hear them saying it's about ending "politicised science" ... considering they are politicians trying to interfere with science and force them to lie about the results with budget threats.
It's doubly ironic that the deniers claim the scientists only publish climate change papers to get grant money... considering that the push from congress has been consistently to take money AWAY from scientists who do that. If anything, it would be a LOT easier to get the republican congress to fund your research if you were a denier.
Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
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 *
I notice he has not replied. How odd. You would think NASA making such a statement would be big news. There'd be a press release and such - he'd be able to link us to at least one newspaper report, or a scientific paper that stated what the margin is and at least some sort of credible assesment that this margin is "huge" (as opposed to his own subjective interpretation of a number he didn't [want to] understand) and sure.
And surely if it invalidated any of their results - then there WOULD be studies showing this. The oil industry is spending hundreds of millions on anti-climate-change propaganda, they would surely be able to offer a few million in a nice grant to any scientist who could do so. I mean - the deniers always tell us scientists publish climate change articles to get money... if they are so greedy, how come the oil companies can't seem to buy any that will write a decent paper and reveal the 'truth' ?
Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
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.
Before NASA was called NASA it was called NACA, the National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics, and it did fundamental research into aerodynamics from 1915 onwards. Chuck Yeager's X-1 was a NACA research program.
Mashiki, you realize that the tweets from Trump's account that call it a hoax still exist, right? The internet is forever.
You are welcome on my lawn.
Trump is not choosing the finest people for a role from all of the USA but instead from a tiny bunch of cronies
First, that's what all presidents do. Why do you think Wall Street people ended up in charge of treasury.
Second, Trump is a bit different because he has very, very few "cronies". With the exception of Thiel he was basically alone during his campaign. He owes nothing to no one. I can't tell at the moment if it's a good or bad thing, but it's new, that's for sure.
lucm, indeed.
Imagine the space program we could have.
If facts don't matter, why spend money for them?
I strongly suspect that NASA is suddenly going to find need for a bunch of new, advanced "weather satellites" ;)
Anyway, as for this article: POTUS can't just "scrap" some random part of NASA. NASA's budget is determined by congress. He can threaten vetoes, but he has to work with congress on the budget.
It's almost as if you believe that Donald understands how government works.
No sig today...
Build a spaceship on the moon or in the orbit.
"It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap
Your argument is like that of a petulant child when called out: "s/he made me do it". It's funny how Republican supporters, who talk about personal responsibility now want to deflect responsibility for Trump's election on someone else.
Work on your reading comprehension. I'm not a Trump supporter (and in the post you replied to I clearly said "I don't think people made the right decision this year.") I am an anti-Trump leftist who was arguing on this very site, weeks before the election, that the anti-Trump rhetoric was backfiring disastrously.
For the rest, I can only refer you to my other reply. I know multiple female Obama supporters who voted for Trump. If you think it's more important that you bleat about the KKK and pussy grabbing twenty times a day for the next four years, so be it. Hopefully, others may realize that most people in this country are more concerned about actual policies. (And yes, Trump had some atrocious ones that were completely drowned out by the tsunami of tedious non-sequitur bullshit regarding just how big a racist and sexist he is.)
As for character, what about all the times Trump used the words: "lying Hillary". Was that not a character assassination?
Things that work very well for the right often don't work for the left. It's not fair. Life isn't fair. I'm beyond fairness; I'm trying to get people to care about what can actually work so that the left in this country can be fixed.
I agree they were there and not hidden, but no, they didn't swing this election. It's getting old saying this, but I personally know at least three liberal females who voted for Obama twice and voted for Trump this election. I don't agree with their reasons, but it's obvious enough to me that one of the reasons why they did this (and none of them liked Trump's personality, obviously) is because they did not hear enough good, policy-centered criticisms of Trump. The criticisms were sort of there, they weren't nonexistent, but they were conflated with and utterly drowned out by a tsunami of white noise (a term I'm using advisedly.)
Trump wasn't proposing any anti-woman legislation beyond his anti-abortion stuff which, while very worrying[1], apparently simply isn't a top concern for a lot of people. Trump wasn't proposing any anti-black stuff that I'm aware of beyond some bombastic pro-police statements that are unlikely to spawn much legislation of consequence[2]. Trump wasn't proposing any anti-Latino measures for people who were citizens. The measures he were proposing against Latino non-citizens are a mixture of dumb, cruel, and maybe-could-be-somewhat-reasonable-if-modified, but anyone who was paying attention realized that just as actual racists use "immigration reform" as a proxy to avoid talking about racism, people who don't want to get in a debate on immigration reform use "racism" as an excuse not to, and in this country it does appear that the latter group of people is a bigger than the former.
The neo-nazis alone did not and could not have swung this election on their own. The failure of the left is right there to see, plain as day. I really hope you people can wake up and see what's going on before 2018 (let alone 2020).
1. SCOTUS stuff in general is why I very early on wrote off any possibility of supporting Trump, even if he swung centrist on the other issues.
2. More important is the implied absence of much-needed indictment and prosecution reform, but that's far too subtle a nuance for the mainstream media to bother with. (Not even the BLM people can manage it, as they'd much rather wail because people won't admit the full extent of racism as they see it instead of pursuing actual solutions that will reduce racist outcomes.)
All that deniers and pseudo-skeptics require is that there be an objection. The objection doesn't have to make sense, it doesn't have to be rational, it can even be an outright lie, but the mere fact that there was an objection made furthers the notion of uncertainty, that the basic claims of the theory under attack are themselves being questioned.
I spent a number of years in my younger days debating Creationists, and I see the identical pattern of anti-scientists making absurd claims and even more absurd demands, moving the goal posts when those demands are met, invoking every possible fallacy, claiming conspiracies when all else fails, the whole drive being "I've read this objection, therefore the whole theory is false!"
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
It's a statement that either you don't understand Citizens United, or you simply reject parts of the First Amendment. Still not sure which, but Citizens United in no way said "all corporations are people with the same rights as people". Instead it said "yup, people peaceably assembled may participate in politics, says so right there".
Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
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.
And your argument hinges on your attempt at deceptively claiming these two things are mutually exclusive. People with science degrees are not magically immune to politics.
In this case they are showing raw data that speaks for itself. I don't care who published it, that looks pretty definitively like an attempt at deliberate manipulation of the data on NOAA's part.
I crunched the raw data myself and got the same warming trend that NASA and NOAA get. See http://forums.sandiegouniontri... for details