• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Trump to scrap NASA climate research in crackdown on ‘politicized science’

Status
Not open for further replies.

EmSeta

Member
Trump may be walking back on some of his outrageous social comments, but the climate stuff is fucking scary. Every year we put off getting off fossil fuels is a year further down the hole.
 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surveys_of_scientists'_views_on_climate_change

"A 2016 paper - co-authored by Naomi Oreskes, Peter Doran, William Anderegg, Bart Verheggen, Ed Maibach, J. Stuart Carlton and John Cook - based on a half a dozen independent studies by the authors - reported that 90%–100% of climate scientists who publish in peer-reviewed journals, had consensus that climate change can be attributed to human activity.[2]"

Yup, post-truth really is the word of the year.
 

Madness

Member
I really hope with Trump in power, it leads to other countries to take on bigger role in global change.

It will. This election has shown the rest of the world the last desperate gasp by a declining America. They are so scared of being relegated much like the UK and France and Germany and Soviet Union before them that they elected this goof into power because he promised to make them great. Trump is the last President the US will have before the US is finally dethroned by China as the de facto world economic power around 2019-2020ish.

China is already a world player on renewable energy and India because it has gotten so polluted also agreed to the Paris accords for a reason. They now realize a large percentage of Americans are morons and that the US President is a brash and dangerous buffoon.
 
“politically correct environmental monitoring”

latest


How does one live life so backwards.
 

Scirrocco

Member
I'm going to be a science jackass right now and say that, actually, rising sea levels will cause salt water inundation around the mouth of the Potomac. So technically he's adding more water while killing anything living there. The Lincoln Reflecting Pool was already rebuilt in 2009 so it used fresh tap water instead of tidal basin water, in fact!

I thought about that. Didn't work as well though.

But there are inland swamps too, so it still kind of works.
 

John_B

Member
There is this scene in the film Moneyball where the team leadership of a baseball team is deciding on what players to pick, and it's these old men that are making decisions entirely based on their gut feelings: "This guy has an ugly girlfriend, so he has no confidence". I get the impression that these are the kind of decision makers that you will have for the next four years.
 

Future

Member
Very interesting age we are in where facts are successfully dismissed as biased through conspiracy theories without evidence. We are in the Information Age, but it doesn't matter when sources are attacked before even reading what they are saying. And a large number of people willingly accept the theories despite evidence.

It's not unlike religion, in a way, where people are accustomed to believing what they want without proof. The same type of faith that goes into believing in religion is being harvested by the right. And similar to trying to get someone to stop believing in religion, all criticism falls on deaf ears as they continue to believe whatever they want. They will believe anything they are told if it is told by people they have faith in, and fact checking is not desired or trusted (evolution versus creationism)

It's actually pretty fascinating
 

weekev

Banned
Time for the European Space Agency to up its game and take on NASAs fine work. I dare say there will be a lot of incredibly talented scientists about to be out of a job which would massively suck if someone else doesn't pick up the mantle.
 
In case you run into anyone that inexplicably agrees with this plan, remind them at the satellites in question do a hell of a lot more beyond "just" investigating climate change. The entire planet depends on this stuff. Quick examples being modeling forest fires worldwide and mass air pollution movement in Asia that threatens the health of hundreds of millions. At least I'm pretty sure that's out of the same hardware. I apologize to the actual expert here if I'm off.
I thought about that. Didn't work as well though.
But there are inland swamps too, so it still kind of works.
Just being petty, lol. It'll dry up plenty of other swamps elsewhere!
 

Zushin

Member
I hate this fucking man and his crew of gangsters so much. I cant comment much because Australia has been apathetic as fuck towards climate change too, but this takes the cake.
 

takriel

Member
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surveys_of_scientists'_views_on_climate_change

"A 2016 paper - co-authored by Naomi Oreskes, Peter Doran, William Anderegg, Bart Verheggen, Ed Maibach, J. Stuart Carlton and John Cook - based on a half a dozen independent studies by the authors - reported that 90%–100% of climate scientists who publish in peer-reviewed journals, had consensus that climate change can be attributed to human activity.[2]"

Peer-reviewed journals are obviously not "good science." They are part of the problem. Didn't you get the memo?
 

-Plasma Reus-

Service guarantees member status
Both sides are the same right.

Some things go beyond politics, climate change is one of them. Please protest this.
 

NeOak

Member
I think NOAA will be fine, and NASA for the most part should be okay (barring this idiotic decision). Repubs in Texas and other Gulf states know how important NOAA is during hurricane season and Texas senators/congressman typically go to bat for NASA.

You clearly haven't heard of Lamar Smith.
 

remz

Member
“My guess is that it would be difficult to stop all ongoing Nasa programs but future programs should definitely be placed with other agencies. I believe that climate research is necessary but it has been heavily politicized, which has undermined a lot of the work that researchers have been doing. Mr Trump’s decisions will be based upon solid science, not politicized science.”
I guess any research that contradicts the winner's agenda is politicized now/
 
Trump doesn't care about this planet's climate issues because we're going to Mars, bitches!
I wish I could cryogenically freeze myself for the next few years.
 

Furoba

Member
Hope the rest of the world picks up the slack, but it's going to be a long 4 years...

What is trumps position on space exploration?
 

Morrigan Stark

Arrogant Smirk
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Survey...climate_change

"A 2016 paper - co-authored by Naomi Oreskes, Peter Doran, William Anderegg, Bart Verheggen, Ed Maibach, J. Stuart Carlton and John Cook - based on a half a dozen independent studies by the authors - reported that 90%–100% of climate scientists who publish in peer-reviewed journals, had consensus that climate change can be attributed to human activity.[2]"
That's just liberal propaganda
/s

"Politically correct environmental monitoring" ...Now I've heard everything.

https://www.theguardian.com/environm...medium=twitter

Walker, however, claimed that doubt over the role of human activity in climate change “is a view shared by half the climatologists in the world. We need good science to tell us what the reality is and science could do that if politicians didn’t interfere with it.”
Walker is not just a fucking liar, but he's a giant hypocrite too. He wants to directly interfere with science, then immediately says politicians shouldn't interfere with science! You cannot make this shit up.

All of this is absolutely infuriating. And yet so very predictable but all the blistering idiots voted for the orange shitstain regardless. Fuck them all.
 
"Walker, however, claimed that doubt over the role of human activity in climate change “is a view shared by half the climatologists in the world. We need good science to tell us what the reality is and science could do that if politicians didn’t interfere with it.”

What is this, Merchants of Doubt all over again? Look at me, just pulling out numbers out of my behind without any proof to support it. Half... Jesus Christ.
 

bsp

Member
The NOAA reaches the exact same conclusions as NASA considering they are kind of sister agencies. They share researchers and data with each other all the time. Does Trump think the NOAA will magically find no more warming and advise more fracking and coal dependency?
 

Wilsongt

Member
I honestly wonder if we'll get to a situation with the GOP congress that they'll pass a bill similar to their gun violence research bill in that you cannot use federal funding to research climate change.
 

Altairre

Member
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surveys_of_scientists'_views_on_climate_change

"A 2016 paper - co-authored by Naomi Oreskes, Peter Doran, William Anderegg, Bart Verheggen, Ed Maibach, J. Stuart Carlton and John Cook - based on a half a dozen independent studies by the authors - reported that 90%–100% of climate scientists who publish in peer-reviewed journals, had consensus that climate change can be attributed to human activity.[2]"

Get your facts outta here. So tired of these experts.
 

Wilsongt

Member
The NOAA reaches the exact same conclusions as NASA considering they are kind of sister agencies. They share researchers and data with each other all the time. Does Trump think the NOAA will magically find no more warming and advise more fracking and coal dependency?

As if NOAA and other research organization's funding won't be slashed lol
 

pringles

Member
"politically correct science"

Scientists all around the world are saying the same thing, and these fuckers want to make it seem like they're operating under some sort of common political agenda. Shameful.

I can't believe this is happening.
 

le.phat

Member
This is fucking terrifying, and there is nobody that can do something about this.... Although, the second amendment people, maybe there is, i don't know.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom