Trump To Scrap NASA Climate Research In Crackdown On 'Politicized Science' (theguardian.com) 667
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."
Political anti-science tr[i]umphant (Score:2)
How to work an "elephant in the room" joke into the Subject:?
This article seems to belong in the anti-news category. News is supposed to be surprising or at least interesting. At this point I see no grounds for interest.
Will Trump survive to 2020, or will the cognitive dissonance of sometimes having to say rational things set his spray-tan on fire before that? Will he live long enough to dump Pence for Ivanka? If he makes it that far, he could abdicate the throne at any time and keep it in the Family, surel
Re: (Score:2)
Talk is expensive, but we've seen no action yet.
This guy is an airhead and it's about time we pegged the meter all the way to the right so we can get this out of our system.
I say to Trump, "Bring it on. Bring it ALL on. Let's get this shit out here so we can examine it up close."
Then we can get off the fucking coke.
Re: (Score:2)
Pretty sure we've already had this discussion, but if my memory is correct, then I didn't use this version of it:
If the American political system is broken beyond repair, then it's just a question of when it implodes. I'm not fully joking when I say that Trump might convert it into a monarchy, even though Nixon failed in that ambition. Trump wants it more and the party discipline of today's so-called Republican Party is like the Bolsheviks, somewhere between Lenin's time and the end of Stalin's purges.
If th
Re: (Score:2)
It's not the political system that's broken.
It's the educational system.
We're turning out cookie-cutter students who are not learning anything useful to a global market.
That's the precise reason for the anti-globalization (it's called isolationism).
"We can't compete so let's just quit."
This administration isn't even in yet and the voters are having a major baby.
Again, it's all talk for now. I'm betting nothing changes except the agitation.
Re:Political anti-science tr[i]umphant (Score:4, Insightful)
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.
Re: (Score:3)
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".
Next up: (Score:2)
Creation theory in schools.
God
Damn
Re:Next up: (Score:5, Funny)
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".
Re:Next up: (Score:5, Insightful)
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.
Re: (Score:2)
Mod +1 Insightful from me.
Re: (Score:2)
And Trump's new Education Secretary was a huge booster of the testing aspects of Common Core, which are its absolutely worst aspect.
No, this is bad. General Flynn is a nutjob who thinks there's a Muslim under every bed. Attorney General Sessions is a Jim Crow-era stereotype who called his black law clerk "boy" and now this Education Secretary who hates education and got her wealth from the Amway pyramid scheme. It's pretty obvious that Mike Pence is getting his way in all these choices, because there's no
He can do a lot of damage in 2 years (Score:3)
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.
Re:Next up: (Score:5, Insightful)
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.
pfffff (Score:2, Insightful)
BREAKING NEWS: ONLY NASA IS ALLOWED TO USE DATA FROM NASA SATELLITES! NOBODY ELSE CAN HAVE THAT DATA! IS IS FORBIDDEN, AS DECREED BY PROPHECY!
Or maybe it's a complete load of horseshit, and maybe, just fucking maybe, our space agency should actually be concerned with going to space again.
Dumb (Score:2)
Please get informed (Score:5, Informative)
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
Re:Please get informed (Score:4, Interesting)
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.
Re: (Score:3)
I doubt Trump will surprise. Nixon may have created the EPA, but under Trump it will be headed by Myron Ebell, who is an outspoken climate change denier.
Let's assume for a moment that you're right, and that Donald Trump and Bob Walker just want to shuffle programs between different agencies, without changing the total dollars spent. If the goal is to "de-politicize the research", how does this reorg even achieve that? Why is NASA's research more political than the research by the EPA?
Moving NASA's Earth Sci
One wonders... (Score:2)
How long this kind of nonsense is going to stay - often seems like 3rd Reich in the beginning... On the radio I even heard people shouting, after asked if they can pronounce the German word for "lying press" - where the press organs which were not in line with the upcoming movement, were constantly denounced - the crowd roared enthusiastically LÜGENPRESSE.. This may have been just a small rightest wing gathering, but Donald consistently labels anything not conforming to his "Universe" as lie again and
Here we go.... (Score:3, Insightful)
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.
Lets separate two things. (Score:3)
America stepping back in the past (Score:3)
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?
He's right about one thing... (Score:3)
If facts don't matter, why spend money for them?
Re: (Score:2)
Re:The science is settled... (Score:5, Insightful)
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.
Re: (Score:2)
This was modded troll? So sad.
Re:The science is settled... (Score:5, Interesting)
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%.
Re: The science is settled... (Score:5, Insightful)
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.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
If you can't make your point without the language you used then just don't post.
Re: (Score:2)
Jzanu was gentle.
I would have said, "... you goddam major fucking batshit crazy under-educated piece of whale shit."
Re:Politicized Science (Score:5, Funny)
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
Re: (Score:2)
You win.
Re: (Score:2)
Who appointed you the language police? Is that some special privilege of 5-digit user IDs?
Strong language shows strong emotion. Fortunately for your precious eyeballs, I don't feel that strongly about language police. I'm too busy pondering the Email Inquisition...
Yeah, I know I risked triggering another low-user-ID-arms race. Some of the little numbers still lurk around, I think. Either that or whipslash should raise money for Slashdot by selling the small numbers to the highest bidders. "What am I bid for
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Maybe he's a potty animal.
Trollicized Science (Score:2)
Do you expect anyone to get in a serious scientific discussion with such hilarious math? Do you have ANY idea how anything actually works?
Come on, tell us the truth. Who's paying you for that tripe? You cannot possibly be so ignorant or crazy by accident.
Just my personal annotation that this branch should be regarded as "pointless and closed" and that the questions were rhetorical. No intention to feed the trolls and even less expectation of an honest answer to ANY question. You can't provide food for thoug
Re: (Score:2)
That's the website that changed a graph by rotating it counter-clockwise 45 degrees. "Look, it's not really getting warmer!"
Re: (Score:2)
All that pseudoskeptics require is a counterclaim. The counterclaim may be idiotic, it may even be an outright lie, but like the Creationists before them, the fact that such an objection, even if a lie, exists somehow makes an entire branch of science wrong.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Translation: I'm a coward who doesn't want to hear bad news
Re: (Score:2)
Hey, stop intruding on AC's safe space! And give a trigger warning!
Re:Some of you, remember you voted for this. (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Eh? Not an AC comment? Why are you trying to bury it?
Anyway, I wanted to react to the Subject: because I think it is unfair. I doubt that many Slashdot members who could vote actually voted for Trump. If they hate email, they probably voted for the Libertarian. The Slashdot members who can't vote are probably paid trolls from Russia and Macedonia, and the one good thing about voter ID laws is that it's much harder for illegal aliens to vote now. Therefore, "some of you [who] voted for this" may be a null se
Re:Some of you, remember you voted for this. (Score:5, Insightful)
You are wrong. Weather satellites for Earth fall under NOAA, not NASA.
Re: (Score:2)
Just about anybody can build a satellite. NOAA has alot of smart brains, they'll carry on just as they always have. And some wasted funding going to NASA will be eliminated.
Re: (Score:2)
Who helps design them to function in space?
Companies like Teledyne, Boeing, Lockheed Martin, etc. that have a LOT of engineers (mil-aero guys) who know a lot about hardening systems for space and extreme environments. In fact, most of the US satellites up there were designed by private contractors; yes, JPL does quite a bit too, but that's actually an arm of Caltech that is just nominally "controlled" by NASA. NASA tends to deal with delivery logistics and project management whilst private contractors do the actual work.
Try again idiot.
Yes, indeed...
Re: (Score:2)
That's right. Because air and space have nothing to do with climate.
Re: (Score:2)
In the case of NASA, the National Aeronautical and Space Administration is focused on human travel through those mediums. Climate is handled by NOAA.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't think humans are bad sensors, but you are right about NASA not focusing solely on manned missions. The unmanned missions advance science, though, and will hopefully lead to manned missions.
Re: (Score:3)
Do you always blame everyone else (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
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.
Re: (Score:3)
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 [slashdot.org]. 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 grabbi
Re: (Score:3)
Re:HAHAHAH (Score:5, Insightful)
Just remember Mr. Right Wing dumb ass, you're on the same planet as everyone else. Even if it is another universe.
Re:HAHAHAH (Score:4, Insightful)
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.
Re: (Score:2)
You should also change their name from National Air and Space Administration to just National Space Administration.
Re: (Score:3)
Build a spaceship on the moon or in the orbit.
Re:HAHAHAH (Score:4, 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.
Re: (Score:3)
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.
Re: (Score:3)
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.
Re: (Score:3)
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.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Re:HAHAHAH (Score:5, Insightful)
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.
Re: (Score:3)
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.
Re: (Score:3)
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
Re: (Score:3)
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.
Re:HAHAHAH (Score:5, Insightful)
The laws of physics are not bound by political ideology.
Re: (Score:2)
If you have actual evidence of climatologists committing fraud with ice cores for money, then provide it.
Re: (Score:3)
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.
Re: (Score:3)
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
Re:HAHAHAH (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.
Re: (Score:3)
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.
Re: (Score:3)
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 d
Re: (Score:3)
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. [cnn.com]
Re: (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.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Can we report that Trump says climate change is a hoax?
Re:Quit blowing smoke! (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... [twitter.com]
and
"We should be focused on clean and beautiful air-not expensive and business closing GLOBAL WARMING-a total hoax!"
https://twitter.com/realdonald... [twitter.com]
Re: (Score:3)
Mashiki, you realize that the tweets from Trump's account that call it a hoax still exist, right? The internet is forever.
Re:Quit blowing smoke! (Score:5, Insightful)
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.
Re:Tell them what to think! (Score:5, Insightful)
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.
You're a "fake" newspaper (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 [washingtonpost.com])
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!!!")
Re: (Score:3)
I think Trump is coming to the realization during his briefings that he is the dumbest person in the room. He can't stand it if one person doesn't respect him. George Bush probably went through the same thing and he seemed defensive every time he spoke in public.
9/11 saved George Bush, but he still created a layer of Yes Men between him and the people. The only thing that would save Trump is an opportunity of a big war and drumming in the flag wavers. Such are the dangers of weak men.
Re:You're a "fake" newspaper (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3)
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.
Re:Quit blowing smoke! (Score:5, Funny)
Ahh, the ol' Bugs Bunny rabbit season bit.
Re: (Score:3)
And how do you propose to develop and launch the satellites?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
And the National Science Foundation's name doesn't have the word "Math" in it, so they shouldn't be allowed to do Math.
Re:FUCK TRUMP (Score:5, Funny)
Fuck Trump, fraudulent fake ass daughter-fucker.
Wannabe daughter-fucker. Accuracy matters, you know.
Re: (Score:2)
And now he's gonna fuck climate scientists to death. Fuck them right to death.
https://youtu.be/p1xiAXMqJIQ [youtu.be]
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
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.
Right (Score:3)
Because the planet we are on isn't a part of space.
Re: (Score:2)
Because the planet we are on isn't a part of space.
It is not space as far as congressional budgeting, which is the point of the discussion.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You just couldn't take 2 seconds to google "noaa satellite" before running your mouth, could you? NASA involvement is an expensive way to launch satellites these days anyway. "Because satellites" is no reason for them to be involved.
Re: (Score:2)
To clarify the (assumed) sarcasm. NOAA is the government agency that is responsible for the U.S. weather service, and maintaining climatological records. NOAA operates the weather satellites, NASA (or a soon to be contractor,) just puts them in orbit.
On a side note, NASA requests "good old fashion" weather balloon data when launching rockets.
NASA's Mission Statement (Score:5, Insightful)
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.