Trump to scrap NASA climate research:

Discussion in 'Earth Science' started by paddoboy, Nov 24, 2016.

  1. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    20,739
    Trump to scrap Nasa climate research in crackdown on ‘politicized science’
    Nasa’s Earth science division is set to be stripped of funding as the president-elect seeks to shift focus away from home in favor of deep space exploration


    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!


    A Nasa Earth photo shows the Bruckner and Heim glaciers where they flow into the Johan Petersen fjord in southeastern Greenland. Photograph: Jeremy Harbeck/AFP/Getty Images

    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.

    more at.....
    https://www.theguardian.com/environ...onald-trump-eliminate-climate-change-research
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Sarkus Hippomonstrosesquippedalo phobe Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,085
    Doh!

    I guess the critics will jump on this as Trump putting his head in the sand and stopping the main (?) source of information against his position.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Xelasnave.1947 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,222
    I agree with his move.
    Why waste money on gathering data that will be ignored.
    We know there is a major problem and all that happens is special interest groups only see opportunity to profit from the impending doom.
    If humans can not stop wars, can not stop drugs, can not stop so many things easier fixed than changing the way we greedily consume energy why think there is any value in thinking somehow we will change.
    Maybe Trump is doing us all a favour and looking for an alternative home.
    How much more data do we need... Or do we hope one day the data will say.. Its now getting cooler.

    NASA should be about space not weather forcasting.

    Alex
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. billvon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,669
    Because at some point rational people will once again be making decisions based on that data.
    Then it would be called "NSA."
     
    origin likes this.
  8. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    21,527
    It won't be ignored by the military, the relevant corporations (insurance, transportation, etc), the weather forecasters and everyone who depends on them, and so forth.

    Meanwhile, it's quite likely that the leverage enjoyed by the US in its large share of important info via what is after all a relatively small amount of money, would be welcomed by others. If the US leaves money on the table like that, somebody's going to pick it up.
     
  9. Xelasnave.1947 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,222
    I simply get frustrated that more is not being done.
    Obviously we need the data NASA gathers.
    I had hoped my earlier post caused outrage but I guess not so much.
    Alex
     
  10. sculptor Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,527
    The problem arises in delineating science from politically correct "science".

    Politics seems to be both a supporter and bastardizer of "science"
    NASA is under department of agriculture.
    perhaps NOAA(under department of commerce) would be a better fit?

    ..............................
    Anyone want to buy a cubic mile of air?
     
  11. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    21,527
    That problem only arises when politicians - such as Trump, or any of the modern Republican Party honchos - step on science they find politically incorrect.
    Putting all government funding for scientific research under the Department of Commerce sounds like something the modern Republican would vote for in a heartbeat.
     
  12. sculptor Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,527
    The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

    or................................
     
  13. billvon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,669
    A better fit for what?
     
  14. sculptor Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,527
    psst: That was a joke.
    How much would you pay for a cubic mile of air if you didn't have any? Would air imported from China or Mexico be acceptable?
    ......................'
    seriously:
    Looking at a body of science----set vs subset---The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration which is intended to study the atmosphere
    vs
    ..."and for other purposes"
    ... other purposes...
    atmosphere vs "other purposes"

    How many "other purposes" would you propose?

    How about the relative success of C3 vs C4 plants under varying atmospheric conditions.....
    Oops "atmospheric" ................................kinda directs that to
    NOAA
     
    Last edited: Nov 30, 2016
  15. Ophiolite Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,161
    We just thought you had eaten infected shellfish.
     
  16. spidergoat Trump rejects intelligence Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    50,269
    Yeah, because he's a fucking piece of shit.
     
  17. billvon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,669
    Things that bear on aeronautics and astronautics. Traditionally that has covered everything from airfoils to behavioral studies to studies of the upper atmosphere to Velcro. Climate change would seem to be within their wheelhouse.
    NOAA does a lot of work on climate change as well. So do publicly funded universities like UCSD, UCLA, CU-Boulder (NCAR) and the University of Maine.
     

Share This Page