This Is What Happens When You Elect Climate Change Deniers

This Is What Happens When You Elect Climate Change Deniers

WASHINGTON -- Scientists are balking at major cuts to NASA's budget that the House Committee on Science, Space and Technology approved last week, cuts that critics say will imperil climate change research in the U.S.

The committee-approved 2016 and 2017 NASA budgets would cut the agency's earth science funding by at least $323 million. Climate is a major part of the agency's earth science work, and NASA plays an important role among government agencies in helping to develop our scientific understanding of how the planet works.

The budget contains two different funding possibilities: "aspirational" and "constrained." Under both scenarios, the budget would be cut significantly, to figures lower than the $1.947 billion that the Obama administration had requested for fiscal year 2016.

Why is this not surprising at all?

The supposed rationale for the committee's cuts is that the members believe NASA should be focusing on space, not on earth science. Committee Chair Lamar Smith (R-Texas) argued that the budget will "restore balance" and "ensure the U.S. continues to lead in space for the next 50 years." The budget does allocate more funding to other areas of research.

...

"Instead of letting political ideology or climate 'religion' guide government policy, we should focus on good science," Smith wrote. "The facts alone should determine what climate policy options the U.S. considers."

GAH! How exactly is "good" science performed if there isn't any funding to do it? It's also funny that Smith talks about "facts" should be used to determine climate policy when the facts say that climate change is real.

Nor has Smith seemed particularly interested in learning more on the subject. In his first year as chairman of the committee, he held more hearings on aliens than on climate science.

Yea, those pesky aliens are SOOO much more important than learning about how humans might be irreparably destroying the planet.

"We don’t know enough yet to make decisions that are going to hurt our economy or hurt the American people," he argued, adding, "Let’s continue to gather the facts, make sure the science is correct."

I hate this argument. When is the point that enough "facts" have been gathered that we actually DO something and stop debating? Right now 98% of the world's scientists agree this is a thing. The only "facts" that Smith is concerned with are ones that say that climate change isn't real. What a crock...

a reply to: Krazysh0t
I think this should be moved to the religion forum.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

I wonder if they will cut funding to the Pentagon for sharing the same opinion of NASA?

Nope they are trying to increase funding for the Pentagon and legislate them keeping there mouth shut about climate change.

Meraca!!!

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Good! As a taxpayer I am happy to see at least some judicious use of my money rather than wasting it on crackpot theories which have gained "consensus" purely due to funding threats and shouting down of dissent.

You need to have a look at the earths history of climate and the changes it has gone through and then pick a time when climate was at it's optimum for humans and set that as the date and time when it seemed to all be going to hell in a hand basket due to humans . Once you find that point in time then we can work it out from there . Up until now it's been a game of doom porn with the only savior being more taxes on the masses . Yea like we haven't seen that sort of thing before with the introduction of the income tax to pay for the war . history is your friend ...

a reply to: burdman30ott6

Crackpot theories? Really?!? Crackpot theories is Congressmen Smith attending more meetings on aliens than on climate change real or imagined. How are you going to be informed on a matter if you don't even read up on the background reading? Then Smith has the GALL to say that climate change is unproven. Typical science denialism...

Do they plan to repeal all the anti tobacco laws, because you know science is just stupid and a waste of money right?

a reply to: Krazysh0t

They just voted to turn off the measuring equipment from space that monitors temperature. That this would be something the people against the cover-up would do is crazy.

I don't even think I care that much about AGW. Its something we would be concerned about in a less evil world, and there is still no really effective means for fighting it I can see. But I can't understand the people who just refuse to accept that it could be happening at all. We release a gas from our cars. It traps sunlight. Over centuries of releasing this gas, things are heating up.

I am so tired of hearing the phrase "climate change deniers."

I have actually seen very few people that deny climate change.

But for some reason that term now gets applied to people that deny man-made global warming.

Yeah, our "space" agency should be preoccupied with the earth instead of worrying about how to get us off the planet and into space.

You know something that would help save the planet? Mining the asteroids. You know how to mine asteroids? Get into space.

You know something that would help save the planet? Non-fossil fuel source of energy. You how to develop that? Go somewhere that doesn't have fossil fuel sources so that such a source of energy becomes a necessity. In other words, get into space and onto Mars or other planets.

I'm not saying that we don't need science on climate, but we have plenty of scientists at plenty of academic institutions who are studying climate, and we have NOAA, and we have other such agencies.

Why does NASA need to split their mission too?

a reply to: tridentblue

Yea, I can understand why people don't believe it. It's something that changes very slightly with each year and humans are notoriously short sighted. So it is no surprise that they wouldn't believe these things, but it should be noted that this past 2015 winter was the warmest on record. The only place that was cold, was the east coast. Naturally, these politicians are located on the east coast... Sooooo... They stupidly think the whole world shared similar temperatures.

a reply to: Krazysh0t



How much more money needs to be spent by NASA staring at the mammoth? Would you be happier if those tax dollars were spent planting trees or improving public transportation, you know? Actual SOLUTIONS to this problem you believe so strongly in? I get it, your solution would be to jack up taxes and regulations to fund it all, well, news flash: America doesn't exist to fund all the various wishes and dreams of liberal lawmakers. Life sucks, buy a helmet, and accept that not everything can be or should be funded by tax dollars.

It should be noted that this was predicted back in January when Ted Cruz took over looking after NASA and science.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
It should be noted that this was predicted back in January when Ted Cruz took over looking after NASA and science.

Oh Good Grief!

Admit it. You just don't like Cruz.

PS, I thought you were libertarian. I am beginning to suspect you are actually liberaltarian meaning the only thing you are actually libertarian on is drug laws. You want all of your libertinism but none of the true freedom or fiscal responsibility.

originally posted by: burdman30ott6
a reply to: Krazysh0t

How much more money needs to be spent by NASA staring at the mammoth? Would you be happier if those tax dollars were spent planting trees or improving public transportation, you know? Actual SOLUTIONS to this problem you believe so strongly in? I get it, your solution would be to jack up taxes and regulations to fund it all, well, news flash: America doesn't exist to fund all the various wishes and dreams of liberal lawmakers. Life sucks, buy a helmet, and accept that not everything can be or should be funded by tax dollars.

My solution? I haven't volunteered a solution. But if you believe that research regarding climate science is over just because scientists are almost positive that it is occurring, then you are sorely mistaken. For one, science is never definitively settled. These scientists need to refine their data so that they can look more precisely at what is and isn't causing the problems. They need new data to tweak their models, update their theories, and present more up-to-date findings. Science is NEVER finished and it is beyond stupid to pretend it is.

originally posted by: ketsuko

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
It should be noted that this was predicted back in January when Ted Cruz took over looking after NASA and science.

Oh Good Grief!

Admit it. You just don't like Cruz.

PS, I thought you were libertarian.

First, Cruz isn't a Libertarian and he wouldn't BE a Liberatarian if he tried. Cruz is just a religious nutter and statist. Second, I don't support any politician that is a science denialist. That is just stupid and I don't want blatant stupidity running the country. Third, stop questioning my political affiliation in political threads. Just debate the topic at hand.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
but it should be noted that this past 2015 winter was the warmest on record. The only place that was cold, was the east coast. Naturally, these politicians are located on the east coast... Sooooo... They stupidly think the whole world shared similar temperatures.

News Flash: What the Northern Hemisphere calls "winter" is what the Southern hemisphere calls "summer." Warmer and colder is ALWAYS a function of where you are and is fairly meaningless when taken across the globe as a whole.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: burdman30ott6
a reply to: Krazysh0t

How much more money needs to be spent by NASA staring at the mammoth? Would you be happier if those tax dollars were spent planting trees or improving public transportation, you know? Actual SOLUTIONS to this problem you believe so strongly in? I get it, your solution would be to jack up taxes and regulations to fund it all, well, news flash: America doesn't exist to fund all the various wishes and dreams of liberal lawmakers. Life sucks, buy a helmet, and accept that not everything can be or should be funded by tax dollars.

My solution? I haven't volunteered a solution. But if you believe that research regarding climate science is over just because scientists are almost positive that it is occurring, then you are sorely mistaken. For one, science is never definitively settled. These scientists need to refine their data so that they can look more precisely at what is and isn't causing the problems. They need new data to tweak their models, update their theories, and present more up-to-date findings. Science is NEVER finished and it is beyond stupid to pretend it is.

OK, science is never definitively settled, but there is consensus. You do not see how those two halves of the statement are more or less exclusive?

And please explain how taking funding away from NASA dangerously cripples climate change study. Is NASA the only source of such study?

a reply to: ketsuko

From the article:

NASA Administrator Charles Bolden said in a statement that the budget "guts our Earth science program and threatens to set back generations worth of progress in better understanding our changing climate, and our ability to prepare for and respond to earthquakes, droughts, and storm events."

“NASA leads the world in the exploration of and study of planets, and none is more important than the one on which we live," Bolden said.

Other scientists agree.

"The research performed and supported by the division helps us understand the world we live in and provide a basis for knowledge and understanding of natural hazards, weather forecasting, air quality, and water availability, among other concerns," wrote Christine W. McEntee, executive director of the American Geophysical Union, which represents space and earth scientists, in a letter to the committee. "The applicability of these missions cannot be overstated given their impact on your constituents."

NASA may not be the only source, but they are a BIG source. This could seriously stunt developing science in this field for a long time. If we happen to pass a threshold point in our warming of the planet while being unable to detect it, that would be a VERY bad thing.

originally posted by: burdman30ott6

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
but it should be noted that this past 2015 winter was the warmest on record. The only place that was cold, was the east coast. Naturally, these politicians are located on the east coast... Sooooo... They stupidly think the whole world shared similar temperatures.

News Flash: What the Northern Hemisphere calls "winter" is what the Southern hemisphere calls "summer."

Warmer and colder is ALWAYS a function of where you are and is fairly meaningless when taken across the globe as a whole.

Newsflash: The Northern Hemisphere isn't JUST the East Coast of the United States.