Item 1:
Quote:
Originally Posted by djchameleon
|
^ Yeah, this is such a sinister move that it deserves more publicity than it is currently getting. It's hard to believe that important climate-change data previously available to both scientists and the public is disappearing from the EPA website.
When Trump appointed Pruitt as the EPA administrator it was tantamount to putting the fox in charge of the hen-house, the wolf in charge of the sheep.
When I wrote
"climate change is by definition a dynamic process, so periodic updates are fundamental to informed discussion" in the OP, nobody contested such an innocuous statement, but it's clear that Pruitt does not approve of informed discussion. His policy is to conceal the facts and muzzle the Environmental Protection Agency. It's there in the title, what the agency should be doing, but Pruitt is eviscerating it from within, hoping to replace open, factual debate with censorship and obfuscation.
Without wanting to overdramatise, I see it as an anti-democratic step, a feint to conceal Trump's dagger blows to the heart of the environment.
__________________________________________________ _____________
Item 2:
Quote:
Originally Posted by elphenor
Had to search the description so I could find the guy
Ivar Giaeven
resigned from the APS over disagreement on climate change
formed Cato Institute
interestingly accepted money from Exon Mobile, Koch Brothers, American Petroleum Institute, and Phillip Morris (he's also claimed 2nd hand smoke has no bad health effects super convenient for this tobacco company) for the Cato Institute.
I just sort of refuse to believe a nobel Laureate in Physics thinks half a day on Google was significant research (watch the lecture he says this right out)
I'm guessing he's laughing all the way to the bank but it could just be an ideological motivation
Consider the taking money from tobacco and concluding 2nd hand smoke is A OK
|
^ Thanks for that piece of "investigative journalism" elphenor!
In fact, the debate about the reality of global warming is all but over. According to Wikipedia:-
Quote:
|
The global warming controversy concerns the public debate over whether global warming is occurring, how much has occurred in modern times, what has caused it, what its effects will be, whether any action should be taken to curb it, and if so what that action should be. In the scientific literature, there is a strong consensus that global surface temperatures have increased in recent decades and that the trend is caused by human-induced emissions of greenhouse gases. No scientific body of national or international standing disagrees with this view, though a few organizations with members in extractive industries hold non-committal positions. Disputes over the key scientific facts of global warming are more prevalent in the media than in the scientific literature, where such issues are treated as resolved, and such disputes are more prevalent in the United States than globally.
|
And this is the wiki graph of mean temp increases over the last 40 years which justifies that certainty:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global...re_Anomaly.svg
@ Neapolitan: My hope with this thread was to highlight recent developments in the struggle to protect our the environment, or to warn of new dangers to the environment. I'm sorry to say this as I consider you a good friend on MB, but your posts from the scientific fringe still disputing the fact of global warming might be more appropriate in one of these threads:-
http://www.musicbanter.com/current-e...t-fiction.html http://www.musicbanter.com/current-e...g-swindle.html
__________________________________________________ _____________
Item 3:
Here's a sad story about Lulu the whale, who never had a baby.
It illustrates one of the most worrying things about pollution; that it often goes unnoticed for decades, and then someone furthur down the line ends up paying the price:
'Shocking' levels of PCB chemicals in UK killer whale Lulu - BBC News
..................Bad luck, Lulu. Although you didn't know it, you never had a chance.