Next NASA Chief Nominee Doesn’t Believe in Climate Change

[EdC]

So who do they trust? They trust the city planners who approved the housing developments and are supposed to be looking out for them. Except the city planners are not looking out for them because they are ignoring the science.

And personal responsibility or not, the tax payers are always on the hook to help pay for the billions in storm damage that could have been mitigated if city planners restricted development in the lowest areas. But hey, that would be a financial burden on the developers.

Don't these planners work for the vaunted "government" that you say needs more resources to save us all from indescribable misery and death?

In the Northeast it's the same story; people living on the shore that was wiped out by Sandy are rebuilding in the same spots, hopefully with a bit better construction techniques. It is worth it to them to roll the dice that it won't happen again in their lifetimes, and really that is all that matters because it makes life more enjoyable.

And in the trust department, if our previous POTUS really believed that AGW was a great threat to humanity why would he be buying a house on an island?

 

[RyanT]

Although I agree in general, I think you are being overly simplistic and ignoring the fact that ability to secure research grants / funding is also pretty important. That can be quite political. An academic that cannot attract research dollars to their institution due to an unpopular research focus is not exactly the most employable.

As an academic scientist, this is something I know a little bit about. Indeed, getting research grants is helpful (or even necessary in some institutions) for getting tenure and keeping your job. Once you have tenure, however, you are free to work on projects however you see fit. After tenure, you don't lose your job for failing to secure additional grants. In addition, many federal scientists (e.g. Smithsonian) work on fixed internal budgets and do not rely on external grants to fund the science. Also, probably the most important point I can make here is that "popular research foci" are not what keep the grants coming in. Right now, the most sure fire way to receive a federal grant in climate science is to provide reliable data showing that we are not warming the planet. The agencies love to fund good science that buck current trends.

 

[RyanT]

Don't these planners work for the vaunted "government" that you say needs more resources to save us all from indescribable misery and death?

Would you mind showing me the quote where I said we need the government to save us from indescribable misery and death?

 

[chrisch]

Would you mind showing me the quote where I said we need the government to save us from indescribable misery and death?

Don't start the whack a mole game. Relax. Move on.

 

[The Chairman]

Don't start the whack a mole game. Relax. Move on.

I don't think he started it. They rely on distortion and defamation in order to press their agenda. His honor is being impugned and I don't blame him for taking exception to such an attack.

Again, I don't see any scientific evidence that supports the deniers. None, nada and squat. All they are doing is trying to undermine the credibility of scientists and experts in this field. They aren't adding any science: they just don't like the science that disagrees with them. They fight facts with invective and made up crap rather than invest in research.

 

[diver0008]

I don't think he started it. They rely on distortion and defamation in order to press their agenda. His honor is being impugned and I don't blame him for taking exception to such an attack.

Again, I don't see any scientific evidence that supports the deniers. None, nada and squat. All they are doing is trying to undermine the credibility of scientists and experts in this field. They aren't adding any science: they just don't like the science that disagrees with them. They fight facts with invective and made up crap rather than invest in research.

And what qualifies you to make that determination?

 

[The Chairman]

And what qualifies you to make that determination?

Which determination? There were a few in there.

 

[Skeptic14]

Yeah sure. Better to be controlled by corporations that only have maximizing their profit in mind than the, "shudder", government. Gotta love libertarians.

Libertarians are awesome, the least hypocritical people there are IMO.

I'll worry as much about big corporations when they can start forcing me at gun point to hand over money like the government can.

 

[diver0008]

Libertarians are awesome

Agree. Hard to understand how anyone could have a problem with people whose ethos is highly about "live and let live".

It may be a little too progressive for some.

 

[KenGordon]

Agree. Hard to understand how anyone could have a problem with people whose ethos is highly about "live and let live".

It may be a little too progressive for some.

In this context isn't the ethos "build wherever I see fit and damn the concequences for others"?