Scientists Asked to Scrub References to Climate Change in their Grants

Please register or login

Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.

Benefits of registering include

  • Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
  • A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
  • You can make this box go away

Joining is quick and easy. Log in or Register now!

Sea Save Foundation

Contributor
Messages
1,110
Reaction score
79
Location
Malibu, California
In their grants with the U.S. Department of Energy, scientists have been asked to scrub all references to global warming and climate change as part of the Trump administration’s “budget language restrictions.” One scientist says he "is more concerned that research priorities are being set by political ideology that is at odds with scientific knowledge.”

Read more here (story #3).

coalplants.jpg
 
Maybe go heavy on acidification due to atmospheric CO2 as an alternative. That is going to mess up the world's oceans as well.
 
Disgusting example of head-in-the-sand (or somewhere else) politics denying fairly well settled science. Reminds me of Galileo and the Catholic Church a few centuries ago.
 
Judging from the story, looks like the pressure is to avoid controversy-laden terminology, not to prevent the research projects from being done. Hopefully the actual research will still get done and the information made available.

Richard.
 
Judging from the story, looks like the pressure is to avoid controversy-laden terminology, not to prevent the research projects from being done. Hopefully the actual research will still get done and the information made available.

Richard.

The phrase "climate change" is controversial? Well, I guess in the same sense that the word "evolution" is controversial...
 
Whether it should be or not, it seems that it is, at least with some people. Lots of people roll their eyes while superficially complying with what they perceive as idiotic political correctness, with an eye toward getting what needs to be done, done.

Richard.
 
Whether it should be or not, it seems that it is, at least with some people. Lots of people roll their eyes while superficially complying with what they perceive as idiotic political correctness, with an eye toward getting what needs to be done, done.

Richard.

I don't understand - this is about funding for scientists studying climate change. What is the political correctness here? Why would there be any logical justification for asking scientists to avoid mentioning the topic of their research? Seriously, I'm not trolling, and I understand full well why the administration would make this an issue. I understand the political angle.

But it should be called out as a craven, unscientific, counterproductive roadblock to critical research. There should be no justification for this.

I want cancer researchers to be able to use the word "cancer". I want scientists working on antibiotic resistant strains of bacteria to be able to use the word "evolution". And I want climate change researchers to be able to use the phrase "climate change".
 
The phrase "climate change" is controversial? Well, I guess in the same sense that the word "evolution" is controversial...
Umm. Yes, exactly. With a certain bunch of voters. Note the key word and tricky phrase I used?
 
Umm. Yes, exactly. With a certain bunch of voters. Note the key word and tricky phrase I used?

I have no idea what you are talking about. E Pluribus Unum, Captain... :wink:
 
If you haven't read it, George Orwell's appendix to his novel "1984" is well worth reading. The parallels to today's political situation are kinda scary.

One word: newspeak.
 
https://www.shearwater.com/products/perdix-ai/

Back
Top Bottom