Defunding NASA’s Climate Research: It’s Not a Complicated Issue
In response to my post explaining how the US National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) will soon see all its climate change research funding removed, here’s a short excerpt from frequent commenter MarcoPolo’s much longer response: It’s always controversial when funding is withdrawn from any research project. However, the reaction from the Sierra Club, like your own, is partisan and politically biased. People are screaming, “I want to get my own way!”
This defunding is the straightforward result of the oil companies’ corruptive influence that pervades US law-making, which is in the process of destroying our civilization. I don’t mince words with that, and you shouldn’t either. It’s not about getting my way; it’s about saving humankind from catastrophe. It’s that simple; it doesn’t require long diatribes.
Craig,
Your observation:-
“This defunding is the straightforward result of the oil companies’ corruptive influence that pervades US law-making, which is in the process of destroying our civilization. I don’t mince words with that, and you shouldn’t either. It’s not about getting my way; it’s about saving humankind from catastrophe. It’s that simple; it doesn’t require long diatribes.”
Is an excellent example of what got Trump elected !
You state your opinion with the certainty of a disciple with a decree from Mt Olympus ! Naturally, in view of the divine nature of your revelation, your tolerate no debate, entertain no doubt and demand others agree without dissent.
Those of us lacking a personal telephone line to Mt Olympus, may timidly (while watching out for thunderbolts) question the evidence to verify or support your decree.
But then, I forgot, you don’t do evidence or justifications, because you don’t want to indulge in “diatribes”!
Back in the real world,
1) No real evidence exists Oil Companies possess any greater “pervasive, corrupting influence on US law-making than befits the place in the US economy. (If they did, the ethanol industry wouldn’t exist).
2) The claim “oil companies are destroying our civilization ” is absurdly melodramatic. Try eliminating the Oil Industry, and see how civilization thrives !
3) “it’s about saving humankind from catastrophe” ! Wonderful sentiment, and very emotive ! Unfortunately, completely meaningless unless you can explain exactly how you intend bringing this about in a practical manner.
Craig, we all want to see environmental progress and a transition from older forms of energy to more efficient, sustainable energy generation. We all want superior cleaner technology.
However, there’s a vast difference between wanting something and having a practical plan to achieve the goal. Just announcing the objective, and ignoring any impediments, doesn’t solve anything, except suggest a political agenda rather than environmental.
I have more reason to annoyed at the election of Donald Trump than you !
For years I have warned of the consequences of excessive activist claims, exaggerations, abusive behavior and confusing environmental issues with political agendas.
For years I’ve been warning of a populist backlash. That’s what’s occurred. Shouting failed slogans louder, doesn’t work ! It’s time for a new, inclusive approach. Joe Public has stopped listening to the old slogans.
It’s time to regroup with a new strategy, be more inclusive, more tolerant, certainly more objective. It’s time to forget all the political agenda’s and get back to proving the economic and environmental credentials of better technology.
Win back confidence and good will, not further division and alienation.
“This defunding is the straightforward result of the oil companies’ corruptive influence that pervades US law-making, which is in the process of destroying our civilization”.
It could be argued that climate change will not destroy our civilization, however the influence from the oil companies and their push towards the past, is in fact that danger that threatens civilization. Why? Because back to the past (only) eclipses the future. It actually robs the civilization of their much deserved AWESOME future.
It’s quite obvious that the trump team does not want to even know about the proven infrared forcings caused from excess CO2, and even more obvious that they don’t want to consider the forced feedback uncertainties of climate change. Thus, their slashing of science funding for CC is a sign that they don’t want anything to do with advanced clean energy generation and storage technologies.
With trump (excuse the non capitalization!), we are going BACKWARDS. Perhaps into hate, racism, scientific illiterism and resource deletion into an over heated biosphere.
I meant to say that “I agree completely” to your words, but my phone was messing up.