Support NeoGAF

[Dreams-Visions]

both sides are the same

That said, I'll be happy if we bring back the national space program. Watching a shuttle liftoff is one of the wonders of the world.

 

[Akuun]

This is pretty much complete nonsense, isn't it?

"by the end of the century" completely means "I'm not going to do shit and let someone else do it after I stop being president", so he's basically saying in about 2983742983742934 words that he's sacking NASA.

 

[Dubbedinenglish]

Lead, Tobacco, Climate change


We never fucking learn

 

[blu]

Is everyone ignoring this line?

I agree with this. I'd like NASA to refocus their goal on space and space exploration. We have other agencies that can be dedicated to climate science. NASA's scientists, technology, and infrastructure is invaluable and I doubt their progress (such as the satellites mentioned) will be decommissioned. There are other organizations in the government that can make their prime focus climate change.

Whether or not it will actually be implemented this way, no one can say.

NASA's been doing some jobs better than other, and their weather satellites have been among those things NASA does great. Why would you want to delegate that to other agencies?

both sides are the same

That said, I'll be happy if we bring back the national space program. Watching a shuttle liftoff is one of the wonders of the world.

Both sides? Which sides - those where one side wants to do climate fuckery unmonitored, and the other that worries about the lives of their children and grandchildren? Indeed the same!

 

[Opto]

Is everyone ignoring this line?



I agree with this. I'd like NASA to refocus their goal on space and space exploration. We have other agencies that can be dedicated to climate science. NASA's scientists, technology, and infrastructure is invaluable and I doubt their progress (such as the satellites mentioned) will be decommissioned. There are other organizations in the government that can make their prime focus climate change.

Whether or not it will actually be implemented this way, no one can say.

NASA has some of the greatest capabilities in actually tracking all the data happening with climate research. Also, one doesn't have some rail against NASA as politicized science and then agree other agencies will do just as good a job without that either being a flat out lie or a promise to manipulate those other agencies.

 

[ant_]

NASA's been doing some jobs better than other, and their weather satellites have been among those things NASA does great. Why would you want to delegate that to other agencies?

Both sides? Which sides - those where one side wants to do climate fuckery unmonitored, and the other that worries about the lives of their children and grandchildren? Indeed the same!

You can still utilize those same resources under a different name. I'm not claiming it's the best or smartest decision, I'm saying the outrage in this thread is pretty unjustified if people merely read that one sentence. I don't think people realize that there are a lot of governmental entities that do research into climate science.

Making the EPA focus on this, and NASA focus on space exploration is fine.

Space exploration has taken a back seat to these other items at NASA. I agree that the goal at NASA needs to be reoriented.

 

[Gutek]

Fuck you, Americans. For fundamentally underestimating how bad this guy is. He shouldn't even be near a political office.

 

[Blader]

You can still utilize those same resources under a different name. I'm not claiming it's the best or smartest decision, I'm saying the outrage in this thread is pretty unjustified if people merely read that one sentence. I don't think people realize that there are a lot of governmental entities that do research into climate science.

Making the EPA focus on this, and NASA focus on space exploration is fine.

Space exploration has taken a back seat to these other items at NASA. I agree that the goal at NASA needs to be reoriented.

A Trump administration and/or Republican Congress are not reallocating any of NASA's earth science resources or climate change research to any other agency, period. The outrage comes from realizing that ending NASA's climate efforts is not going to suddenly permit other agencies to ramp up their own climate efforts. It's just a gutting of climate research full stop.

Oh, I didn't even see your line about the EPA... the guy Trump appointed to oversee the EPA is reviled by climate activists as an infamous climate change denier. So, the EPA ain't doing shit either.

 

[koji kabuto]

Next will be supporting the real science,You know....Like reptilians and flat earth...

 

[faisal233]

You can still utilize those same resources under a different name. I'm not claiming it's the best or smartest decision, I'm saying the outrage in this thread is pretty unjustified if people merely read that one sentence. I don't think people realize that there are a lot of governmental entities that do research into climate science.

Making the EPA focus on this, and NASA focus on space exploration is fine.

Space exploration has taken a back seat to these other items at NASA. I agree that the goal at NASA needs to be reoriented.

LOL

 

[RMI]

Fuck you, Americans. For fundamentally underestimating how bad this guy is. He shouldn't even be near a political office.

I didn't vote for him. take it easy.

 

[aeolist]

You can still utilize those same resources under a different name. I'm not claiming it's the best or smartest decision, I'm saying the outrage in this thread is pretty unjustified if people merely read that one sentence. I don't think people realize that there are a lot of governmental entities that do research into climate science.

Making the EPA focus on this, and NASA focus on space exploration is fine.

Space exploration has taken a back seat to these other items at NASA. I agree that the goal at NASA needs to be reoriented.

if you actually think this is about reorganizing the bureaucracy to be more efficient and not gutting a program that keeps putting out facts that inconvenience republicans you are incredibly gullible

 

[jakonovski]

NASA is the shining beacon of American awesomeness so of course Trump wants to fuck them up. America is really going to fall hard.

 

[CloudyTuba]

Make Mars Great Again (because Earth is fucked)

 

[PsychoSoldier]

Humans are such good Stewards of the Earth. God would be proud.

This is the thing that makes me bonkers about Evangelical support for max exploitation of the earth's resources and being unsupportive of cleaner fuel sources.

Taking care of the Earth doesn't mean draining it dry.

 

[rogue74]

Fuck you, Americans. For fundamentally underestimating how bad this guy is. He shouldn't even be near a political office.

He lost the popular vote dude. No need to insult the entire country.

 

[Gutek]

I didn't vote for him. take it easy.

It is pretty clear Americans have failed to mobilize against his bigotry, stupidity, and authoritarianism.

This was a vote on human decency, and America has proven that it is fundamentally not decent enough to stand up to racism, sexism, corruption, charlatans, and authoritarians.

You get the government you deserve.

 

[Griss]

There's like this pro-apocalypse nihilist side to me that gets giddy and cheers every time I read this kind of Trump news.

It's like that feeling of excitement that arises right next to the devastation when you find out a loved one has died - a bizarre defensive reflex or something. Like giggling at a funeral. I don't know.

But this is bad, man. Bad.

 

[adj_noun]

I didn't vote for him. take it easy.

Clinton's popular vote lead just surpassed two million.

For all the good it does.

 

[DasPenguin]

if you actually think this is about reorganizing the bureaucracy to be more efficient and not gutting a program that keeps putting out facts that inconvenience republicans you are incredibly gullible

Incredibly gullible, also know as the average American voter.

Gullible enough to believe that Trump will build that wall, bring back manufacturing jobs or make America great again.

First thing that should be fixed is the educational system. This kind of stupidity and lack of education shouldn't be tolerated by a first world country. Just an absolute clown show.

 

[Bubba_Sparks]

What missions are tied to this division? Will removing the budget of $2 billion transfer that money to the space budget?

 

[RMI]

It is pretty clear Americans have failed to mobilize against his bigotry, stupidity, and authoritarianism.

This was a vote on human decency, and America has proven that it is fundamentally not decent enough to stand up to racism, sexism, corruption, charlatans, and authoritarians.

You get the government you deserve.

alright but most of the people on this forum are just regular guys and gals that went out and did their duty by voting for the only sane candidate on the ballot. We're just as frustrated by this as the rest of the world is, so this type of commentary is not helpful or productive.

 

[ant_]

if you actually think this is about reorganizing the bureaucracy to be more efficient and not gutting a program that keeps putting out facts that inconvenience republicans you are incredibly gullible

This is conjecture. You don't know what's going to happen; none of us do. All I can do is react on the topic & information presented. I'd say I'm pretty far from gullible. Thanks.

 

[daveo42]

Wait so we can just find a new Earth instead?

Based Trump.

I look forward to us taking it over and kicking out all the indigenous aliens living there thanks to Manifest Destiny.

 

[Gutek]

alright but most of the people on this forum are just regular guys and gals that went out and did their duty by voting for the only sane candidate on the ballot. We're just as frustrated by this as the rest of the world is, so this type of commentary is not helpful or productive.

Instead of complaining - maybe you should look inward and seek how to make American society more decent after all.

America will be the butt of the joke for the next 4 years, for good reason, and you better own up to it.

 

[aeolist]

alright but most of the people on this forum are just regular guys and gals that went out and did their duty by voting for the only sane candidate on the ballot. We're just as frustrated by this as the rest of the world is, so this type of commentary is not helpful or productive.

we should have done more, not just during this campaign but in the last few decades. we've largely been apathetic and fatalistic about government and the state of our society. we haven't been really outraged or driven to action when past republicans destroyed important regulations or when past democrats bombed children in the middle east. we've each individually contributed to environmental devastation well after we all knew it was happening.

i voted for hillary too, but voting once every few years is the barest minimum standard to which we should be held. it wasn't enough and i share some of the blame for this.

 

[Blader]

This is conjecture. You don't know what's going to happen; none of us do. All I can do is react on the topic & information presented. I'd say I'm pretty far from gullible. Thanks.

Look at Myron Ebell and tell me you think Trump's administration will make climate action a focus for the EPA.

The signs here are pretty damn clear.

 

[daveo42]

Is everyone ignoring this line?

I agree with this. I'd like NASA to refocus their goal on space and space exploration. We have other agencies that can be dedicated to climate science. NASA's scientists, technology, and infrastructure is invaluable and I doubt their progress (such as the satellites mentioned) will be decommissioned. There are other organizations in the government that can make their prime focus climate change.

Whether or not it will actually be implemented this way, no one can say.

I'm fine with NASA spending more time and money on actual space exploration, we shouldn't straight abandon all the work and progress they've already done in monitoring weather patterns and climate change. They are in a unique position to cover it because we can see the cause and effect over the entire Earth, not just anecdotal location information. I think NASA should still have control and release reports based on climate as is and shouldn't run through from Trump EPA filter which will cut out any kind of man-made climate change information.

Having the EPA have final say when the man leading it is a staunch climate change denier regardless of the mountain of evidence and support for.

 

[aeolist]

This is conjecture. You don't know what's going to happen; none of us do. All I can do is react on the topic & information presented. I'd say I'm pretty far from gullible. Thanks.

every single republican in federal government wants to destroy major regulatory bodies and climate science. every adviser to the trump transition team has talked openly about an extremist right wing agenda (his FCC adviser has said that the FCC effectively shouldn't exist). trump has called for increased investment in the dirtiest possible sources of power generation.

this move is entirely about eliminating a source of information on what is happening to our environment. protesting after the fact will be too late.

 

[adj_noun]

Look at Myron Ebell and tell me you think Trump's administration will make climate action a focus for the EPA.

The signs here are pretty damn clear.

Well let's take a look.

President-elect Donald Trump has made no secret of his disdain for the Environmental Protection Agency, saying the regulations it has put out under President Obama are “a disgrace.” He has vowed to roll back Obama’s signature effort to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions, known as the Clean Power Plan, and to scrap a litany of other “unnecessary” rules, especially those imposed on the oil, gas and coal sectors.

The man planning how a Trump administration can obliterate Obama’s environmental legacy is Myron Ebell, a Washington fixture who has long been a cheerful warrior against what he sees as an alarmist, overzealous environmental movement that has used global warming as a pretext for expanding government. Ebell has argued for opening up more federal lands for logging, oil and gas exploration and coal mining, and for turning over more permitting authority to the states. And he has urged the Senate to vote to reject an international climate accord signed last year in Paris.

I say we give him a chance!

 

[AstroNut325]

This is conjecture. You don't know what's going to happen; none of us do. All I can do is react on the topic & information presented. I'd say I'm pretty far from gullible. Thanks.

So his comments about climate change being a hoax and his ardent support of the coal industry doesn't sound any alarm bells? He also appointed a climate change denier to his cabinet and is currently considering a climate change denier for the EPA. This will absolutely mean the Earth Sciences division being gutted.

 

[theepicoftyler]

Is everyone ignoring this line?



I agree with this. I'd like NASA to refocus their goal on space and space exploration. We have other agencies that can be dedicated to climate science. NASA's scientists, technology, and infrastructure is invaluable and I doubt their progress (such as the satellites mentioned) will be decommissioned. There are other organizations in the government that can make their prime focus climate change.

Whether or not it will actually be implemented this way, no one can say.

NASA has been the driving force behind climate science and earth science in general for a very long time. They are a purely science institution. It has always been this way. If you want more funding for space exploration, then give more money to NASA. Don't dictate to the scientists what kind of science they're allowed to do.

NASA sends missions to places all over the solar system so researchers all over the world can use the data collected for their own research. The fact that they can fund research helps them justify science missions. Curiosity isn't there to scout out a landing location for a manned mission to Mars, it's there to share data with scientists all over the world in hopes to make new breakthroughs and understanding.

The fact of the matter is that, thousands of researchers depend upon NASA for funding and data, and that will go away. Last year the National Science Foundation was already gutted by the GOP with their own mandate that money should not be spent on climate science.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/battle-over-science-funding-gets-fiercer-in-u-s-congress/

There is no other way to see this than a direct continuation of attacks on climate research.

The EPA is an enforcement agency. They regulate based on research that occurs with money spent by the NSF or NASA and other public entities. They don't do basic research. They can't just spin up the wheels and start funding science. They're fighting their own fight to even exist in the new administration.

 

[ant_]

I don't really know and can't speak on the EPA. I'm not qualified. So I believe you guys (the posters above me). It'd be horrible if that were to happen and if what you are saying is true (that the EPA will not focus on climate change or is filled with climate change deniers).

All I can speak is of NASA. I've done a lot of work with NASA and have a degree/done research in Physics/Astrophysics. I just think reorienting NASA to focus on space exploration is a good thing.

If science works, scientific based agencies, filled with scientists, can not push forward climate denying as an agenda. It's an immutable fact that climate change exists and we need to react to it.

 

[aeolist]

If science works, scientific based agencies, filled with scientists, can not push forward climate denying as an agenda. It's an immutable fact that climate change exists and we need to react to it.

they are either going to stop doing climate science entirely or will hire people willing to skew the data and its interpretations enough to jive with their viewpoint. the immutability of facts and reason mean nothing to donald trump in particular or republicans in general.

 

[Kai Dracon]

I don't really know and can't speak on the EPA. I'm not qualified. So I believe you guys (the posters above me). It'd be horrible if that were to happen and if what you are saying is true (that the EPA will not focus on climate change or is filled with climate change deniers).

All I can speak is of NASA. I've done a lot of work with NASA and have a degree/done research in Physics/Astrophysics. I just think reorienting NASA to focus on space exploration is a good thing.

If science works, scientific based agencies, filled with scientists, can not push forward climate denying as an agenda. It's an immutable fact that climate change exists and we need to react to it.

The statement from the Trump camp specifically calls climate research a political gambit. That's not supporting science, it's undermining science.

"Science works" only if it's allowed to work. Government funded scientific efforts can be repressed simply by ordering scientists not to do the work or be shut down. The results can be repressed by corrupt science-denying persons in an administration.

 

[Sotha_Sil]

Damn. Why not both? It's not like NASA has this massive boondoggle budget that's out of control. I do like to see space being a priority again, but NASA's earth science research is huge in our field. A great deal would be lost by this.

 

[kaching]

Is everyone ignoring this line?



I agree with this. I'd like NASA to refocus their goal on space and space exploration. We have other agencies that can be dedicated to climate science. NASA's scientists, technology, and infrastructure is invaluable and I doubt their progress (such as the satellites mentioned) will be decommissioned. There are other organizations in the government that can make their prime focus climate change.

Whether or not it will actually be implemented this way, no one can say.

Why not both? Launching satellites into space to monitor planetary conditions is a core competency they're going to need for deeper space exploration. Earth is the training ground, if nothing else. Ignore the "politicized science" of climate change for the moment and think of the kind of data we get from planetary monitoring systems, or advances in technology we can more incrementally roll out on a more rapid basis, and how expertise derived here in earth orbit can be applied to systems deployed further into space.

And if we really want to commit to deep space exploration, we're going to need to significantly increase NASA funding, which this proposal doesn't actually guarantee in any way. It just proposes to take funding away from NASA.

 

[RMI]

they are either going to stop doing climate science entirely or will hire people willing to skew the data and its interpretations enough to jive with their viewpoint. the immutability of facts and reason mean nothing to donald trump in particular or republicans in general.

As someone who works in the science field I feel as though it is unlikely that the caliber of scientist who would be employed by NASA would be willing to do unethical work.

My bet would be that they just defund it.

 

[TyrantII]

Is everyone ignoring this line?



I agree with this. I'd like NASA to refocus their goal on space and space exploration. We have other agencies that can be dedicated to climate science. NASA's scientists, technology, and infrastructure is invaluable and I doubt their progress (such as the satellites mentioned) will be decommissioned. There are other organizations in the government that can make their prime focus climate change.

Whether or not it will actually be implemented this way, no one can say.

Exploring Exoplanets is part of deep space exploration, and doing so will be done from the science baseline we gather from LEO of our own planet. Both the data and the technology we developer to gather it.

These two things and inexpertly linked.

You can't divorce one from the other without seriously harming NASAs mission of planetary exploration.

 

[MysteryQuesadilla]

Those downplaying the significance of this I think missed the part where the incoming administration is openly questioning NASA and their ability to monitor climate change as being "politicized". That's them putting their spin on it because the current President-elect has degenerated a serious issue with scientific consensus into multiple conspiracy theories instead.

 

[You Are Viewtiful]

Liberal science has been ruining this country for decades.

- Climate change
- Keynesian economics
- Gay computers

I need to know what this is about, lol.

 

[Muppet of a Man]

This is the thing that makes me bonkers about Evangelical support for max exploitation of the earth's resources and being unsupportive of cleaner fuel sources.

Taking care of the Earth doesn't mean draining it dry.

Evangelicals are hypocritical pieces of shit. News at 11.

 

[Brashnir]

Where's Captain Planet when you need him.

Fire killed Air and Heart had a heart attack. He can no longer be summoned.

 

[Wilsongt]

You can still utilize those same resources under a different name. I'm not claiming it's the best or smartest decision, I'm saying the outrage in this thread is pretty unjustified if people merely read that one sentence. I don't think people realize that there are a lot of governmental entities that do research into climate science.

Making the EPA focus on this, and NASA focus on space exploration is fine.

Space exploration has taken a back seat to these other items at NASA. I agree that the goal at NASA needs to be reoriented.

What EPA? republicans want to trash it.

 

[onadesertedisland]

With all of the other shitty things he is to be doing, this is what worries me most. Our environment is changing rapidly, and if we aren't ready, or continue the actions that are speeding up the changes, we're all going to be suffering. Droughts, crop failures, famine, natural disasters, war, etc. People will act differently when water is rationed, when refugees are seen not as seeking safety, but abusing limited resources. It's a shit show we're up for, and this kind of bullshit by the leader of the free world, is one of the most worrying things he has done yet.

 

[Draxyle]

I don't understand why Trump is so into all the full blown Tea Party/Republican nonsense. He has no vested interests in keeping coal or other pollutant industries alive; you would think an "outsider" would be beyond that.

 

[Moon_frogger]

politicized science? how about letting economists dictate environmental legislation. that's not only a conflict of interest, it's dangerously stupid.

 

[HotHamBoy]

How do you guys feel about the Gaffers who get all giddy about Trump news in his favor when you read shit like this?

I just had a topic closed shortly after one fellow said how happy he was that Trump is doing so well in the approval ratings. Sadly, I cannot tell him how I feel about that.

 

[kinoki]

The rhetoric used by Trump is so weird to behold: he accuses his opponents of doing what he's doing and somehow isn't being called out on it. More often than not the opponent is innocent of the accusation.

 

[besada]

Is everyone ignoring this line?



I agree with this. I'd like NASA to refocus their goal on space and space exploration. We have other agencies that can be dedicated to climate science. NASA's scientists, technology, and infrastructure is invaluable and I doubt their progress (such as the satellites mentioned) will be decommissioned. There are other organizations in the government that can make their prime focus climate change.

Whether or not it will actually be implemented this way, no one can say.

Yes, because it's bullshit. No other agencies can launch or maintain satellites, which are necessary to study the effects of climate change. NASAs earth-science division is one of the jewels of NASA and has saved countless lives both in its early warning systems for natural disasters, and in its drought prediction systems for farmers. This is a disaster for anyone who actually understands what NASA does in this role and how difficult it would be to replicate their expertise.

There is no one else to take over, particularly since they're getting ready to gut other climate agencies.