It feels like such a strange time to be alive. Even if you disagree with the concept of man-made climate change the distortion of scientific studies seems like something that everybody can agree is wrong. So much of science is funded by govt grants. The idea that everything must conform to the view of the current administration or it is not worth funding seems dangerous and economically limiting.
EPA Science Under Scrutiny by Trump Political Staff
171–180 of 211 posts
Re: EPA Science Under Scrutiny by Trump Political Staff
#172Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm just curious, what are the absolute best articles/papers that prove the following: 1) Climate change (meaning the planet is warming). 2) Climate change is man made and causing the planet to warm.
All the scientists of the world organized the production of the reports together since 1990, supported by almost all governments of the world, including those who would otherwise benefit from bigger fossil fuel use. The conclusion is: human-made climate change, and if nothing is done, the effects are dire. Note: there was no scientific valid input that would disprove the human-caused climate change, and believe me, d…
Re: EPA Science Under Scrutiny by Trump Political Staff
#173Earlier quoted context omitted.
I am more interested in a single paper which really proves either point, or at least presents compelling evidence. Im sure there are a bunch out there, so id like to read some of them.
Note that the natural science doesn't work as "proving the theorems" (mathematics even isn't natural science) but as "establishing the facts." It's like a doing the detective work, collecting "exhibits" and then bringing it to the jury, the jury then can decide which exhibits are valid etc. The jury is the total community of the scientists who devoted their lives to learn as much as possible about the topics they jud…
I figure that there have to be 2-3 solid research papers on the subject.
Re: EPA Science Under Scrutiny by Trump Political Staff
#174Re: EPA Science Under Scrutiny by Trump Political Staff
#175As awful as this is, it seems completely legal since the executive agencies operate at the mercy of the President. The President has the authority to tell the EPA to stop researching climate science, or to even disband the EPA. Have we never considered this scenario before? Has there ever been an attempt to establish independent agencies, not subject to the whims of the White House? (IIRC, maybe the CIA or the FBI ar…
Re: EPA Science Under Scrutiny by Trump Political Staff
#176Earlier quoted context omitted.
When you say he denies climate change, are you referring to climate change itself, or man made climate change? I know man made climate change deniers who fully believe in climate change. But the term "climate change denier" gets thrown around so loosely (sometimes I wonder if that's intentional), that I don't know what people are actually referring to.
Man made climate change, AKA, the extreme levels of change in temperature, atmospheric composition and acidity levels in the oceans we are experiencing right now. I think splitting hairs over the term is unnecessary. I'm sure there are people who believe earth's climate has always been the same but they are probably very few. The most popular position among climate change deniers, as far as I know, is that this chang…
Re: EPA Science Under Scrutiny by Trump Political Staff
#177As awful as this is, it seems completely legal since the executive agencies operate at the mercy of the President. The President has the authority to tell the EPA to stop researching climate science, or to even disband the EPA. Have we never considered this scenario before? Has there ever been an attempt to establish independent agencies, not subject to the whims of the White House? (IIRC, maybe the CIA or the FBI ar…
Re: EPA Science Under Scrutiny by Trump Political Staff
#178As awful as this is, it seems completely legal since the executive agencies operate at the mercy of the President. The President has the authority to tell the EPA to stop researching climate science, or to even disband the EPA. Have we never considered this scenario before? Has there ever been an attempt to establish independent agencies, not subject to the whims of the White House? (IIRC, maybe the CIA or the FBI ar…
Also, there are laws in place that the EPA is responsible for. So it is highly unlikely (illegal even) to simply disband the EPA for any reason. The only way to do that is through congress by repealing a host of laws that the EPA is effectively responsible for. That is to say, the EPA is responsible for executing on those laws. If they don't, then the government could be sued - which is the purpose of the justice dep…
Re: EPA Science Under Scrutiny by Trump Political Staff
#179Re: EPA Science Under Scrutiny by Trump Political Staff
#180Earlier quoted context omitted.
Note that the natural science doesn't work as "proving the theorems" (mathematics even isn't natural science) but as "establishing the facts." It's like a doing the detective work, collecting "exhibits" and then bringing it to the jury, the jury then can decide which exhibits are valid etc. The jury is the total community of the scientists who devoted their lives to learn as much as possible about the topics they jud…
Im fine with compelling evidence, but I just want to read something that demonstrates a high likylihood that there is in fact global warming and that it is caused by humans. I figure that there have to be 2-3 solid research papers on the subject.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ice_core
The expected rise of CO2 closely matches our fosil fuels consumption.
https://www.skepticalscience.com/human-co2-smaller-than-natu...