Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

EPA tells some scientists to stop publishing studies

washingtonpost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 197 posts

Re: EPA tells some scientists to stop publishing studies

#101

Post by nine_zeros »

lotsofpulp wrote: post #23
nine_zeros wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course they will say they are transparent while lying about everything. People have been falling for their lies since 2016. Why wouldn't they keep lying? The real question is why are so many people completely willing to sell their country, community, and future to these liars? Ask any trump voter and you'll find various racial nationalism answer to it.

They aren’t falling for the lies, the lies are a mechanism of signaling that candidate is willing to harm those outside of their tribe (they are willing to be corrupt), and sufficient people believe they are in the tribe.

I don't know why this is being down voted. The white Christian nationalist movement absolutely is willing to burn America to get what they want - they are willing to be corrupt, elect corrupt, forget their religion, hurt the out-group, and lie to give plausible deniability while doing exactly that.

Downvoters: Prove that this administration is not corrupt and not hurting people instead of downvoting - or just accept the truth.

Re: EPA tells some scientists to stop publishing studies

#102

Post by mahirsaid »

The whole idea of polarized opposite parties in the U.S. has gotten out of hand. like science is needed for humanity to further progress. To say the left needs to do this, and the right needs to do that is delusional in its own right. The joint effort comes first or should come first along with logical decisions not based on whether you like the opposite party or not. its about the nation as a whole.

Re: EPA tells some scientists to stop publishing studies

#103

Post by andrewflnr »

lelanthran wrote: post #93
estebarb wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Conservative people tend to protect their believes, no matter how wrong they are based on new evidence. Humanity has many examples of this happening through millennia, it is widely documented...

> Conservative people tend to protect their believes, no matter how wrong they are based on new evidence. You can replace the label "Conservative" there with just about any ideology or political leaning.

Kind of, but also, I've been watching my mainstream liberal friends update their beliefs about stuff, while conservatives still seem stuck. Certainly the point of being "progressive" is about being open to new ideas, and they don't entirely fail at their title. At least in America at the moment, I think the conservatives have it worse.

Re: EPA tells some scientists to stop publishing studies

#104

Post by cogman10 »

wqaatwt wrote: post #100
cogman10 wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It was tried once. Unfortunately it was ultimately killed off by a corrupt leader who took over the military and started deploying them the cities to stop crime. That leader ultimately strong armed the other elected officials into doing his bidding leading to the destruction of the once great nation. He ignored the law and the will of the people. He was ultimately assassinated in 44BC. I believe his name was Julius C…

To be fair Ceasar was replaced by a few even more oppressive wannabe tyrants. He never posted lists of his political enemies to be murdered and was generally pretty lenient. Probably led to his downfall. Augustus made sure to squash all potential sources of opposition before taking over.

For sure. Julius ultimately just paved the way for the future tyrants. He consolidated the power into himself which made it a lot easier for his predecessors to take things further.

Re: EPA tells some scientists to stop publishing studies

#105

Post by delta_p_delta_x »

gWPVhyxPHqvk wrote: post #34
johnebgd wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Great idea. Who pays for it?

We could all band together and have another dedicated group collect money for it. It wouldn't be optional, either, because we mostly all agree it's valuable. Of course, there would have to be yet another group that sets how much money to collect, and how to spend it.

> have another dedicated group collect money for it

Sounds like S E C E S S I O N

Re: EPA tells some scientists to stop publishing studies

#106

Post by wqaatwt »

cogman10 wrote: post #89
rectang wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, now that taker states have figured out how to hack the system and bleed giver states while doing things such as neutering the EPA without facing electoral consequences, attitudes seem to be changing amongst people who previously were all right with subsidizing taker states on humanitarian grounds.

This is something baked into the constitution from the beginning. The entire reason we have the senate is because the less populated slave states didn't want to get steam rolled by the the more populated northern free states. It was an anti-democracy measure to ensure low population regions get over-represented.

The differences in population weren’t that massive in the early years, though.

Re: EPA tells some scientists to stop publishing studies

#107

Post by rectang »

cogman10 wrote: post #89
rectang wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, now that taker states have figured out how to hack the system and bleed giver states while doing things such as neutering the EPA without facing electoral consequences, attitudes seem to be changing amongst people who previously were all right with subsidizing taker states on humanitarian grounds.

This is something baked into the constitution from the beginning. The entire reason we have the senate is because the less populated slave states didn't want to get steam rolled by the the more populated northern free states. It was an anti-democracy measure to ensure low population regions get over-represented.

Since the US Civil War, it has been the feds forcing the ex-slave states into granting representation for their minority populations. States don’t have the power to force fair elections in other states without the feds — so the appreciation for the feds is understandable among those who believe in equal representation.

Sclerotic severe gerrymandering of every seat in the House of Representatives, enabled by the Roberts Court, though, is new.

Re: EPA tells some scientists to stop publishing studies

#108

Post by wqaatwt »

estebarb wrote: post #72
reval wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Out of curiosity, why does this have to be a left-leaning initiative? I personally don’t use these political labels as I’m often confused by how they are used.

Conservative people tend to protect their believes, no matter how wrong they are based on new evidence. Humanity has many examples of this happening through millennia, it is widely documented...

> protect their believes

Is there much left in there besides extreme hypocrisy and cognitive dissonance? Their beliefs seem to be highly fluid and aligned with whatever the dear leader is saying at any given movement. Daily radical swings are not that uncommon..

Re: EPA tells some scientists to stop publishing studies

#109

Post by cdrini »

lukeschlather wrote: post #74
GenerocUsername wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In a way it is? Let me explain. The USA is big, but China bigger. If the USA over optimizes on reducing greenhouse gas today, at the expense of our long term economic and world power, China, who cares for less about preserving the world will continue to destroy the world and claim the most power simultaneously. So while we can reduce OUR footprint by taking ourselves out of the game, the world still loses. So now try…

This perspective relies on seeing Chinese lives as worth less than American lives. On average individual Americans contribute more to the problem than individual Chinese people. One example is airline miles. Americans travel 2000 miles by plane every year. In China the figure is 1000 miles. So your argument is basically "sure, we could stop traveling by plane, but if Chinese people travel an extra 50 miles a year tha…

> This perspective relies on seeing Chinese lives as worth less than American lives.

I'm not sure I follow this. If I was to summarise GenerocUsername's argument it would be "the Chinese government is less concerned with making their economy green, and if the US begins taking an economic/influence hit to make it's economy greener, it'll be yielding an economic advantage to China, which will canabalise more global industry in a non-green way, resulting in a net worse environmental outcome." They're claiming basically a fundamental ideological difference between the countries on climate change that, coupled with a claim of zero-sum international industry, means long term environmental outcomes are better if the US is a dominant international player today.

Sidestepping the argument itself which I believe has a number of key weaknesses (as outlined by others in the comments), can you go over how you're linking that to a devaluation of Chinese lives?

Re: EPA tells some scientists to stop publishing studies

#110

Post by cogman10 »

wqaatwt wrote: post #106
cogman10 wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is something baked into the constitution from the beginning. The entire reason we have the senate is because the less populated slave states didn't want to get steam rolled by the the more populated northern free states. It was an anti-democracy measure to ensure low population regions get over-represented.

The differences in population weren’t that massive in the early years, though.

The voting population difference was massive. The entire reason for the 3/5ths compromise was because the slave states would have almost no house representation.
Post reply on HN