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

Websites hosting major US climate reports taken down

apnews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 445 posts

Re: Websites hosting major US climate reports taken down

#261

Post by inigoalonso »

4gotunameagain wrote: post #228
shafyy wrote: post #220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It also made "no sense" for Russia to attack Ukraine. This is not about rational thinking.

If we are to be completely rational, what made no sense was Ukraine thinking it could be a part of NATO, or independent. It is the sad reality of existing next to a superpower. You cannot be independent. It would either be heavily influenced by Russia, or the option B they chose: in rubble.

What of those two options did Finland choose? In reality Russia shares a land border with 14 countries, 6 of which are already NATO members (of the others the second largest border is with China). And the countries they have only a maritime border with are Japan and the USA.

Re: Websites hosting major US climate reports taken down

#262

Post by voidhorse »

roxolotl wrote: post #54
timr wrote: post #49

[flagged]

Is it really that unreasonable to believe that a government run by people who’ve regularly called climate change a hoax and has a history of pulling previously public data is pulling the public data about climate change? I don’t disagree that jumping to conclusions is bad but intentionally discounting prior behavior seems just as reckless to me.

Yeah. The copium and ignorance described as "reason" is strong.

This administration really shows you that there are several people out there that are so dense and naive that they'd want to give their oppressors a "fair shake" and "look at the facts" (issued from the oppressors) before daring to question the justice of their own persecution.

Some Americans and Europeans have apparently had things so cushy they can no longer discern when their systems and institutions are actively being destroyed. The very idea of systematic and active oppression is so foreign to them that their "reason" becomes unreasonable. The democratic establishment in the US is a blatant example of this. Let's allow the neofascists to do whatever they want on the ground of remaining "civil".

Re: Websites hosting major US climate reports taken down

#263

Post by timeon »

close04 wrote: post #254
dgb23 wrote: post #235

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is there a term to describe "whataboutism but it's not even happening"?

> "whataboutism but it's not even happening"? What's not happening? I think you are confusing what "whataboutism" is? "Whatabout" the exact same fossil fuel industry OP referenced? I corrected a misconception that OP had, and I guess so do you: that the oil industry cares about political affiliation. To you this probably sounded like a support of the right, and whatabouting the left. Least effort interpretation meets…

'whataboutism' was not correct term here just search vector for similar effect.

I would call it maybe 'relativizing'. Like making everything so relative that anything could happen in theory while taking away attention from the fact (hence similarity with whataboutism) that it just (or mostly) happens in one specific case. So Oil industry would align with 'Left' if 'Left' aligned with Oil industry, but that is not relevant take since it is not happening.

And using Musk is not example of this case because he is not part of oil industry.

Re: Websites hosting major US climate reports taken down

#264

Post by voidhorse »

timr wrote: post #64
chaoskitty wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's hopelessly naive. A "misconfiguration" is the excuse they use after the fact when there's enough outrage that they have to put things back the way they were.

I'm not being hopelessly naive. It's certainly possible that they took it down with the explicit intention of hiding information on the internet, but that would also be pretty stupid, since various articles have found the reports on other government servers . So I assume incompetence before malice. What's already known is that they fired the staff who prepared the report, and are presumably shutting down the agency.…

You are being repeatedly pummeled in the face by a gang of bullies and responding by pondering whether or not they may be continually assaulting you out of some kind of misunderstanding. lol

Re: Websites hosting major US climate reports taken down

#265

Post by ModernMech »

ryandrake wrote: post #183
Ylpertnodi wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>How are these people our elected officials? It’s unbelievable. Voters are stupid?

They’re not stupid. These voters see government as a means to enact cruelty on outgroups they don’t like. That’s why they vote for cruel people who don’t care about hurting others. They are not stupid. They know exactly what they are voting for and are overwhelmingly supportive if it.

I've spent some time reading r/leopardsatemyface, and there's just an unending stream of people who say something like "I didn't vote for this. I voted to inflict this cruelty upon other people, but now that it's coming for me I'm upset. Please redirect this toward people who deserve it. That being said I still support Trump."

This quote from 2019 really sums it up:

  “I voted for him, and he’s the one who’s doing this... I thought he was going to do good things. He’s not hurting the people he needs to be hurting.” [1]
The "good thing" he needs to do to according to this voter is "hurt people who deserve it".

I've honestly tried to avoid this conclusion for years, thinking there has to be more to it, but at long last it seems there's not. People want to hurt other people, and they see Trump as their vehicle to do so, because that's what he promises; "I am your justice...I am your retribution" was his literal campaign pitch. [2]

[1] https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2019/1/8/18173678/tr...

[2] https://www.c-span.org/clip/campaign-2024/former-pres-trump-...

Re: Websites hosting major US climate reports taken down

#266

Post by close04 »

timeon wrote: post #263
close04 wrote: post #254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "whataboutism but it's not even happening"? What's not happening? I think you are confusing what "whataboutism" is? "Whatabout" the exact same fossil fuel industry OP referenced? I corrected a misconception that OP had, and I guess so do you: that the oil industry cares about political affiliation. To you this probably sounded like a support of the right, and whatabouting the left. Least effort interpretation meets…

'whataboutism' was not correct term here just search vector for similar effect. I would call it maybe 'relativizing'. Like making everything so relative that anything could happen in theory while taking away attention from the fact (hence similarity with whataboutism) that it just (or mostly) happens in one specific case. So Oil industry would align with 'Left' if 'Left' aligned with Oil industry, but that is not rel…

> Like making everything so relative

That industries shift affiliation if it brings them money is not "relative", it's just something they show again and again, some more than others. I don't care about US politics right/left but as someone who worked in the oil industry I can guarantee you that the industry will shift its affiliation towards the side that makes it more money. Many industries do this, much of the left leaning tech sector collectively kissed the boot of the Trump administration, shoveled money his way, and clapped on order at his inauguration. It probably wasn't ideological but pragmatic.

> And using Musk is not example of this case because he is not part of oil industry.

And yet he is, as the perfect example of changing affiliation for money. The poster child of the traditionally left EV/green industry slinking away to the famously non-green right. How many examples do you need? Worldwide the oil industry doesn't show a particular preference to the right, it does without exception show preference to the side making them more money.

Re: Websites hosting major US climate reports taken down

#267

Post by timr »

nothrabannosir wrote: post #139
timr wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

> Being preached at about science by a population of people who probably mostly failed high school science is not a good time. I agree with the part about preaching, but fair is fair: they were preaching scientific consensus. They preach what is said by the overwhelming majority of active scientific researchers in this field. You didn’t say they were wrong I agree, but still .. they were (/ are) right. And why should…

So? There’s more to a movie than being right.

It wasn’t a documentary, and even if it were a documentary, a dreadful, preachy, insipid movie that is technically right is still bad.

(I say “technically right”, because let’s not forget that this film was supposed to be a satire.)

Re: Websites hosting major US climate reports taken down

#268

Post by epgui »

lotsofpulp wrote: post #245
dgb23 wrote: post #243

There are so many red flags with this administration that I lost count. Policing speech, suppressing information, cutting research funding, cutting social programs, increasing spending and intensity for deportations, deporting people for political affiliation, an unnecessarily disruptive economic policy and many reports of general incompetence, lying and corruption. It's all so bleak. Where is the payoff?

The new tax bill, which benefits asset owners (wealthy), older people, and the beneficiaries of the wealthy. When you have a population age histogram that is flattening and eventually an upside down triangle, you need some way of extracting labor from the young and giving it to the old (the chosen ones who can afford it) to maintain the socioeconomic hierarchy. The young without inheritances won’t ever have it as goo…

Right, because that’s a “smart” way to tackle the demographic collapse/crisis while totally not making the problem worse.

Re: Websites hosting major US climate reports taken down

#269

Post by timr »

jahsome wrote: post #145
timr wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

C'mon bud, you've got a PhD. You don't really need some uneducated filth to point out how you were disengenous. But just in case: you made a prejudiced assumption and then boldly claimed you didn't. And you didn't state an opinion, you presented it as (probable) fact. You can couch it with all the adverbs you want, your own snobby disdain shines right through.

I said a movie was bad because I don’t enjoy being lectured about science by actors, many (if not most) of whom have only the most tenuous grasp of science. I wasn’t being “disingenuous”. I meant every word. It’s fine if you think I’m a snob, but I’m not “lying”.

Y’all seem to have a hard time accepting that some people might not like propaganda, even if it is propaganda for things you support.

Re: Websites hosting major US climate reports taken down

#270

Post by Marazan »

4gotunameagain wrote: post #228
shafyy wrote: post #220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It also made "no sense" for Russia to attack Ukraine. This is not about rational thinking.

If we are to be completely rational, what made no sense was Ukraine thinking it could be a part of NATO, or independent. It is the sad reality of existing next to a superpower. You cannot be independent. It would either be heavily influenced by Russia, or the option B they chose: in rubble.

Latvia and Estonia are members.

Finland is a member.

Lithuania is a member.

The sad reality is that your logic is just a twisted pretzel to support the position you wish to take which is you support Russia's unprovoked invasion of Ukraine.

Post reply on HN