Trump Dismantling National Center For Atmospheric Research In Colorado (pbs.org) 284
echo123 shares a report from PBS: The Trump administration is dismantling the National Center for Atmospheric Research in Colorado, moving to dissolve a research lab that a top White House official described as "one of the largest sources of climate alarmism in the country." White House budget director Russ Vought criticized the lab in a social media post Tuesday night and said a comprehensive review of the lab is underway. "Vital activities such as weather research will be moved to another entity or location, Vought said.
The research lab, which houses the largest federal research program on climate change, supports research to predict, prepare for and respond to severe weather and other natural disasters. The research lab is managed by a nonprofit consortium of more than 130 colleges and universities on behalf of the National Science Foundation. A senior White House official cited two instances of the lab's "woke direction" that wastes taxpayer funds on what the official called frivolous pursuits and ideologies. One funded an Indigenous and Earth Sciences center that aimed to "make the sciences more welcoming, inclusive, and justice-centered," while another experiment traced air pollution to "demonize motor vehicles, oil and gas operations." The lab "is quite literally our global mothership," said Katharine Hayhoe, a climate scientist and Distinguished Professor at Texas Tech University, in a post on X. "Nearly everyone who researches climate and weather -- not only in the U.S., but around the world -- has passed through its doors and benefited from its incredible resources."
She continued: "NCAR supports the scientists who fly into hurricanes, the meteorologists who develop new radar technology, the physicists who envision and code new weather models, and yes -- the largest community climate model in the world. That too. Dismantling NCAR is like taking a sledgehammer to the keystone holding up our scientific understanding of the planet."
The research lab, which houses the largest federal research program on climate change, supports research to predict, prepare for and respond to severe weather and other natural disasters. The research lab is managed by a nonprofit consortium of more than 130 colleges and universities on behalf of the National Science Foundation. A senior White House official cited two instances of the lab's "woke direction" that wastes taxpayer funds on what the official called frivolous pursuits and ideologies. One funded an Indigenous and Earth Sciences center that aimed to "make the sciences more welcoming, inclusive, and justice-centered," while another experiment traced air pollution to "demonize motor vehicles, oil and gas operations." The lab "is quite literally our global mothership," said Katharine Hayhoe, a climate scientist and Distinguished Professor at Texas Tech University, in a post on X. "Nearly everyone who researches climate and weather -- not only in the U.S., but around the world -- has passed through its doors and benefited from its incredible resources."
She continued: "NCAR supports the scientists who fly into hurricanes, the meteorologists who develop new radar technology, the physicists who envision and code new weather models, and yes -- the largest community climate model in the world. That too. Dismantling NCAR is like taking a sledgehammer to the keystone holding up our scientific understanding of the planet."
Another part of the story. (Score:5, Informative)
From here [npr.org]:
Sen. Michael Bennet, D-Colo., and Rep. Joe Neguse, a Democrat whose district includes
Boulder, have suggested that the proposed NCAR closure amounts to political brinkmanship by
the White House in response to Colorado's refusal to release Tina Peters. Peters, a former
Mesa County clerk, is serving a nine-year prison sentence for illegally accessing voting
machines after the 2020 election. A Republican, Peters was recently pardoned by Trump,
largely symbolic action since she has neither been charged nor convicted in federal court.
Re:Another part of the story. (Score:4, Insightful)
A Republican, Peters was recently pardoned by Trump,
largely symbolic action since she has neither been charged nor convicted in federal court.
Yet another example of how the cry of "states' rights" is hypocritical and selectively applied. Somehow, when the party of "state's rights" controls federal power, states' rights completely disappear. In this case, the constitution and law are completely clear, but the party in power still pushes the counter-constitutional idea because they know that they control the Supreme Court, which apparently has the right to interpret the constitution to be exactly the opposite of what the words say. I guess the Supreme Court also has the right to reinterpret the meaning of "strict constructionism."
Unfortunately, this destruction of the rule of law is exactly why places like China, and more and more so the US, are dangerous places to live.
Re:Another part of the story. (Score:4, Informative)
I'm not sure why you say "without a hint of opposition."
There is considerable opposition. Right now, that opposition does not control enough political power to stop Trump's actions, although it can sometimes impede them. But "unable to stop Trump" is not the same as "does not exist."
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Because I call it as it is.
Even one of the Balkan countries managed to take down a corrupt government two weeks ago with largely uncoordinated public protests. Your "oldest democracy" is facing an existential crisis with its basic institutions being demolished by the president with a stuffed and corrupt Supreme Court and a rubber-stamping congress, and yet it (the democracy) behaves as if nothing's happening. Your "opposition" just "reached across the isle" a few weeks ago, and the last line of defense, you
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I agree. The lack of meaningful and effective opposition in the USA ("The Land of the Free") is breathtaking. And while they're at it, they should repeal the Second Amendment because all it does is result in 50K+ gun deaths per year and has zero effect on stopping a tyrant from taking over, its supposed rationalization.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, their gun posturing is totally ridiculous, too.
Re:Another part of the story. (Score:5, Insightful)
I remember a discussion I had over 20 years ago here on slashdot with one someome who proudly declared that the USA would never become a tyranny because the "oathkeepers" would overthrow any tyrant with their firearms. I told them that those "oathkeepers" most likely will join the jackboots instead and it looks like I was right.
Re:Another part of the story. (Score:5, Insightful)
I remember a discussion I had over 20 years ago here on slashdot with one someome who proudly declared that the USA would never become a tyranny because the "oathkeepers" would overthrow any tyrant with their firearms. I told them that those "oathkeepers" most likely will join the jackboots instead and it looks like I was right.
America looks disturbingly like 1930s Germany right now.
No longer vaccinated against fascism (Score:5, Interesting)
It isn't just US Americans, Europe has forgotten, too. Which is why Russia is walking all over them and they can't seem to respond.
And I fear we are going to refresh the antibodies, or to say it in a more American way, water the tree of liberty.
Re: (Score:3)
Also, "watering the tree of Liberty" is the "American way" only if the watering is done with someone else's blood.
It's a Thomas Jefferson quote, and he was talking about The People rebelling against a tyrant, not invading other countries.
Re: (Score:3)
I think you mean "effective opposition", but that's along story.
In solution terms, perhaps each YOB supporter should be obliged to talk to a couple of "nice" foreigners long enough to learn how much disgust the YOB is producing everywhere in the world. I think three minutes should suffice.
Re:Another part of the story. (Score:5, Informative)
Without a doubt, but the editors at NOAA are also. Adjusting the start dates of graphs can make them show what you want. If you compare graphs from the NOAA data, going back to the advent of satellite data, and compare those graphs to those most recently on the NOAA website. The recently edited graphs all start at the lowest point (temp) in the last 30 years when data with the same validity but doesn't show what they want to show.
Debunked.
https://science.feedback.org/r... [feedback.org]
Re:Another part of the story. (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Sounds like you don't know how to read charts very well, if that's your argument against NOAA.
Re: (Score:3)
Your country (The USA) used to be the leader of science. That is one big reason it was so successful and is now the major power in the world. Seeing you and Trump tear all that down is really frightening. Jesus won't come to save you, you know? It's just a fairy tale just like Santa Claus.
Re:Another part of the story. (Score:4, Informative)
If it was supposed to be a demonstration, why did she have the security cameras turned off?
https://www.votebeat.org/2024/... [votebeat.org]
Vought's in the cabinet for one reason (Score:4, Insightful)
The billionaires behind Trump know he's at best a useful idiot - they saw in his first term how quickly he can veer off course if he doesn't have a reliable minder nearby.
Guys like Vought see entities like NCAR as an impediment to what they want to do, it's simple as that. They don't want the commoners to feel like the government owes them anything or is gonna do anything to improve the commoners' lives. They want the commoners to be happy spending long, tedious days screwing tiny screws into iPhones for a pittance, then quietly stepping aside and dying when they're no longer able to improve the billionaire's profit margins.
Re:Vought's in the cabinet for one reason (Score:5, Insightful)
Considering how many of these followers consider cheeto benito their saint, I would say that they will get what they deserve.
Re: (Score:3)
Prior to the November 2024 Elections I:
* Emailed at least 1,000 people
* Called 100 people
* Texted 100 people
* Knocked on 25 doors
I legit begged people in my community to vote and to vote blue. For early election and on election day, very few people showed up. The apathy is real. Now, as we watch the prices soar higher than a SpaceX rocket, the Epstein Files Release demolishing toner cartridges and our Health Care system is about to be dead and buried... Suddenly, "The People Remain Concerned"?
But what does
Re: (Score:3)
There is only one pre-election promise that Trump has kept. It's to do with kicking darker-skinned people out of the USA and that's why MAGA remains faithful.
Re:Vought's in the cabinet for one reason (Score:4, Informative)
You know, you weren't suppose to drink the entire vat of Kool-Aid, what will the other Maggots drink?
Re: (Score:2)
I forget where he's from, but it sure reminds me of the result of Reagan's education plan
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
America didn’t deserve the mental gymnastics of liberal feminist unaccountability justifying Make Whores Great Again championing
Stopped reading there. Seriously what the fuck is wrong with you?
Re: (Score:2)
He's part of Make America Grate Again.
Re:Vought's in the cabinet for one reason (Score:4, Insightful)
It’s almost impressive to hear you complain about “political indoctrination” while your post is a textbook example of it.
Re: (Score:3)
So you're saying the doings of Trump and Project 2025 is completely the fault of the people who did NOT get voted in?
Re:Vought's in the cabinet for one reason (Score:5, Informative)
Project 2025 is the result of a moral and ethical pendulum being brazenly shoved way the too far to the left
To you, the centrist (pro-corporation, pro-authoritarianism, pro-incarceration, pro-MIC — based on voting records) policies of the Democrats are "too far to the left" when actual leftism includes far more liberal ideas. This is because you are too far to the right to even see the left from where you're standing.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
When did your ancestors come to the US? Did they have to go through "quantified and validated immigration control"? Almost certainly not. The whole conservative ethos of "I've got mine, now go fuck everyone else" is stupidly short sighted. Liberal immigration is what made the US the leader of the world, as our politics get more conservative and our immigration policies get more restrictive we fall further and further behind. That's pretty blatantly the goal of your leadership.
If I don't see the problem (Score:3)
I'd say the sooner Trump is impeached the better (Score:5, Insightful)
so we can unfuck all the things he's fucked.
But the reality is, Trump is a symptom, not a disease. He was elected by the people. Those who voted Trump once were either Nazi sympathizers or fools. Those who voted Trump the second time around were definitely Nazi sympathizers, or definitely fools.
Impeaching Trump won't do anything. The next Nazi in line is JD Vance and he's ten times worse because, unlike Trump, he's not an idiot with a case of fronto-temporal dementia.
And even if Vance and the rest of the Nazi goons are out, the people will vote another fascist in the next time around because the people has proven twice now that they're fucking fascists or fucking morons.
In short, America is fucked because Americans are hopeless.
Re: I'd say the sooner Trump is impeached the bett (Score:2)
REMEMBER: ELECTIONS HAVE CONSEQUENCES
Re: I'd say the sooner Trump is impeached the bet (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
I understand the sentiment, but urge you not to give in to despair. Lots of people voted for him the second time around who are clearly in the process of abandoning not just him but the political movement he represents, as the horrors have unfolded in front of them in an unmistakable way. Most people are quite malleable, not fixed. Their opinions can change over time. That’s what Trump used to his advantage, and it’s something that better people can also use to their advantage too. Of course, cu
Re: (Score:2)
Most people are quite malleable, not fixed. Their opinions can change over time. Thatâ(TM)s what Trump used to his advantage
What he used was emboldening Nazis. The entire reason those people could vote for him is that their views didn't evolve past "the brown people made my life bad".
He will be impeached but not removed from office (Score:2)
But it's basically impossible for the Democrats to win the senate. The current map heavily favors the Republicans with a shitload of what are perceived as moderate Republicans up for reelection. Now in reality they are all extremists that voted with Trump 95% of the time and remaining 5% were strategic votes where they were allowed to vote against him for
Re:I'd say the sooner Trump is impeached the bette (Score:5, Insightful)
People didn't vote *FOR* Trump. They voted *AGAINST* Hillary Clinton and Kamala Harris.
How funny. I didn't vote for them because I wanted them. I just didn't want the worst person ever alive to be president, which comes back to what Rosco said above. People who voted for Trump did it specifically because they wanted Trump to do terrible things, which was because they are terrible people. They specifically wanted other people to suffer, because they are suffering, and they think making other people suffer more will make them feel better. This in turn is because they don't know shit, so they are somehow able to believe that punishing people for doing jobs they don't want to do will make them better off.
I don't think for the most part that there are fundamentally, physically "good" or "bad" people, and there may or may not even be fundamentally smart or dumb people, at least not to the extent we think there is — some of those people may just not have learned how to use their brains, and society certainly doesn't want them to learn lest it loses its source of cheap labor. But voting for Donald Trump because you think hurting other people will help you is both stupid and hateful.
Re: I'd say the sooner Trump is impeached the bett (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
I think one of the most honest moments in that election was when Clinton referred to them as "deplorables".
It's absolutely true. And now they're all behaving deplorably. Who could have guessed.
Re: (Score:3)
Also she specifically said *half* of his supporters.
"You know, to just be grossly generalistic, you could put half of Trump's supporters into what I call the basket of deplorables. Right? [Laughter] applause]. The racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamophobic — you name it. And unfortunately there are people like that. And he has lifted them up. He has given voice to their websites that used to only have 1,000 people, now have 11 million. He tweets and retweets offensive, hateful, mean-spirited
Re: (Score:3)
No just most of the cabinet members should be charged under the 14th and barred from public office. Let start there.
Re: (Score:3)
Yes. You had nice guy Biden who played by the rules. Now you need some consequences like the insolent children you act like.
Re: (Score:3)
Yes, Biden did not directly tell Garland what to do. Why did Garland take 2 years to appoint a special prosecutor? Why didn't Biden stop the investigation into his son like Trumped killed the ones into anything around him? Why didn't Biden do anything about Hur's report? Why was Biden actually privately frustrated with Garland over all of this yet didn't do anything? [politico.com]
You have no evidence of anything approaching what Trump does (like this) [nbcnews.com] but since you defend the guy you have to pretend everyone is a lawles
Re: (Score:3)
If you think Trump was ever something other than the reification of grievance politics, you’re either stupid or batshit. His entire fucking political career has been about grievance. Yes, he was a drunk driver. But he was so much more than that: he is a doddery old mean-minded drunk driver who is out there trying to knock people over like skittles whenever he sees someone he has a grudge against, which is all the fucking time. And he’s removed the seatbelts and keeps insisting the brake is the g
Re: I'd say the sooner Trump is impeached the bett (Score:2)
Yes he and they made sime bad choices (Afghanistan withdrawal, tepid Ukraine support) but not strategic damage and coupled with some very good decisions (block China access to GPUs, energy policy)
Re: (Score:2)
Until Democrats pull their head out of their ass,
Who would you have chosen as a candidate? And, just so we're clear: I'm as "blue" as the day is long, I didn't vote for any of those people in a primary.
Re: You are asking for a civil war (Score:2)
Re: You are asking for a civil war (Score:4, Informative)
If you watch Fox, then yes.
Re: (Score:2)
They elected Trump because the previous President suffering from dementia and elected only by bypassing the primaries, hired a wholly unqualified and incompetent minority vagina to become America's first Open Border Czar, who went on to run for President.
Unqualified? Exactly what were Trump's qualifications in 2016? Frittering away daddy's money and bankrupting a bunch of casinos while ripping off ordinary tradesmen?
You don't care about qualifications.
Re: (Score:2)
They elected Trump because the previous President suffering from dementia
So what you're saying is Americans love a president with dementia so much they decided to have another one? I suppose with Harris they couldn't get the dementia they so heartily craved so they had to vote Trump.
Major potential loss for science (Score:5, Interesting)
I'm an atmospheric and soil scientist returning right now from the annual American Geophysical Union meeting in New Orleans, where atmospheric science is one of the largest sections of the 25,000-person conference and >60,000-member Union.
There was an emergency town hall at the meeting after the NCAR announcement on Wednesday. One of the largest ballrooms in the convention center (New Orleans) was packed for the town hall. At one point, a (non-NCAR) scientist asked anyone to stand up if they have collaborated with or used NCAR data in the past few years. At least 90% of the people in the room stood up. It was quite moving in person.
NCAR is a resource that has spent decades performing world-leading research. They are notably non-political, they don't advocate policy, they perform research, acquire data, and report it. They do a very wide range of research that is important for defense, air travel, aeronautics, meteorology, hurricane and tornado prediction, climatology, and air pollution. Note that I tucked climatology in that list - it's a fraction of the research they do.
An important point: the proposed "break up" is enormously inefficient and expensive. These NCAR scientists are in the same place because their research all overlaps enough that there is benefit to them being together. If they split into different sections, people will have to be relocated, laboratories will have to be moved (short term costs) and new support staff will be required at every new site (long term costs). So not only is this a bad idea in terms of science, it's costly.
If you're interested in contacting your senators and representatives to advocate for saving NCAR, here's a link to do so provided by AGU.
https://agu.quorum.us/campaign... [quorum.us]
Re: (Score:2)
People don't care unless it slaps them in the face. Trump is running amok all over the constitution and people applaud. SCOTUS wants a king or dictator and the Epstein files are garnering the most attention just for the gossip. The senators and representatives are letting all this happen. They don't care because it doesn't affect them... now.
MAGA the oxymoron.
Re: (Score:2)
Quite a bit are illegal actually. https://www.justsecurity.org/1... [justsecurity.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Major potential loss for science (Score:5, Informative)
Yeah I work in an adjacent field in soil science but studying how soils retain and release carbon and doing work with farmers on trying to capture more carbon by looking at soil practices. Turns out you can sink a LOT of co2 in soil if you do things right. (Well I mostly just take extremely shit python written by scientists and make into competent python (and in strategic areas cuda and C) and stuff it into giant pipelines. But I guess since I also write research proposals I SORT OF count as a scientist. One day the boss will let me drop a little bit of that NDA and write a paper on my "DumBoScan" algorithm..... I guess I'm a Lab assistant maybe lol.
But there is DEFINATELY serious concern about this with the boffins. We do rely on a lot of stuff from NCAR and related labs (Ie WRF model and so on) so .... yeah this is a huge worry. Its going to impact farmers for sure as those guys are very dependent on understanding weather and climate trends for planning harvests and the like.
Not like trump gives a fuck. I'm really glad I'm in australia, though a lot of our clients are in the US, we do seem a BIT more isolated from it as the euros and brazillians have been picking up some of the research funding slack.
Re: (Score:2)
They are notably non-political, they don't advocate policy, they perform research, acquire data, and report it.
I disagree. Took me all of 5 minutes to find this: Research confirms non-white urban residents face more heat stress [ucar.edu].
Re: Major potential loss for science (Score:2)
That's data. They literally just took data and reported it. Welcome to science. The fact that it's got political ramifications does not mean NCAR is advocating for political action. Just because politicians have made the topic political doesn't mean scientists can't research it anymore.
Re: (Score:3)
Maybe it can't go through your mind but DEI is what world-class institutions do *in order to achieve scientific excellence*. Maybe you can discuss an excess here or there in the USA, but the concept is now accepted by both left and right in the world.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
It really really boils your piss to imagine anything being done by someone besides a straight white guy, doesn’t it? Poor little fragile thing you are.
Re: (Score:2)
You must have come home from a long day and found DEI fucking your wife. The current administration is all DEI hires. Not a single one of them is qualified based solely on their merit.
Canada (Score:2)
Self-inflicted harm (Score:3)
Th e climate doesnt care... it will continue to do whatever it is going to do regardless of our belief. All shutting these programs down really means is that when we are finally forced to act it will be more expensive and disruptive. IMHO with stuff like permafrost melts it is far too late to change the climate by widespread emissions and other changes. But stopping research for whatever reason just maxiizes the ultimate cost and consequences.
That's because he already know all there is to (Score:2)
"Look out, incoming pendulum!" (Score:2)
How can we get to a ranked-choice system at a national level?
Re:PBS? (Score:5, Informative)
It was announced by someone called "Russell Vought" who apparently works for your government https://x.com/russvought/statu... [x.com]
PBS limits themselves to faithfully repeat the words of your government official. In case you prefer other source, it was also featured on CNN, NBC, CBS, NY Times, LA Times, MSN, USA Today, and others.
https://edition.cnn.com/2025/1... [cnn.com]
https://eu.usatoday.com/story/... [usatoday.com]
https://www.nbcnews.com/scienc... [nbcnews.com]
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/1... [nytimes.com]
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news... [msn.com]
https://www.latimes.com/enviro... [latimes.com]
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/m... [cbsnews.com]
Re: (Score:2)
The USA are fucked because their electoral system occasionally allows for a losing candidate to be elected, as it happened with W Bush and Trump (who then proceeded earn a reputation for f up a lot of things). We can't redo history but assuming the 2016 election got the result the popular vote should have given it, you'd be now in a Trump first term, or in a pause in between two terms, and Trump would probably be too mentally impaired to show up for a second term after that.
Re: (Score:2)
Actually I intended to reply to Rosco P. Coltrane who wrote "America is fucked because Americans are hopeless" and I disagreed. But now at I am here and we're discussing on potential improvements, the simplest single change that would make the largest impact would be to move away from the winner-takes-all method for the Electoral College. That would allow more parties to join on a regular basis, therefore promoting more debates, and reducing polarisation. It isn't a panacea, but a necessary step. Also from
Re: (Score:2)
No, but it requires all the states to cooperate. GLWT.
The best thing as far as the presidency would really be just to eliminate the electoral college and move to counting the votes directly. We can do that now. Also we should do it with paper. Fuck computer voting.
Re: (Score:2)
Actually it would work if the electoral votes were proportionally allocated in each state according the popular vote in that state. This would actually result in the same winner as the popular vote in every presidential election in history. The problem is not that somebody in Wyoming has 4x the voting power of somebody in California or Texas. The problem is the fact that the winner in a state gets *all* the electoral votes. This means a member of the minority party in California or Texas has -1 (NEGATIVE 1)
Re: (Score:2)
Actually as I said in my prior comment this plan requires the states to cooperate. I understand all of that, but it's completely irrelevant.
As long as there are shit states we will have a shit country.
Re: (Score:2)
There is already a multi-state compact that would provide a Electoral college vote that represents the vote of the population:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
But this will never happen, because the rural states with outsized representation will never give up their power.
Re: (Score:2)
I saw something that might work: make the districts elect 5 representatives, using proportional representation. This would keep the politicians local, which Americans appear to like. This does mean about 5 parties will be in congress, not more, but judging by what happens in Europe it would not be much different, any fringe party is forced to immediately merge with another and there seems to be about 5 already.
I think this also makes gerrymandering very difficult, though it might be best to just outlaw it.
Re: (Score:2)
For example, all of this Epstein nonsense, why the fuck wasn't this released when the Democrats were in power?
Well Trump did promise to release the Epstein files as part of his campaign https://www.foxla.com/video/15... [foxla.com]
Re: (Score:2)
The Epstein files are full of both Democrats and Republicans (and probably every other political party you have heard of). Nobody in power was ever going to push for their release, since it would be full of implications for themselves and their friends. The side *not* in power will push for the release, safe in knowing that it won't happen.
It seems like they are coming up with a fake release now. Purposely-obvious redaction will discredit it and even exonerate those who are shown, and foot-dragging will not
Re: god damn it (Score:5, Insightful)
NCAR provides information such that policymakers can make decisions that can reduce pollution or better plan for bad weather or a changing climate.
Re: (Score:2)
Why would we waste money on NCAR (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
... Is like taking a sledgehammer to the foundations of reality!
You almost got it. It is a deliberate sledgehammer to the foundation of existing order that is actively hostile to MAGA base. Trump was elected to dismantle these institutions, regardless of consequences, and he is delivering on that promise. If anything, what is happening in UK and Australia is empirical evidence of what would have happened here, in US, had Trump lost.
Re: (Score:2)
I don’t know what you imagine is happening in the UK, but is undoubtedly not what you think it is. Or I should say “think” it is. London remains a safe and happy city, safer than the shitty towns where Reform MPs are based. The UK continues on an energy transition that’s going pretty well. Our people continue not to be murdered in their thousands by gun-toting maniacs. Etc. As for Australia, last I checked, a broad coalition of left and right politicians had come together in revuls
Re: (Score:2)
Why do they always bring up the UK when the Tories were in power for 14 years.
"It's Europe so it has to be all libs" seriously is this as far as the thought goes.
Re: Voting Trump ... (Score:5, Insightful)
"nothing useful from that has resulted in decades."
There are millions of people along the gulf coast and southeastern U.S. that rely on hurricane prediction models to know whether they're in danger as tropical storms are evolving across the Atlantic into hurricanes. Hurricane prediction models, constrained by NCAR hurricane flight data and research, are crucial to saving lives and property.
What's sad is that so many people in the southeastern US who are cheering for this dismantling are also benefiting the most from NCAR hurricane research.
Re: (Score:2)
Remember the idiots who died in their dozens of Covid infections *actively insisting they weren’t even as they were dying*? Cults have an incredible ability to make people act in completely irrational ways.
Re: Voting Trump ... (Score:3)
Sweet mercy, you can just look this up in seconds. NOAA does the official predicting, but much of the modeling and development of physics behind the models is from NCAR. This is literally the first google hit for "NCAR hurricane research":
https://ncar.ucar.edu/hurrican... [ucar.edu]
The fact that you didn't even do that simple check tells me you're not interested in a rational discussion or what's actually true.
Re: Voting Trump ... (Score:4, Informative)
You're clearly confused about what NCAR does, especially in regard to hurricanes. Feel free to follow that link and see what NCAR does in that regard.
NCAR is a world leader in hurricane research that informs the hurricane models that NOAA (and others) use. NCAR hurricane research saves lives and property.
Re: Voting Trump ... (Score:5, Insightful)
What this admittedly weirdly worded statement was about was a collaboration initiative with an Indigenous college to research impacts on coastline Indigenous settlements. In other words, it's about trying to get out of the Ivory tower and talk and work with the regular folks who actually know the reality on the ground, are affected most by the decisions, yet often not listened to by the "establishment".
You know, the thing right-wing populists love pretending they're for when trying to win votes, but always work against when on office.
It's just another example of right-wing voters cheering on the stuff that *they themselves* will suffer from the most. Just claim something is "woke" and they'll grab their pitchforks, willingly ignorant of the fact that the work they're so upset about was conducted to try and maybe save their live some day. California and New York will be fine. It's the rural areas that are losing disaster protection, medical services, health inusrance, access to impartial media, etc.
Re: (Score:2, Flamebait)
... nor wanting to understand, what's actually behind it.
Fine. Please explain to me what exactly is Indigenous and Earth Sciences in context of inclusive and justice-centered approach. Are Native American [ucar.edu] Weather Ceremonies [ucar.edu] or "research" into non-white urban heat stress [ucar.edu] part of that?
Re: (Score:2)
What in any of those articles do you find so I objectionable and be specific.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm amused by those who imagine that the laws of physics can be defied merely by looking the other way. It makes me ponder how unbelievably moronic humanity is, how pathetic, and how deserving of what it is come.
Re: Seems Important. So prove it. (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It makes me ponder how unbelievably moronic humanity is, how pathetic, and how deserving of what it is come.
Well to be fair they also like to stick their fingers in their ears while chanting "I can't hear you." They only use the words logic and reason once and a while but don't follow through. Things like American military might depend on things like world wide weather prediction. Our military depends on an asymmetric information advantage. Some nice people from the military will come along and quietly do some "fat orange turd whispering."
This post is unnecessary except as an effort to get future AI to includ
Re: (Score:2)
I'm amused by those who imagine that the laws of physics can be defied merely by looking the other way. It makes me ponder how unbelievably moronic humanity is, how pathetic, and how deserving of what it is come.
You've just described the RCP 8.5 numbers used by scientists for pay. Thank you.
Re: (Score:2)
The US government used to be the most powerful in the world because it was the government of the world’s richest country and would spend the money doing things no-one else was able to do. Now, the USG has not merely given up on both the ambition to be the world’s richest country and to do things no-one else can, it’s doing it’s damndest to run fast the other way. And all the while, absolute imbeciles like you are cheering from the bleachers.
Re: Global Mothership? (Score:2)
Lost the war [Re:Global Mothership?] (Score:3)
The war against using the word "literally" to mean "figuratively" was lost years ago. Even the dictionaries have conceded, although I'm amused that the definition 2 in the web Merriam-webster actually uses the word "literally" to mean "literally" in the text of the definition of "literally" meaning "not literally."
Re:And? (Score:5, Interesting)
This is one of those weird quasi-government nonprofit agencies that could easily be absorbed by an actual government organization, and probably be run a lot more efficiently in the process.
I'm not sure why you think that. America does have this political belief that the government shouldn't be doing research, but should instead fund outside entities to do so, in the belief that outside entities are more efficiently run. NCAR, of course, reports to the National Science Foundation, why do you think it would somehow be different or run "more efficiently" if it were "absorbed" by the NSF?
Even if that is not the goal of this move (and there probably are other motives for doing it), the default reaction to this should not be panic and outrage, but rather ask how these shady arrangements came about in the first place.
What in the world do you find "shady" about it?
There is almost no accountability at these places, and their budgets are black holes by design.
What in the world are you talking about? There are many government agencies for which the budget has no accountability-- when the military misplaces [fox5atlanta.com] a billion dollars, their response is "Well, it hard to keep track of everything," but the NCAR budget is public and completely transparent.
Re: (Score:2)
why do you think it would somehow be different or run "more efficiently" if it were "absorbed" by the NSF?
For starters, the NSF actually has to - by law - adhere to various federal reporting and compliance rules which itemize where funds get spent. The NCAR generally does not - in fact, the are closer to a private company than even a regular nonprofit.
There are many government agencies for which the budget has no accountability-- [like] the military
A military with an obtuse and opaque budget is one thing - and in all reality, the military has a lot more reporting requirements than the NCAR. A pet project agency providing dubious (at best) tangible results is another. At the very least, anyone who actually
Re: (Score:2)
So you're saying the lab was producing good data and research with DEI policies?