Environment & Energy
Related: About this forum"A Horrendous Display Of Scientific Illiteracy" - If You Guessed "Lamar Smith", Congratulations!
EDIT
Speaking of momentum, the hearing came a day after President Trump signed an executive order aimed at rolling back progress the Obama administration made on climate, ostensibly to bring back coal jobs (not happening, ever), and a couple of weeks after a skinny budget from the White House suggested cutting just about everything science-related you can think of, and climate-related programs in particular. The hearing featured one widely-respected climate scientistMichael Mann, professor of atmospheric science at Penn Stateand three Republican invitees whose views on climate change, if were being charitable, lie somewhat outside mainstream scientific consensus: Judith Curry, professor emeritus at Georgia Tech; John Christy, professor and director of the Earth System Science Center at the University of Alabama at Huntsville; and Roger Pielke Jr., professor of environmental studies at the University of Colorado.
The witnesses, along with some of the Committee members, repeated a number of claims that the GOP has clung to for decades now: The climate models dont match reality (yes they do); extreme weather events, like hurricanes and droughts, are in no way linked to climate change (yes they are); there was a consensus in the 1970s that the world was cooling (not even close to true); and so on. Multiple people even brought up the ClimateGate scandal, involving hacked emails and accusations of fiddling with data, which was investigated to death with no evidence of wrongdoing years ago.
As Democratic Congressman Bill Fosterthe only member of Congress with a PhD in a scientific fieldput it at one point during the hearing: This is a very strange mixture of science and
not. When Mann quoted a recent article in Science calling out Smith for using the committee for political gain, the chairman interrupted him to say that that journalScience!is not known as an objective magazine.
It was, overall, a horrendously depressing display of scientific illiteracy, but there were some odd bits of optimism to be found. The witnesses all agreed at various points that yes, the climate is changing and that humans play a role (though they disagreed, contrary to overwhelming evidence, on the magnitude of that role), and they also agreed that the Trump administrations proposed cuts to Earth-observing systems at NASA, NOAA, and elsewhere are a monumentally dumb idea.
EDIT
http://gizmodo.com/todays-congressional-hearing-on-climate-change-was-a-co-1793787320?utm_medium=sharefromsite&utm_source=Gizmodo_facebook
Bernardo de La Paz
(60,320 posts)Over 400 marches, one near you:
https://www.marchforscience.com
northoftheborder
(7,639 posts)my Representative (NOT)
He does not accept even phone messages, nor respond to texts.
defacto7
(14,162 posts)science must fit the needs of the politics at hand and in the simplest way possible. Science must conform, never lead, never answer the question not asked and never disturb the status quo. Science must be the tool of the complacent for complacency is the new religion.
sarc.