Conservative War On Science

[Topaz]

My answer to this stupid rule is for the scientist to talk to someone who IS NOT a journalist and have them reported to the media. This a called the TORY WAY!

[Saipan]

Read my edited version. If you can read.

I have to say (using YOUR words) "Perhaps you read a little too much into my jokey post".

[bloodyminded]

.....

(:

Edited December 15, 2010 by bloodyminded

[waldo]

the party of Lincoln... the rise of Snookiism!

When ignorance becomes a movement: The rise of Snookiism

Be afraid. Be very afraid. Mainstream, rock-ribbed, you-can't-make-me-flinch Republicans are. One former leader of the party I spoke with the other night said, "We've never seen anything like them. The Gingrich 'Contract with America' revolution was mild by comparison."

In just the past couple of weeks since the election we have seen half a dozen examples of this next generation know-nothingism, this translation of a dumbed-down zeitgeist into a new movement that might be called Snookiism.

• The battle for the House Energy and Commerce chairmanship has illustrated well how truly demented this debate has become. In order to promote his own candidacy to be chairman, Texas Representative Joe Barton has circulated a Rush Limbaugh authored commentary on the front runner for the position, Rep. Fred Upton, in which an attempt is made to discredit Upton due to the fact that he actually appears to believe in (at least some of) the science surrounding climate change. The implication: you can't be a true Republican and believe in science. This impression is only amplified in light of the argument from another contender, Rep. John Shimkus who has offered his belief in the literal interpretation of the Bible as his reason for not believing in climate change. (After the flood, God said it wouldn't happen again.) I've got nothing against the Bible, believe me. But do we really want to use it to predict the weather?

.

.

speaking of that U.S. House Energy and Commerce chairmanship... ultimately, the so-called "moderate", Rep. Fred Upton prevailed and was awarded the chairmanship. Of course, almost immediately after being appointed, Upton put forward draft legislation to effectively gut/counter the U.S. Supreme Court Ruling and related EPA actions in regards to regulating emission controls as a facet of the U.S. Clean Air Act. In any case, a most revealing video attempt to pin Upton's position down... the weasel tried, but couldn't escape having to actually state a position. Republican war on science continues unabated! Of course, the salient question for Upton wasn't asked by the video moderator... just what does he (Upton) attribute climate change to.

[Saipan]

Who would deny climate?

[waldo]

further evidence of the way the Harper Conservative government is muzzling scientists... and denying the Canadian public's right to knowledge gained through its tax dollars! And it only took a long delayed response to an Access To Information Request to bring this lil' ditty forward:

Harper Conservatives put polar briefings on ice --- Newly released federal documents show Tories have been thwarting scientists' efforts to keep Canadians informed on Arctic ice levels

Federal scientists who keep a close eye on the Arctic ice would like to routinely brief Canadians about extraordinary events unfolding in the North.

But newly released federal documents show the Harper government has been thwarting their efforts.

In 2012, as the Arctic ice hit the lowest point ever recorded, scientists at the Canadian Ice Service were keen to tell Canadians about the stunning ice loss.

“Less ice doesn’t mean less danger. In fact the opposite is true and there is greater need for ice information,” Leah Braithwaite, the service’s chief of applied science said in an August 2012 memo to Norman Naylor, a strategic communications adviser at Environment Canada.

Braithwaite and her colleagues — aware of the national and international interest in the shrinking polar ice — wanted to hold a “strictly factual” technical briefing for the media to inform Canadians how the ice had disappeared from not only the Northwest Passage but many normally ice-choked parts of the Arctic.

The briefing never happened. Nine levels of approval — from the director of the ice service up to the environment minister’s office — were needed for the “communication plan,” according to the documents released to Postmedia News under the Access to Information Act.

“Ministerial services” — the sixth layer — cancelled the briefing, the documents say. And the ice service scientists ended up watching as the Canadian media and public got most of their information from the U.S. National Snow and Ice Data Center (NSIDC), where scientists were quick to give interviews, hold briefings and issue press releases as the ice shattered records as it melted from Baffin Island to the Beaufort Sea.

Edited August 19, 2014 by waldo

[On Guard for Thee]

Here's a plan: Carnival or one of those cruise lines is planning to run one of their ships through the NW Passage the summer after next. Perhaps we can each withhold a few bucks from out federal taxes and provide tickets to a few of those laid off scientists and send them on the cruise. Gives them something to do and maybe we could actually get some information about arctic ice. Or the lack thereof if a cruise ship can get through.

[Keepitsimple]

Here's a plan: Carnival or one of those cruise lines is planning to run one of their ships through the NW Passage the summer after next. Perhaps we can each withhold a few bucks from out federal taxes and provide tickets to a few of those laid off scientists and send them on the cruise. Gives them something to do and maybe we could actually get some information about arctic ice. Or the lack thereof if a cruise ship can get through.

Sounds like a plan - hope they have better luck than these guys:

They were aiming to raise awareness about climate change by rowing through areas previously covered in ice, but in the end, they didn't find what they were expecting.

Link: http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/sea-ice-winds-end-rowers-northwest-passage-bid-early-1.1362408

[PIK]

further evidence of the way the Harper Conservative government is muzzling scientists... and denying the Canadian public's right to knowledge gained through its tax dollars! And it only took a long delayed response to an Access To Information Request to bring this lil' ditty forward:

Harper Conservatives put polar briefings on ice --- Newly released federal documents show Tories have been thwarting scientists' efforts to keep Canadians informed on Arctic ice levels

So the media can go nuts about how harper is killing the planet. lol What we do here has nothing to do with CC , since we produce so little of it.

[waldo]

Sounds like a plan - hope they have better luck than these guys:

wow Simple, that's.... oh wait, it was just rowers (a year ago)... yes, rowers... imagine! They ran into extreme winds that they couldn't row against. But really Simple, talking about "not finding what's expected"...

16-foot Waves Measured in Arctic Ocean Where There Was Once Only Ice --- Reduced sea ice allowed the buildup of huge waves in the Beaufort Sea

Sixteen-foot waves are buffeting an area of the Arctic Ocean that until recently was permanently covered in sea ice—another sign of a warming climate, scientists say.

.

.

The waves aren’t just a symptom of the Arctic’s ice woes, though. They may accelerate the problems. According to research published earlier this year by University of Washington oceanographer Jim Thomson and a colleague, the waves may be a mechanism for accelerating ice retreat, which in turn may cause even bigger waves.

The result, according to Thomson, is “a potentially new process”: a vicious cycle that is expected to ultimately end in an ice-free summertime Arctic within decades.

The science here is fairly simple. Less ice means more open water, and when combined with the Arctic’s sometimes strong winds, that water can more easily churn itself into bigger waves. It seems that’s exactly what the new research has found.

[waldo]

What we do here has nothing to do with CC , since we produce so little of it.

keep your myopic sights set PIK... quite telling for you to dismiss Canada's per capita emissions level and... how unsustained tarsands development is/will continue to enable/aid the world's reliance on fossil-fuels. Your dismissive attitude won't get rid of the global warming impact on Canada... no matter how hard your boy Harper tries to muzzle/censor Canadian scientists.

Edited August 19, 2014 by waldo

[PIK]

keep your myopic sights set PIK... quite telling for you to dismiss Canada's per capita emissions level and... how unsustained tarsands development is/will continue to enable/aid the world's reliance on fossil-fuels. Your dismissive attitude won't get rid of the global warming impact on Canada... no matter how hard your boy Harper tries to muzzle/censor Canadian scientists.

So lets destroy our economy, others can ruin the planet. Real smart thinking waldo.

[eyeball]

So lets destroy our economy, others can ruin the planet. Real smart thinking waldo.

If it really comes down to such an either or scenario then the only conservative approach is to sacrifice the economy.

Our planet's ecosystems can function just fine without any human economy but there is no way any human economy can survive without our ecosystems. To believe otherwise is just plain delusional.

Edited August 20, 2014 by eyeball

[On Guard for Thee]

So lets destroy our economy, others can ruin the planet. Real smart thinking waldo.

At least you seem to be finally catching on to the fact the planet is currently being ruined

[TimG]

Our planet's ecosystems can function just fine without any human economy but there is no way any human economy can survive without our ecosystems.

Except CO2 is not "destroying" and ecosystems - it merely changes them.

[Mighty AC]

So lets destroy our economy, others can ruin the planet. Real smart thinking waldo.

Do you ever get tired of this 'destroy the economy' BS?

[eyeball]

Except CO2 is not "destroying" and ecosystems - it merely changes them.

Actually it's our economy that's changing our ecosystems and given the rate of extinctions and number of organisms we're pushing to that brink change is in fact tantamount to destruction. There is a reason why the destruction of habitat is regarded as the leading cause of extinction.

Edited August 20, 2014 by eyeball

[TimG]

Actually it's our economy that's changing our ecosystems and given the rate of extinctions and number of organisms we're pushing to that brink change is in fact tantamount to destruction. There is a reason why the destruction of habitat is regarded as the leading cause of extinction.

And why is change bad?

[dre]

So lets destroy our economy, others can ruin the planet. Real smart thinking waldo.

We dont need to destroy our economy, there can be a balance between economic and environtal concerns. In any case this is not a valid defense for the government trying to keep publically funded research from the public. The government definately should not be engaging in that type of activity.

[waldo]

And why is change bad?

uhhh.... bad change is... bad - yes?

[dre]

And why is change bad?

Ask yourself that.... Youre the one always pining for the status quo.

[eyeball]

And why is change bad?

[facepalm/]

[PIK]

Do you ever get tired of this 'destroy the economy' BS?

Who is paying the bills, not ONT but alberta.

[guyser]

Who is paying the bills, not ONT but alberta.

No they arent. But nice try.

Alberta sends Ottawa $35.990B.

Ontario Sends Ottawa $85,239B

Math tells me that $49B less, so how could they pay the bills, or do they, like every single province, pay their share?

[waldo]

Who is paying the bills, not ONT but alberta.

you really should take some time to understand the difference between tax revenues and equalization... MLW member, 'Guyser2' has given you the tax revenue numbers... be a good sport and provide us the equalization numbers, hey! While you doing that do a tally and tell us what you find!