• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

All Authors Working on Flagship U.S. Climate Report Are Dismissed

P

Pyrite

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 8, 2023
Messages
31,086
Reaction score
34,359
Location
Ohio, USA
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Liberal

All Authors Working on Flagship U.S. Climate Report Are Dismissed

The Trump administration told researchers it was “releasing” them from their roles. It puts the future of the assessment, which is required by Congress, in doubt.
www.nytimes.com

The Trump administration has dismissed the hundreds of scientists and experts who had been compiling the federal government’s flagship report on how global warming is affecting the country.

The move puts the future of the report, which is required by Congress and is known as the National Climate Assessment, into serious jeopardy, experts said.

Since 2000, the federal government has published a comprehensive look every few years at how rising temperatures will affect human health, agriculture, fisheries, water supplies, transportation, energy production and other aspects of the U.S. economy. The last climate assessment came out in 2023 and is used by state and local governments as well as private companies to help prepare for the effects of heat waves, floods, droughts and other climate-related calamities.

On Monday, researchers around the country who had begun work on the sixth national climate assessment, planned for early 2028, received an email informing them that the scope of the report “is currently being re-evaluated” and that all contributors were being dismissed....

“This is as close as it gets to a termination of the assessment,” said Jesse Keenan, a professor at Tulane University who specializes in climate adaptation and was a co-author on the last climate assessment. “If you get rid of all the people involved, nothing’s moving forward.”...
 
Trump will just wave his magic sharpie and male climate change go away. No need then for any science or planning for impacts that Trump will just magic away.
 
No surprise here. Trump is deliberately destroying this country and the world to set up an oligarch reign. He knows he won't live long enough to see the results of the climate change he's chosen to ignore, and obviously he could care less about his grandchildren who will. Makes one wonder, what does he expect this country to be like if he succeeds, I don't think he cares at all. He's gonna die of something well deserved in the next decade more than likely, and leave this country and the world in general to clean up the mess of his diabolical rule....
 
Ishm said:
Trump will just wave his magic sharpie and male climate change go away. No need then for any science or planning for impacts that Trump will just magic away.
Click to expand...
No need. Man made 'climate change' was not there in the first place. The 'experts', despite thirty years worth of failure are hanging on to their grants and salaries. Glad to see some are departing in the US, we should get rid of the leeches in Europe too.
 
The continued existence of the world is not dependent on the USA or its *National Climate Assessment' boondoggle.
 
I respectfully disagree. Climate change is largely man made, and a result of the growing population and disregard to the needs of this planet NOT blaming scientists for doing what they've been trained to do...
 
Sweden said:
The continued existence of the world is not dependent on the USA or its *National Climate Assessment' boondoggle.
Click to expand...
Of course the world is not "dependent" on us , but as the leader of the free world it's our obligation to act responsibily....which we ARE NOT.
 
Jessie C said:
I respectfully disagree. Climate change is largely man made, and a result of the growing population and disregard to the needs of this planet NOT blaming scientists for doing what they've been trained to do...
Click to expand...
It doesn't actually matter. We exceeded 300 ppm in 2016. Even if we shut the world down, the feedback loop is established.

So it no longer matters how it happened.
 
Sweden said:
The continued existence of the world is not dependent on the USA or its *National Climate Assessment' boondoggle.
Click to expand...
Oh, the world will be just fine. Humans as a species will be just fine.

The standard of living will most likely suck, though.
 
Assume it is natural.

What is the functional difference?
 
Jessie C said:
Of course the world is not "dependent" on us , but as the leader of the free world it's our obligation to act responsibily....which we ARE NOT.
Click to expand...
Trumps USA is most certainly not the "leader of the free world". Sadly it is a failing state, coming apart at the seams and maybe heading towards some ridiculous tin-pot dictatorship.
 
Hamish Howl said:
Assume it is natural.

What is the functional difference?
Click to expand...
For a start ceasing to spend vast resources on futile attempts to control 'climate change'. The money saved might go towards helping nations affected by natural changes, for example, worsening droughts.
 
Sweden said:
Trumps USA is most certainly not the "leader of the free world". Sadly it is a failing state, coming apart at the seams and maybe heading towards some ridiculous tin-pot dictatorship.
Click to expand...
You are 100% correct. BUT, we were the leader of the free world before this mother****er came along......
 
Hamish Howl said:
Oh, the world will be just fine. Humans as a species will be just fine.

The standard of living will most likely suck, though.
Click to expand...
In some places yes in others no. A rise of a degree or two would be of great benefit to Sweden and, I assume , to Canada and Russia.
 
Sweden said:
In some places yes in others no. A rise of a degree or two would be of great benefit to Sweden and, I assume , to Canada and Russia.
Click to expand...
Except that rising temperatures in those countries would also affect weather and most especially winds.

Also, if you get the slow model, the Atlantic Conveyor goes limp dick and everything North of Holland freezes solid.
 
Over decades thousands of models have been created, all useless. Why place any reliance on the latest effluent from the 'climate' industry?
 
The last national climate assessment was still using the nearly impossible RCP8.5 emission scenario,
but all the reports are based on added CO2 having a certain climate sensitivity, and then guessing at a future CO2 level.
The predicted future temperature, would then be used to estimate changes.
Where this breaks down, is the data since 2000, (Which is when we could first measure the energy paths in and out of Earth),
is showing that the added CO2 did almost nothing to Earths longwave energy imbalance. The only directly attributable observed change is that
Earth is greener.
Imagine we had a National Health department, that all the doctors believed in Homeopathic medicine, and refused to consider
modern medicine? The department excluded any doctors who disagreed with them. What would be the value of an assessment of national health
that group produces?

Perhaps there will be some benefit to getting a new group of scientist to produce the national climate assessment, who
follow the data and base future climate predictions on observed data!
 
longview said:
Perhaps there will be some benefit to getting a new group of scientist to produce the national climate assessment, who
follow the data and base future climate predictions on observed data!
Click to expand...
Well where are those scientists that agree with you now? Which organizations are they in?
 
Volunteer said:
Well where are those scientists that agree with you now? Which organizations are they in?
Click to expand...
That is the problem, they were excluded from the club because they disagreed with the group!
They mostly retired, or left academia, because their research funding dried up.
Contrary to popular belief, the oil companies are not giving grants to scientist to research
the climate sensitivity of added CO2. no one is! The sensitivity is assumed, without any empirical evidence.
 
Jessie C said:
I respectfully disagree. Climate change is largely man made, and a result of the growing population and disregard to the needs of this planet NOT blaming scientists for doing what they've been trained to do...
Click to expand...
Yeah, @Sweden's post is so similar to the Felon-in-Chief's attitude toward Covid. Don't publish the numbers and that will make it go away.
 
"I want great climate" - Complete Idiot, 2018
 
The anti-science party strikes again.
 
dockside said:
Yeah, @Sweden's post is so similar to the Felon-in-Chief's attitude toward Covid. Don't publish the numbers and that will make it go away.
Click to expand...
Actually Trump's position on the climate is not accurate ether, but moves like this and getting out of the Paris Accord are still correct moves.
The difference is with actual science. The Paris Accord and the national Climate assessment, are all about controlling CO2 emissions.
The belief is that if we achieve Net Zero CO2 emissions, it will alter the trajectory of the climate.
This belief is at odds with the observed data. Starting in year 2000 the CERES interments on satellites have been measuring
the energy paths in an out of the earth. The goal was to finally have some observed evidence that added greenhouse gases
were increasing Earth's longwave energy imbalance. The problem is that we now have 25 years of data, showing
that as the greenhouse gas levels increased, Earth's longwave energy imbalance...Decreased!
Overall Earth was still gaining energy, because more of the available shortwave sunlight was reaching the surface,
but that is not something driven by greenhouse gases. The Human activity that would increase the amount of sunlight
reaching the surface, is clearing air pollution from the skies, something that has been happening since about 1980.
So we are warming, and Human activity is causing it, but NOT added greenhouse gases.
The aims of the Paris accord and the predictions of the National Climate assessment, will not alter our future climate.
 
NolanVoyd said:
The anti-science party strikes again.
Click to expand...
In this case the anti-science are the people working on the National Climate Assessment, who continued down the
CO2 driven climate path, even when 24 years or data say that is not what is happening.
 
longview said:
In this case the anti-science are the people working on the National Climate Assessment, who continued down the
CO2 driven climate path, even when 24 years or data say that is not what is happening.
Click to expand...
Thats ridiculous inspiration crap.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…