Ontopic Mission to Uranus

my little brony said:
Unfortunately it completely strips their mission of Earth science which means a LOT of climate research just got completely axed. This despite the claims that such missions would be shifted to the EPA and NOAA while both of those agencies are being gutted.

But hopefully they can sneak it in under planetary science missions.
Click to expand...
... And now my happiness has been cancelled out.
 
  • Gravy
Reactions: fly, my little brony and Duke
APRIL said:
... And now my happiness has been cancelled out.
Click to expand...

cfwZROU.jpg
 
  • Gravy
Reactions: Jehannum and APRIL
my little brony said:
Unfortunately it completely strips their mission of Earth science which means a LOT of climate research just got completely axed. This despite the claims that such missions would be shifted to the EPA and NOAA while both of those agencies are being gutted.

But hopefully they can sneak it in under planetary science missions.
Click to expand...
In all honestly, how much more climate science do we need as long as we keep pumping CO2? Anyone with half a brain gets it, which is why our society is driving us green. More money isn't going to prevent people who have ZERO idea about how the climate works from telling scientists they're wrong...
 
  • Gravy
Reactions: nukes
fly said:
In all honestly, how much more climate science do we need as long as we keep pumping CO2? Anyone with half a brain gets it, which is why our society is driving us green. More money isn't going to prevent people who have ZERO idea about how the climate works from telling scientists they're wrong...
Click to expand...
More money might buy spikier clue-by-fours to beat @nukes and @Amstel with, though.
 
  • Gravy
Reactions: fly
fly said:
In all honestly, how much more climate science do we need as long as we keep pumping CO2? Anyone with half a brain gets it, which is why our society is driving us green. More money isn't going to prevent people who have ZERO idea about how the climate works from telling scientists they're wrong...
Click to expand...

it's not like the goal was "prove climate change is happening" and now that it's done let's all go home, nothing more to do

continuous climate science is how we're going to figure out the mitigation strategies and know what to prepare for. more money WILL help figure out how severe storms are going to be or how much ice is about to melt off antarctica or what's the next link in the food chain that will die out in a particular region

they're not doing climate science for the sake of convincing people, they're doing it because it's going to be the single most lethal natural problem humanity has had to deal with since the black plague.
 
  • Gravy
Reactions: Ledboots, Duke and Jehannum
BTW, there is a great chapter in Nate Silver's Signal and the Noise about climate change and the IPCC and how they've nailed the predictions they've issued with 'a high degree of certainty' or whatever the exact terminology was. Also just generally a great book.

The Signal and the Noise: Why So Many Predictions Fail--but Some Don't
https://www.amazon.com/Signal-Noise...F8&qid=1490276925&sr=8-1&keywords=nate+silver

The book name is also ironic since our election predictions failed. :lol:
 
  • Gravy
Reactions: my little brony
fly said:
The book name is also ironic since our election predictions failed. :lol:
Click to expand...

Did they fail, though? Or did they actually succeed in their purpose, in getting so many people to believe that one result would happen that they didn't bother to vote, assuming they wouldn't need to, which resulted in a completely different action occurring which may have been the desired one by those in control in the first place.


Tell me corporations aren't reveling in both Brexit and a corporate friendly Trump. It worked out swimmingly for them in both cases.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back