Sardines
Well-Known Member
Because of incentives for renewables and unnecessary penalties and hurdles on nuclear.
The Climate Change Thread
- Thread starter str8line
- Start date
No. Its half 4 in the morning and I want to go to bed. The penalties and hurdles for nuclear are what most of the rest of the world calls safe guards. You have a dictator at present who is removing all oversight of everything, where does this end up?
I'm 12,000 miles away so I'm way beyond fall out I hope. Good luck!!!
Sardines
Well-Known Member
Modern reactors are essentially meltdown proof. I'm not talking about removing reasonable safeguards. I'm talking about having reasonable, meaningful rules, regulations, and safeguards while dropping the rules that were made more than 50 years ago when nuclear reactor tech was not what it is today. Breeder reactors run MUCH longer on a lot less nuclear fuel while having a design that is not susceptible to the types of meltdowns that happened at Chernobyl and Three Mile Island.
Red
Well-Known Member
Red
Well-Known Member
You are in full support of this. It’s not just climate science. You’re either against the destruction of science in the United States, or you are complicit in the scientific brain drain of American scientists to more science friendly nations. And you are complicit in this drain. I believe you have made it clear you favor these cuts and attacks on science, and not just climate science. You are unable to criticize Trump for doing this. And if you do suggest “no, it’s just fake climate science”, then maybe you might tell us how you do not favor this overall attack on science and American scientists, and foreign scientists working in America. Tell us Trump is wrong to cause a drain of scientists from the United States, you defender of “real science”.
—————————————————————————————————————-
“America has stood as a world superpower for the past century or so, and much of that power has been derived from the country’s scientific and technological prowess. From medicine to aerospace, some of the greatest thinkers in modern history have called the United States their home and pushed boundaries while residing within its borders.
That tradition is under threat in ways it has never been before as Donald Trump’s administration engages in the mass firing of scientists in the federal government, cuts funding to scientific research, and generally pushes an agenda that opposes scientific inquiry.
The Trump administration has thrown out hundreds of National Institutes of Health (NIH) research projects, fired thousands of the agency’s scientists, and looks intent on further dismantling the agency. Research funding for universities is also being stripped. So is climate science. Science is under attack in the United States basically everywhere you look.
Trump’s attacks on science are making American scientists anxious, and many are considering leaving the country indefinitely. Nearly 2,000 members of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine signed a letter in March warning of the administration’s threat to science. A poll from the international science journal Nature in late March found that 75 percent of American scientists are considering leaving the United States. European countries are planning on increasing their science funding, and countries like France, Belgium, and the Netherlandshave launched programs to lure American scientists.
Brain Drain: Scientists Are Fleeing the U.S. as Trump Cuts Funding
American scientists are looking for opportunities overseas as Donald Trump and his administration cut funding and fire scientists.
www.rollingstone.com
Last edited:
The Thriller
Well-Known Member
If you were a researcher who had opportunities in Canada, Europe, and even Asia, why would you stay here? American political leadership has made it pretty obvious that they don’t value your Expertise, aren’t going to fund your research, and may use the levers of government to harass you if your research doesn’t agree with their worldview.You are in full support of this. It’s not just climate science. You’re either against the destruction of science in the United States, or you are complicit in the scientific brain drain of American scientists to more science friendly nations. And you are complicit in this drain. I believe you have made it clear you favor these cuts and attacks on science, and not just climate science. You are unable to criticize Trump for doing this. And if you do suggest “no, it’s just fake climate science”, then maybe you might tell us how you do not favor this overall attack on science and American scientists, and foreign scientists working in America. Tell us Trump is wrong to cause a drain of scientists from the United States, you defender of “real science”.
—————————————————————————————————————-
“America has stood as a world superpower for the past century or so, and much of that power has been derived from the country’s scientific and technological prowess. From medicine to aerospace, some of the greatest thinkers in modern history have called the United States their home and pushed boundaries while residing within its borders.
That tradition is under threat in ways it has never been before as Donald Trump’s administration engages in the mass firing of scientists in the federal government, cuts funding to scientific research, and generally pushes an agenda that opposes scientific inquiry.
The Trump administration has thrown out hundreds of National Institutes of Health (NIH) research projects, fired thousands of the agency’s scientists, and looks intent on further dismantling the agency. Research funding for universities is also being stripped. So is climate science. Science is under attack in the United States basically everywhere you look.
Trump’s attacks on science are making American scientists anxious, and many are considering leaving the country indefinitely. Nearly 2,000 members of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine signed a letter in March warning of the administration’s threat to science. A poll from the international science journal Nature in late March found that 75 percent of American scientists are considering leaving the United States. European countries are planning on increasing their science funding, and countries like France, Belgium, and the Netherlandshave launched programs to lure American scientists.
Brain Drain: Scientists Are Fleeing the U.S. as Trump Cuts Funding
American scientists are looking for opportunities overseas as Donald Trump and his administration cut funding and fire scientists.
View attachment 18583
PJF
Well-Known Member
I can't believe anyone gives this guy the time of day anymore. Everything he said was complete BS.
View: https://x.com/catturd2/status/1917921188279419272?t=rd12zvh2CvHqTssLxKZbkw&s=19
View: https://x.com/catturd2/status/1917921188279419272?t=rd12zvh2CvHqTssLxKZbkw&s=19
PJF
Well-Known Member
Yes, climate change is a hoax.
View: https://x.com/ChrisMartzWX/status/1918714175087419828?t=0BhaBGS7OLCtMsEaWaeuzw&s=19
View: https://x.com/ChrisMartzWX/status/1918714175087419828?t=0BhaBGS7OLCtMsEaWaeuzw&s=19
I think some influential climate scientists transition away from science into politics (Mann, Hayhoe, Dessler). They offer up commentary that will sway public opinion and make headlines. That is how politics works. I don’t think it necessarily means climate change isn’t real but you do have to be aware of how the political apparatus operates.
Agree that comments like “the world is ending in 12 years” will ultimately become an albatross for the climate folks, but at the time it galvanized a lot of support. The issue with climate is that it’s a long term issue that will never affect anyone alive today meaningfully. At least not so much as to change your lifestyle because fossil fuels provide so much value. The trade off is incredibly one sided. That could change in the future (like 300 - 500 years or more), it also might not. The question is, do you want to roll that dice?
Agree that comments like “the world is ending in 12 years” will ultimately become an albatross for the climate folks, but at the time it galvanized a lot of support. The issue with climate is that it’s a long term issue that will never affect anyone alive today meaningfully. At least not so much as to change your lifestyle because fossil fuels provide so much value. The trade off is incredibly one sided. That could change in the future (like 300 - 500 years or more), it also might not. The question is, do you want to roll that dice?
Sardines
Well-Known Member
I feel like climate change has affected me and my lifestyle just over the course of my life. Enough for me to do anything more than turning off the lights more diligently and throwing the cardboard in the recycling? No.
I've lived in the Salt Lake Valley most of my life. Our seasons are different now vs in the 80s. It is pretty undeniable IMHO.
Don’t disagree. Question is, what material changes are you willing to make because of it?
Even more important, what material changes are the 7B in poverty, striving for a better life, willing to make?
Sardines
Well-Known Member
I already said. Small **** that will not make a difference. Government and industry has to make changes in order for anything to happen. There is no amount of person conservation, even if every single person did it, that would make a real difference. A single factory can waste more electricity, water, space, and spew more toxins and greenhouse gasses into the air than hundreds or even thousands of homes.
Factories exist because of demand for products. Demand starts at the individual level. On the supply side you can use environmental regulation to improve environmental impacts and rightfully so. If you want better environmental conditions you should support domestic production because we cannot regulate China et al.
fishonjazz
Well-Known Member
Contributor
2018 Award Winner
2019 Award Winner
20-21 Award Winner
2022 Award Winner
2023 Award Winner
2024 Award Winner
2025 Award Winner
Lol. It already affects people today.
Kids at the elementary school had to stay inside rather than go outside for recess a few days this year due to air quality being so poor. Yay fossil fuels.
Also increasing fires, floods, hurricanes, etc. heard something about some issues with lobsters happening due to climate change. People are being affected already in our lifetime.
I don’t disagree but have those impacts changed how you will conduct your life meaningfully? If so, in what ways?
Sardines
Well-Known Member
You also don't specifically agree. You're equivocating on the issue.
It’s a complicated subject. There’s no black and white. To be more clear, what I’m saying is climate change is real. But I have not seen evidence of anyone taking it seriously in their daily lives as they turn on the lights, get in their cars, and fly (etc, etc).
Sardines
Well-Known Member
Sure, we all have to live in the world that exists.
Don’t disagree!