[HN Gopher] White House pushes to dismantle leading climate and ...
___________________________________________________________________
White House pushes to dismantle leading climate and weather
research center
Author : Teever
Score : 231 points
Date : 2025-12-27 21:01 UTC (1 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.pbs.org)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.pbs.org)
| oceansky wrote:
| Damn, this is the kind of thing that will backfire so much
| decades from now. Literally incalculable damages
| data-ottawa wrote:
| The situation reminds me of that New Yorker comic: "Yes, the
| planet got destroyed. But for a beautiful moment in time we
| created a lot of value for shareholders"
|
| Governments should be responsible for preventing these types of
| externalities as one of their core functions. There is no
| incentive for markets, consumers, and companies to deal with
| this, yet the forecast costs of climate change and sea level
| rise are (and will be) massive. Many places have some weak
| patchwork framework of private insurance and FEMA style funds,
| but without an actual pricing and enforcement system there's no
| way out of the warming feedback loop.
|
| I was extremely disappointed in the failure of my (Canada's)
| government to articulate what a carbon tax was or how it worked
| to voters, and that allowed the opposition from both sides to
| chip at it until now it's a politically toxic idea.
|
| The game theory of international accords is increasingly
| falling apart and countries will try to undercut each other on
| carbon pricing.
|
| https://www.newyorker.com/cartoon/a16995
| epistasis wrote:
| > "one of the largest sources of climate alarmism in the
| country."
|
| It's amazing how fast free speech has been destroyed in the past
| year. Especially when it comes to censorship of science and
| science's conclusions.
|
| However, I heard many many more people complaining about a lack
| of free speech in 2023 and 2024 than now. I really wonder what
| happened to all those principles! It's shocking.
| Coffeewine wrote:
| I think this sums it up pretty well.
|
| "When I am weaker than you, I ask you for freedom because that
| is according to your principles; when I am stronger than you, I
| take away your freedom because that is according to my
| principles,"
| azinman2 wrote:
| That's exactly right.
| ianlevesque wrote:
| Yeah, except there aren't even principles at play here. For
| example, streamline all regulatory approvals, oh except for
| disfavored groups: https://arstechnica.com/tech-
| policy/2025/12/speed-act-passes...
| lovich wrote:
| That is very much in line with their principles. A more
| accurate quote for them is
|
| "For my friends, everything; for my enemies, the law."
| Fnoord wrote:
| [delayed]
| DustinEchoes wrote:
| It's just pure reaction. Liberals favor renewable energy,
| so MAGA opposes it. Liberals favor climate science, so MAGA
| opposes it.
| cryptoegorophy wrote:
| Sadly liberals are not immune from it either. Anything
| trump does no matter good or bad is considered bad.
| g-b-r wrote:
| Examples?
| Eupolemos wrote:
| Do you have a good example?
| phantasmish wrote:
| I tried to help them steelman this but the only couple
| examples of good things I could come up with, I've not
| seen liberals complain about. Hm. Coming up blank.
| alright2565 wrote:
| The two recent examples I can think of are the Gaza
| ceasefire, as well as the general concept (and not actual
| implementation) of re-industrializing the USA in the
| context of China's dominance.
| moralestapia wrote:
| Aerial Firefighting Enhancement Act of 2025
|
| https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/senate-
| bill/160...
|
| GENIUS Act
|
| https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/senate-
| bill/158...
|
| HALT Fentanyl Act
|
| https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/senate-
| bill/331...
|
| Trump signs order to ease US marijuana regulations,
| sparking industry hopes
|
| https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/trump-moving-
| ease-u...
|
| [... more coming ...]
| plagiarist wrote:
| The principles are difficult for you to detect because your
| values are things like truth or integrity. Their values are
| just about forming hierarchy.
| Alupis wrote:
| I'd assert the alarmism is real - even if you disagree with
| this particular administration/action.
|
| Over the summer in the California valley, your computer will
| scream at you in bright red text it's hot outside. You'll even
| receive emergency messages on your phone, tv and radio from the
| government when it reaches triple-digits. There's a joke from
| someone I can't recall, but the gist is "we used to call it
| summer...".
|
| Just recently, California declared a state of emergency over a
| winter storm - a usual/normal occurrence for this time of year
| as well.
|
| Normal and completely natural weather events are being used to
| create an environment of alarmism and fear. This is part of why
| our youth are so convinced the world is going to end $NEXT_YEAR
| - they've grown up in a world were the government constantly
| tells them to be afraid of normal, seasonal weather.
| epistasis wrote:
| Even calling what the national lab does "alarmism" is
| objectively a lie meant to distort and politicize basic and
| important science. I don't need to tell you the political
| party of the person from the quote because that political
| party has been working for six a long time to take non-
| partisan science and politicize it and use that
| politicization to divide the country.
|
| There is no national lab producing "alarmism" and calling it
| that as justification for cutting funding is meant as a
| justification for restricting free speech and free science.
| Alupis wrote:
| I'm not sure how/why you are asserting this is a "free
| speech" or "free science" issue. The government isn't
| obligated to fund this (or any) lab - private donors are
| free to step in and continue funding.
| g-b-r wrote:
| I'm sure plenty of oil tycoons will step in
| Alupis wrote:
| Yes because "oil tycoons" are _clearly_ the only wealthy
| people in this country.
| g-b-r wrote:
| Might it be that you can't rely on private funding for
| things that don't result in a profit?
|
| And that there's some disincentive for wealthy people to
| go against the current administration's policies?
| zahlman wrote:
| >... calling [something] [an inherently subjective term] is
| objectively...
|
| Sorry, I don't follow. At any rate, you're replying to a
| post that gave object examples of things that actually
| happened, and you made not attempt to explain why the
| things the other person considered unreasonable are
| actually reasonable.
|
| > calling it that as justification for cutting funding is
| meant as a justification for restricting free speech
|
| Freedom of speech as a philosophical concept does not
| entail entitlement to funding, never mind 1A.
| conartist6 wrote:
| Have you seen the charts which show the rate at which peak
| temperatures are rising?
| realo wrote:
| You should explain all that patiently to the drowning polar
| bears up north.
|
| Or maybe offer an alternative solution to the Svalbard seed
| bank? They actually need to pump water from melting ice
| outside nowadays.
| majormajor wrote:
| You're complaining about the level of weather notifications.
| Those exist because people die in the heat and they die in
| big storms and now there's more technology to make people
| think about it before driving their car into a flash flood.
|
| There are severe weather alerts even in red-states that don't
| believe the climate is changing at all. Because they do
| notice when people die.
|
| Maybe that's too much "big government" for you tastes - "oh
| no, they made my phone beep!" - but...
|
| That's not really the same thing as research into knowing
| what is going on long-term.
| thfuran wrote:
| >your computer will scream at you in bright red text it's hot
| outside. You'll even receive emergency messages on your
| phone, tv and radio from the government when it reaches
| triple-digits
|
| That weather kills people.
| crooked-v wrote:
| > normal and completely natural
|
| In Portland, where I used to live, there are more hundred-
| plus-degree days and heat deaths in the last decade than in
| the city's entire recorded history. The city has had to open
| cooling centers for extended periods every summer for
| vulnerable people, something that was never needed before
| outside of specific single-year exceptional heat waves.
|
| https://www.oregonlive.com/weather/2017/08/its_not_just_your.
| ..
|
| https://www.wweek.com/news/2025/08/25/extreme-heat-claims-
| th...
| orionspelt wrote:
| Not such a shock for people paying attention. Groups have been
| pushing back about inequality and climate, healthcare, for
| decades and just ignored. Every political issue in our faces
| now was called out as a future problem years ago by various
| groups. Water is finally too hot now for frogs in the middle of
| pot.
|
| Free speech doesn't create an obligation. It's not a binding
| magic. It's irrelevancy hasn't just happened. It's been a slow
| death.
|
| The shift to information age and science education did not
| start until after the Boomers and much of GenX were in and out
| of school and college. The world for them was cheap and just
| winging it. Science! Bah! Uncle Rico can still throw them balls
| over that mountain!
|
| Was warning people 15 years ago the now 80 year olds in charge
| are nihilistic and not going to change; they will be dead and
| are just trolling youth about caring. They're self selecting
| biology.
|
| Takes $800k/yr to have the buying power $200k/yr had in 1980.
| The rise in inequality and the global temperature follow a
| growth pattern that was way too normal to be winging it; what's
| been allowed economically has been very carefully studied and
| managed to preserve freedom of agency for the elders. Same as
| environment:
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ExxonMobil_climate_change_deni...
|
| Same old stupid political inanity as when I was younger. It
| still works on a lot of people.
| petcat wrote:
| > how fast free speech has been destroyed
|
| This doesn't really have anything to do with constitutional
| "free speech". This is a government agency, not the personal
| research blog of a private citizen.
|
| Government agencies don't have "free speech".
|
| That said, it's a shame this is happening. Maybe a future
| administration will reopen it.
| treadump wrote:
| > Maybe a future administration will reopen it
|
| Future administration?
| torstenvl wrote:
| Can you explain what you mean by this comment?
| sonar_un wrote:
| I think that anyone paying attention knows exactly what
| he meant by that comment.
| mc32 wrote:
| It seems the poster is of the low probability belief that
| at some point before Nov 2028 elections will be suspended
| and we will move to some kind of imperial system instead.
|
| You can take them up on polymarket.
| lmeyerov wrote:
| Deleted, I'm not sure what's the point of talking with
| people about for/against Trump at this point
| mc32 wrote:
| Polymarkets are a place to put a dollar bet on one's
| beliefs and the likelihood that belief will come true.
| selectodude wrote:
| The issue is that even if I win that bet, they're paying
| me my winnings in USD, which is backed by the full faith
| and credit of the US Government, which has been
| irreparably destroyed.
|
| If I can buy, say, low probability insurance that that
| will give me a squad of mercenaries and a jet to a bunker
| somewhere safe, I'd be far more apt to put my money where
| my mouth is.
|
| It's not a bad bet. It's just a dumb bet. The payout
| doesn't match the risk.
| phantasmish wrote:
| The usual way for this to happen doesn't involve
| suspending elections. And I'd not bet on a guy that old
| and infirm winning again in 2028 even if he _could_
| legally run.
|
| We'll see how ICE at select polling places and iffy
| federal-run voter role purges go in 2026. Should set the
| tone for how far they try to go in 2028.
| mc32 wrote:
| Polling places closing early, terrible weather, computers
| off-line, etc., will of course drive people from voting.
| Seeing an ICE agent isn't going to deter a citizen from
| voting any more than deter people taking vacations
| overseas. I'd be more than happy to show ID to vote as
| the rest of the world does.
| Griffinsauce wrote:
| People sailing on as if this flip will have another
| standard flop is wild to me. I guess it may be self
| protection.
| websiteapi wrote:
| every time someone says nonsense like this I ask them to
| take me up on it:
| https://polymarket.com/event/presidential-election-
| winner-20...
|
| I have 100k NO on trump. it's free money if someone
| seriously thinks there won't be any "future
| administration".
|
| of course once there's money at stake they grumble and say
| there probably will be an election after all <_<
| guiand wrote:
| Long horizon events like this on Polymarket stabilize
| around a % odds corresponding to time value of money. You
| can get 4% buying risk free CDs for that horizon.
| websiteapi wrote:
| this is not true - if you know for certainty that trump
| will be president/win in 2028 you can make over 20X your
| money.
|
| at the end of the day people don't actually believe it,
| which is why trump is valued little. people who aren't
| willing to bet with their money on things they say so
| absolutely aren't serious people.
| enraged_camel wrote:
| >> people who aren't willing to bet with their money on
| things they say so absolutely aren't serious people.
|
| Either that, or they don't have money to throw at dumb
| bets.
| tbrownaw wrote:
| > _people who aren 't willing to bet with their money on
| things they say so absolutely aren't serious people._
|
| There are in fact people who avoid gambling on general
| principle, unrelated to any one particular thing they're
| being pressured to bet on.
| StrLght wrote:
| Because nothing screams you're serious more than throwing
| large sums of money at a shady gambling website.
| websiteapi wrote:
| people who claim to know the winning lotto numbers but
| never buy tickets shouldn't be taken seriously =)
| lokar wrote:
| A more charitable explanation is that people believe in a
| larger set of nearly equivalent outcomes that are not
| captured in that market.
|
| Some possible outcomes (I personally don't believe they
| are very probable), but...
|
| There is no "call" or inaugurated at all, Trump stays on
| via some kind of "emergency". The market will fail to
| resolve to an outcome (based on what it says).
|
| Somehow (via a normal election, or the outcome being
| decided in the House) one of Trumps sons becomes
| president.
|
| This, I think, illustrates some of the problems with far
| out edge cases in prediction markets. Nailing down all of
| the possible outcomes exactly is hard.
| rvba wrote:
| Do you seriously think that polymarket, an anonymous tool
| where KGB can easily put some money for propaganda
| purposes, matters?
| wk_end wrote:
| > Government agencies don't have "free speech".
|
| My understanding is that, in many ways, government agencies
| are _more_ constitutionally protected speech-wise than
| private entities, precisely because any hierarchical attempt
| to punish them for their speech would be coming from the
| government rather than private entities. IANAL (or even
| American) though so grain of salt.
|
| In any case, a lot of the right-wing hypocrisy around free
| speech that was being called out by OP didn't have much to do
| with constitutionally protected freedom of speech either - it
| was complaining about things like private companies (e.g.
| Twitter) shadowbanning people.
| crooked-v wrote:
| In theory, sure. In practice the Supreme Court's rulings
| mean President can now just fire anyone he wants whenever
| for any reason.
| wk_end wrote:
| Any discussion about the constitution and jurisprudence
| and rights should probably be assumed to be referring to
| the Before Times, when those things still mattered. Sigh.
| matthewdgreen wrote:
| The complaints about "free speech" I heard from conservatives
| over the past five years often had nothing to do with
| constitutional free speech, either. They were almost always
| directed at private companies and organizations moderating
| content; from time to time someone would try to claim a
| government nexus, but it was rare and always something like a
| request to take down some content (that often got rejected.)
| Given that we've spent years having a broad conversation
| about the principle of free speech, to suddenly demand that
| we restrict the conversation to one about pure First
| Amendment requirements seems a bit disingenuous.
|
| Speech is important. Scientific speech more important. A
| government right now is using its power to selectively defund
| and wipe out big chunks of scientific research and
| communications that ultimately exist to protect your future.
| You should be livid and working to inform people how
| dangerous this is, not making poor excuses.
| petcat wrote:
| > You should be livid and working to inform people how
| dangerous this is, not making poor excuses.
|
| Making poor excuses? Don't tell me what to do. If you're so
| "livid" then you can go hit the pavement for both of us.
| Ar-Curunir wrote:
| You're responding to is Matthew Green, who has done more
| for deployed cryptography and internet privacy than most
| people alive. He has absolutely "hit the pavement"
| petcat wrote:
| That's great. He should keep doing it. Also study what
| the constitutional requirements and limitations of "free
| speech" are.
| zahlman wrote:
| > They were almost always directed at private companies and
| organizations moderating content
|
| Yes. They were motivated by private individuals losing
| their livelihood, rather than by organizations losing
| government funding that was not _a priori_ owed to them.
|
| > You should be livid and working to inform people how
| dangerous this is, not making poor excuses.
|
| Or you could fund it.
| dyauspitr wrote:
| The right has destroyed free speech when compared to all the
| people up in arms about the left basically pushing around the
| edges, trying to prevent genocidal propaganda from being
| dispersed.
| zosima wrote:
| What has closing a government agency to do with free speech?
|
| Did you interpret the calls for the end of censoring and
| cancellations that all government agencies must continue to
| exist forever?
|
| And if so is there any resemblance of logic behind that
| interpretation?
| ffsm8 wrote:
| It seems you're unaware just how many people are climate change
| sceptics - and not just in the uneducated groups, it's all over
| the spectrum.
|
| Frankly, I wouldn't be surprised about this at all. If
| anything, I think it might even be the same cause: because
| climate change sceptics _were_ being suppressed before Trump.
|
| To be upfront: I'm not American, but it's hard not to notice
| how the narrative has changed all over the internet.
|
| My personal perspective to the climate crisis has always been a
| defeatist attitude, I was always in favor of green energy etc,
| but that's primarily because it would also improve the local
| area, Air quality etc. from a climate change perspective, it
| was always pointless, because that's a global issue and cannot
| be solved by internal regulation in a singular country
| throw20251220 wrote:
| I'm from EU but here's my take on this. This has nothing to do
| with freedom of speech. Nobody forbids those people from NCAR
| to speak up. The administration simply doesn't want to pay to
| cultivate their freedom of speech because NCAR is funded in 95%
| by the federal government.
| user____name wrote:
| They are masters of projection and compartmentalization.
|
| These are the same people who were "being censored by the
| media" while going on Fox News to complain about it.
|
| Whining about freedom of speech, or the "demise of Western
| values", while banning school libraries worth of classic works
| of western literature for being "subversive".
|
| Their heads would probably explode reading Plato or J.S. Mill.
| ako wrote:
| It's a shame politicians can't be kept accountable tens of years
| from now. It would be great that if in 25 years it turns out
| global warming does indeed cause huge problems for humans, we
| could sue the politicians that took irresponsible risks with the
| environment. Now they can just focus on short term gains, and
| ignore all the long term side effects.
| iwontberude wrote:
| https://generalstrikeus.com/
| yoavm wrote:
| While I agree that the results of these policies are
| devastating, why blame the politicians? They were voted for,
| and it's not like they were hiding their agendas.
| azinman2 wrote:
| Well they kind of are, in that the real perps are not them
| but folks like the Koch family who fund entire think tanks
| and counter programming to serve their narrow interests. They
| give money to the politicians in exchange for this viewpoint.
| It gets woven into so much of a bubbles fabric that it
| becomes self-reinforcing.
| Nasrudith wrote:
| Again, if the voters bought it they are responsible for it
| and not the advocates. There is a reason that nobody named
| in the Epstein files is running a normalize pedophilia
| campaign. Because contrary to the rhetoric about money
| being the end all in politics it doesn't work for
| everything.
| azinman2 wrote:
| People as a whole are not experts in every possible area,
| nor is everyone universally smart. When politics get
| bought at an entire party level for decades, it's hard to
| place blame on those who allow it. Don't forget that
| culture wars is used as a wedge such that everything is
| combined. People don't get to vote on their issues, they
| vote on buckets of viewpoints.
|
| Fox News literally had a segment on the difference
| between pedophilia and some other philia whose name I
| forget.. it was basically saying hey they weren't 5, they
| were 14-16! That's different! Wonder why they'd feel the
| need to air that viewpoint...
| thfuran wrote:
| So you're saying that the politicians were just following
| orders?
| netsharc wrote:
| "You can't blame us for that, that was President Newsom's 2034
| policy! Our climate expert says so, and his credentials is that
| he's the go-to climate expert that Fox News turns to whenever
| the libs talk about climate change!"...
|
| And the J.D. Vance nominated judge will say "not guilty!"...
| schmuckonwheels wrote:
| >It would be great that if in 25 years it turns out global
| warming does indeed cause huge problems for humans, we could
| sue the politicians that took irresponsible risks with the
| environment.
|
| And if it turns out to be a big nothingburger, can we sue the
| politicians to recover the billions in taxpayer dollars that
| were diverted to their cronies on projects to nowhere during
| the green gold rush?
| measurablefunc wrote:
| The money is fake, the burning of fossil fuels & increase of
| greenhouse gasses is real regardless of what ideology you
| subscribe to.
| Teever wrote:
| Switching to renewables and mass transit can improve the
| quality of life for people who live in urban environments
| because it makes the air they breath cleaner.
|
| This is a major reason why developing countries are
| leapfrogging the west on this sort of stuff. Massive S.E.
| Asian cities are experiencing tremendous health benefits from
| the green revolution.
| schmuckonwheels wrote:
| It's mostly built atop problem shifting. For example,
| Seattle fought to send their compost and build wind farms
| in eastern Washington - where it was in someone else's
| backyard.
|
| Similar to battery recycling - which might end up being
| "recycled" by some 8 year old kid in SE Asia with a
| sledgehammer.
| Nasrudith wrote:
| At worst the same way that performing CPR on a man with a
| heart attack is problem shifting, or feeding the hungry
| only makes them hungry again in the future.
|
| Wind turbines are not problems. They are opportunities.
| Notice that thr specious bullshit problems cited with
| wind turbines go away in rural areas once farmers are the
| ones making money on them.
| locknitpicker wrote:
| > It's mostly built atop problem shifting. For example,
| Seattle fought to send their compost and build wind farms
| in eastern Washington - where it was in someone else's
| backyard.
|
| This is a silly opinion to have. It's like complaining
| that reinforcing police presence in an area is problem
| shifting because you'll still have crime taking place
| somewhere else. It's an attempt to frame any action as a
| false dilemma that forces an all-or-nothing logic based
| on specious reasoning.
| jfengel wrote:
| Ok. That's fine with me. If I'm wrong, then I take
| responsibility for that.
| g-b-r wrote:
| If it doesn't turn into a nothingburger *, can we get back
| the glaciers, the climate and the people who died to help
| your own cronies get some more billions?
|
| * (that is, if there's not a global conspiracy of pedo-
| scientists set to harm poor oil tycoons)
| zomiaen wrote:
| There are a vast number of scientists in agreement with each
| other that it is not a nothingburger.
|
| It takes nothing but stark intentional ignorance to make a
| statement like yours.
|
| It absolutely boggles my mind at the suggestion that green
| energy is all profit seeking, as if the counterparties in big
| oil aren't also just as or more interested in maintaining
| status quo in the opposite direction. Yet I never see someone
| who expresses ideas like this recognize or acknowledge that.
| ako wrote:
| Better safe than sorry. If the risk is significant, and the
| impact is big, it is sensible to have plan to address risks.
| You probably have many expenses you hope you never need, like
| all sorts of insurances. And even if it turns out climate
| changes was less impactful than forcasted, change sparks
| innovation and creates economic opportunity. E.g, these days
| electrucs cars are better than fossil fuel cars (my wife wont
| let me lease another fossil fuel car, she likes the way the
| electric one drives much better), and solar electricity is
| cheaper than fossil electricity.
| dguest wrote:
| But punishing ex-presidents is what happens in banana
| republics!
|
| We wouldn't want to become one of those! As long as we never
| hold leaders accountable I'm sure we'll be safe from that fate.
| Bengalilol wrote:
| Who is speaking of 'presidents' ?
| g-b-r wrote:
| I've been thinking for a while that the only fix democracy
| needs is accountability for everything the politicians do and
| say (in public).
|
| If you think of any (societal) issue you care about, there's a
| good chance it would get solved with that tiny change
| therobots927 wrote:
| Oh they absolutely could be held accountable if enough people
| woke up. That's a stretch though even for my active
| imagination.
| websiteapi wrote:
| this doesn't really make any sense. in this scenario what's the
| hedge then?
| crooked-v wrote:
| A good start for actually holding people accountable in the US
| would be prosecuting the entire chain of command responsible
| for blowing up unarmed South American boats and then murdering
| the survivors. That one's concrete, proven to have happened,
| and illegal under multiple standards of law, so if we can't at
| least make that happen anything else is unlikely.
| pjc50 wrote:
| > it's a shame politicians can't be kept accountable tens of
| years from now.
|
| Donald Trump is 79. He can only be held accountable in the
| afterlife, if there is one.
| baby wrote:
| I really think we need to change the system to create some sort
| of accountability here. I think a number of people in the
| current government need to go prison.
| iwontberude wrote:
| This country is done. I'm ready for the New California Republic.
| RealityVoid wrote:
| I wouldn't call for its funeral just yet, I think there's still
| fight left in it. But yes, now the inmates are running the
| asylum and it's... Sad.
| dyauspitr wrote:
| They've given themselves 4 years to sack and loot the US.
| coliveira wrote:
| I hope all these scientists move to China and Europe.
| phtrivier wrote:
| We can't afford scientist in Europe anymore, we have pensions
| to pay.
|
| I suppose China does not need american scientist to work in
| China. They just need to make sure they can't work in the US.
| Which they are doing.
|
| The only "funny" outcome is that they manage to fund a startup
| that develops tools to alleviate climate change, and explicitly
| reserve them to countries and states that believed in climate
| change in the first place.
|
| But that would be mean. So, of course Florida can have it. It
| will just be slightly expensive for them.
| ggm wrote:
| https://commission.europa.eu/topics/research-and-
| innovation/...
| tomww wrote:
| Climate scientists earn ~PS30-50k in the UK
| dboreham wrote:
| My wife worked there when we first met. She told me she knew
| where there was a Cray-1 sitting at the bottom of a stair well.
| Obviously this raised my level of interest. We went up there on
| the weekend and took each other's photo sitting on it. From
| memory it was a very low serial number having been shipped to
| <some-TLA> first then subsequently moved to NCAR. I also peered
| through the glass at various exotica in the machine room: YMP,
| KSR, TM that sort of thing. Great first date.
| ttctciyf wrote:
| The agnotologists[1] have never had it so good!
|
| The production of ignorance is booming as its trajectory takes it
| from roots in advertising, then lobbying, then political
| campaigns to center stage in political strategy and official
| government business.
|
| I suspect the academics who study culturally cultivated ignorance
| will be playing catchup for at least a decade after this
| administration!
|
| (Assuming they are still around, of course.)
|
| 1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agnotology
| Bengalilol wrote:
| I feel quite ashamed, but I learned a word (and more behind).
| Thanks for sharing.
| MarkMarine wrote:
| Great to see "don't look up" was just a documentary with some
| prescience.
| therobots927 wrote:
| Shout out to the tech oligarchs who got us here. I hope each and
| every one of them gets investigated and broken up by Lina Khan
| when the socialists get their hands on the wheel. But
| unfortunately I don't think enough everyday people understand
| exactly what's going on or are nearly as angry about this as they
| should be.
| JKCalhoun wrote:
| They got pretty angry during the Great Depression.
| tehjoker wrote:
| They set the paradigm for this during the biden administration
| when they shut down all the covid reporting. now the paradigm is
| no info no problem.
| therobots927 wrote:
| Who is they? The state of Florida? And what the hell did Biden
| have to do with it?
| tehjoker wrote:
| biden shut down reporting, subsidies, and wound down almost
| everything. then trump came in and put in the worst villains
| from the brownstone institute and MAHA
| g-b-r wrote:
| As I had already finished a reply to
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46405900 when I found out it
| had died, here it is:
|
| FACT: There's a lot that the United States can do to make the
| situation much worse or better.
|
| FACT: However bad the current situation is, continuing the
| emissions will keep worsening it.
|
| FACT: Digging in on dying technologies supports the prosperity of
| our less idiotic adversaries.
|
| FACT: You will be downvoted to oblivion by people who are more
| aware of what the actual facts are.
| nostrebored wrote:
| "Digging in on dying technologies" is an interesting framing.
|
| There is no appetite for oil alternatives that would stop this
| from meaning the deaths of hundreds of thousands or more
| people.
|
| The fact is there is no effective way to power a stable grid
| with modern renewables. Increasing the energy mix sustainably
| is great. But if people truly want to divest from oil and coal
| there number one issue right now should be how to onboard
| nuclear energy effectively. This has been true for decades at
| this point, but purist policies on the right and the left have
| left it completely unrealized or actively dismantled it.
| g-b-r wrote:
| Are coal and oil not dying technologies?
|
| We can debate how much nuclear is needed, but renewables can
| do a lot, and just hoping that AI will bring nuclear fusion
| in 5 years is not a great strategy
| crooked-v wrote:
| Solar and batteries get cheaper to build and maintain every
| year (almost to an absurd degree, seriously, look at the
| charts for the past 2 decades), while nuclear stays the same
| price.
|
| That's not to say that nuclear power is bad to have, but
| there's an extremely obvious trajectory here of cheap
| battery-backed solar everywhere, with few regulatory hurdles
| and obvious incentives for people to have their own mini
| solar systems and batteries that take load off the larger
| grid.
| ChrisArchitect wrote:
| News from a few weeks ago, multiple submissions around here.
|
| https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2025/12/16/trum...
|
| https://www.nytimes.com/2025/12/17/climate/national-center-f...
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2025-12-27 23:00 UTC)