Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Tuesday February 21 2017, @12:48PM   Printer-friendly
from the not-ignoring-ignorance dept.

From the I've-heard-enough-and-won't-take-it-anymore department, http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-39024648

The BBC reports that former Congressman Rush Holt, now part of the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS), is the spokesman for a movement "standing up for science".

His remarks reflect growing concern among researchers that science is disregarded by President Trump.

Scientists across the US plan to march in DC on 22 April.

[...] "To see young scientists, older scientists, the general public speaking up for the idea of science. We are going to work with our members and affiliated organisations to see that this march for science is a success."

Mr Holt made his comments at the AAAS annual meting in Boston as President Trump appointed a fierce critic of the Environmental Protection Agency as its head. Scott Pruitt has spent years fighting the role and reach of the EPA.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by VLM on Tuesday February 21 2017, @09:03PM

    by VLM (445) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday February 21 2017, @09:03PM (#469878)

    There is an interesting side issue that there is no China environment and no USA environment there's just one environment, and that muddies the waters such that if a local conflict of interest dude is none the less an arbitrary 100x stricter than China compared to the Obama dude who was 1000x stricter, it doesn't really matter in the big picture. Other than maybe we're getting a higher quality of life / better economy with the guy who's only 99% clean than the guy who was 99.9% clean, while something that isn't changing is virtually all our pollution comes from China regardless under either policy, we're just a wealthier nation with one option.

    Much as it can be interesting to express global warming in terms of "miles toward the equator" or "miles per hour toward the equator" it would be interesting to specify a year. Yeah I don't think anyone is proposing a pre- '70 environmental policy. So we're talking about rolling back environmental protection from 2010s era to the filthy 90s or what? I mean, no one is proposing pollution the Mississippi river until it catches fire, or polluting the air until LA tomorrow is as bad as Beijing today. That can be an extremely hard political sell that its a crisis to roll all the way back to the 90s, perhaps, which weren't that bad really.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2