SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
President Trump has been accused of deliberately obstructing research on global warming after it emerged that a critically important technique for investigating polar sea-ice extent and concentration is being blocked.
A key polar satellite used to measure the arctic ice cap failed a few days ago, leaving the US with only three others, and those have lived well beyond their shelf lives. Scientists say there is no chance a new one can be launched until 2023 or later. None of the current satellites will still be in operation then. This will put an end to nearly 40 years of uninterrupted data on polar ice.
It seems like there would be a backup satellite, right? In fact, there was a backup satellite ready to go. Then the Trump Administration destroyed it earlier this year, by order of the US Congress. They said the storage costs were too high.
(Score: 2) by frojack on Monday November 20 2017, @01:41AM (3 children)
I think I see your problem, AC. You seem to have forgotten which way the datagrams flow, and who's duty it is to send ACKs.
The Voting Base was so sick of both parties that they elected a total outsider. It wasn't an accident. It was intentional.
Those republicans still resisting the message are slitting their own throat.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 20 2017, @02:58AM (2 children)
Naah, actually kind of agree with you. It was definitely not an insider's election to win. The main question was who would be the fatcat and who'd be at the head of the baying mob.
The dems lost, and deserved to lose, because they tried to impose their candidate. The republicans, despite their distaste, played a (halfway) honest game with the nomination, and reaped a reward (of sorts).
For myself, I thought both candidates were ludicrously bad, but had to give a grudging edge to Trump for being somewhat more in conflict with the entrenched powers.
(Score: 2) by DutchUncle on Monday November 20 2017, @02:47PM (1 child)
If this were a sport, or an entertainment show, I'd agree. Since these matters have serious real-world consequences, I'd rather have taken the lesser of the weevils.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 21 2017, @05:24PM
You're kidding me, right?
The US presidential election is a vast, multinational reality show with incredible ratings. It's entertainment, writ large. Even the olympic games can't match it for sheer spectacle, partly because it has such immense opportunities for ego and scandal.
And as for real world consequences? More of those, please. Presidents have very limited powers, and even most of those powers are constrained by what the US congress will let them do. Remember Obama's weak sauce remark that he had a phone and a pen? Whoop-de-doo.
And given all that, for most americans - in fact, even most american voters - the presidential election is an event for which, given their real power to change things, they might as well wipe their asses with their ballots. This is reflected in the huge swathes of the US in which the candidates hardly even bother campaigning.
Yeah, you might as well treat it as a game show.