SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the changed-research-climate-changes-climate-research dept.
Scientists used the Medea program to study how global warming could worsen conflict. Now that project has come to an end.
Some national security experts were surprised to learn that an important component of that effort has been ended. A CIA spokesperson confirmed to Climate Desk that the agency is shuttering its main climate research program. Under the program, known as Medea, the CIA had allowed civilian scientists to access classified data—such as ocean temperature and tidal readings gathered by Navy submarines and topography data collected by spy satellites—in an effort to glean insights about how global warming could create security threats around the world.In theory, the program benefited both sides: Scientists could study environmental data that was much higher-resolution than they would normally have access to, and the CIA received research insights about climate-related threats.
http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2015/05/cia-closing-its-main-climate-research-program
[Medea: Measurements of Earth Data for Environmental Analysis. - Ed]
(Score: 2, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 25 2015, @06:20PM
When was the last time roving bandits tried to kill then rape you? When was the last time you didn't have any food for a month? Our world is better than it ever has been and the trend is continuing.
(Score: 3, Touché) by Jiro on Monday May 25 2015, @06:45PM
In that order?
(Score: 3, Funny) by looorg on Monday May 25 2015, @08:45PM
When was the last time roving bandits tried to kill then rape you?
In that order?
Well if you are trying to make a living as a highwayman these days I guess you can't really afford to be picky.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by K_benzoate on Monday May 25 2015, @09:53PM
A better way to measure success is to consider what we've been able to accomplish with the given resources, and compare those outcomes to what could have been achieved with a maximally efficient effort. Squandering billions of dollars to listen in on everyone's phone calls, drill students through weeks of standardized testing, or allow superfluous rent-seekers to parasitise our healthcare system, are not maximally efficient ways to organize a modern human society. In fact, it's worse than that. Devoting man-hours and treasure to these pursuits isn't just an opportunity cost, it's actually setting back progress in other areas. These activities provide negative utility across the domain of civilization. They persist because, like the war of all against all in our recent past, they've found local optimums--islands of stability within a chaotic system.
So while you're right that I haven't been waylaid by marauders at any time in my life, I still can't get medical care without going broke, my kids likely won't be able to afford an education without going in to debt (if at all), and my country locks up more of its own people per capita than any other significant* nation on Earth--many for victimless horticultural activities. And back when highwaymen and footpads were things to worry about, there were a slew of social problems and difficulties which were within the civilizations of the periods' capacities to solve but which they failed to overcome due to their own shortcomings. And it's not as if they were simply unaware of the problems or their ability to fix them; moral exemplars of the time noticed and wrote about them, in an effort to inform their society and spur it to do better.
It's perfectly valid to comment on our relative shortcomings without committing the fallacy of historically relative privation. [wikipedia.org]
*Seychelles technically has a higher rate of 868 prisoners per 100,000 citizens, but their population is only 92,000.
Climate change is real and primarily caused by human activity.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 25 2015, @10:37PM
Great response.
Someone always spits out some obtuse [insert truism here] response which succors pitty and in its own context sounds good, however, holds no real value to the argument.
You hit the nail exactly on the head with Fallacy of relative privation which can also be coined, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thought_terminating_cliche [wikipedia.org]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 25 2015, @11:25PM
Our world is better than it ever has been and the trend is continuing.
I want to know who made the world a better place than it used to be.
Was it regular people working their asses off for human improvement and making the world a better place for all, or was it because of some military?
(Score: 1) by WillAdams on Tuesday May 26 2015, @01:30PM
Given that one of the impetuses behind the American Revolution was the British failing to do anything about the Barbary Pirates, and that having been an early priority of the nascent U.S. Government's military (Halls of Montezuma and the Shores of Tripoli and all that), one has to give some credence to the military's rôle in enabling the fourth of the "four freedoms":
* Freedom of speech
* Freedom of worship
* Freedom from want
* Freedom from fear
(Score: 2) by Alfred on Tuesday May 26 2015, @04:28PM
These are not possible. Everyone will always fear something and always want something else. No .gov entity can fix these and don't pretend they can. You can be reasonably free of either but not completely.
I believe you more likely meant a subset of fear like "Freedom from fear of pirates at sea." Yes the Military was instrumental in taking care of that so we didn't have to pay out for "protection" anymore.
(Score: 1) by WillAdams on Tuesday May 26 2015, @06:23PM
Take it up w/ FDR, it was his speech:
http://www.wwnorton.com/college/history/ralph/workbook/ralprs36b.htm [wwnorton.com]
(Score: 2) by Alfred on Wednesday May 27 2015, @03:39PM