Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by cmn32480 on Wednesday September 14 2016, @01:07PM   Printer-friendly
from the interesting-but-not-surprising dept.

Three of the four major candidates for United States president have responded to America's Top 20 Presidential Science, Engineering, Technology, Health and Environmental Questions. The nonprofit advocacy group ScienceDebate.org has posted their responses online. Hillary Clinton, Donald Trump, and Jill Stein had all responded as of press time, and the group was awaiting responses from Libertarian Party candidate Gary Johnson.


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This discussion has been archived.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: 3, Interesting) by VLM on Wednesday September 14 2016, @04:07PM

    by VLM (445) Subscriber Badge on Wednesday September 14 2016, @04:07PM (#401861)

    In other words, Trump says there is no climate change problem

    More like he says its a very low priority problem compared to our other issues with mother natire.

    For example there was another el nino crop failure in Africa this summer and 50 mil are gonna starve unless we burn lots of petroleum to send them USA grain. And we probably will. Or we'll "save the climate change" and let them starve to death. One way or another "climate change" and greenwashing and treaties that accomplish nothing are not very important compared to things he does list like, say, feeding people.

    Something that tends to be very telling is what very specifically to do about climate change varies between progressive neocon globalists and rational people. When someone says they've solved the problem because there's an international treaty that does nothing from an engineering perspective and if only we'd sign it the problem would be fixed, you know they're progressive neocon globalist democrats. Trump's response is more rational. OK we'll feed those 50M people today and meanwhile try to study some way to REALISTICALLY fix problems.

    Its basically the same answer he gave for the research question. TLDR is something like yeah well everything's got a fanboy who thinks their pet project is the most important but a good manager tries to maximize overall productivity which usually results in a balance in effort much to the chagrin of ALL single issue fanboys oh well.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +1  
       Interesting=1, Total=1
    Extra 'Interesting' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   3  
  • (Score: 2) by DeathMonkey on Wednesday September 14 2016, @05:40PM

    by DeathMonkey (1380) on Wednesday September 14 2016, @05:40PM (#401924) Journal
    In other words, Trump says there is no climate change problem

    More like he says its a very low priority problem compared to our other issues with mother natire.


    I guess all those direct quotes from the man claiming it's fake are all just jokes. Additionally, putting scare-quotes around "climate change" in his response to the question also must just be a joke.

    We'll just let VLM tell us his actual, totally-real, stance and just ignore all the words coming out of Trump's mouth.
    • (Score: 2) by VLM on Wednesday September 14 2016, @05:56PM

      by VLM (445) Subscriber Badge on Wednesday September 14 2016, @05:56PM (#401933)

      Well thats kinda cheaty referencing stuff outside the response and historical.

      As a practical matter do beliefs about something unimportant, of low priority compared to more pressing problems, really matter?

      Say he flipflops on his position WRT the Investiture Controversy of 1102. Should that matter? Its really important to folks in the field and people who are into certain identify politics use it as a litmus test of who gets to belong and who doesn't. But being irrelevant and of low priority does it really matter?

      • (Score: 4, Insightful) by DeathMonkey on Wednesday September 14 2016, @06:17PM

        by DeathMonkey (1380) on Wednesday September 14 2016, @06:17PM (#401947) Journal

        Yes, ignoring very basic and easily provable science is a very large problem for someone who is supposed to be making important decisions.

  • (Score: 2) by Reziac on Thursday September 15 2016, @03:58AM

    by Reziac (2489) on Thursday September 15 2016, @03:58AM (#402125) Homepage

    Or as I summarized the interview for someone elsewhere,

    1) longwinded rambles that say nothing, but government will fix!
    2) realist who speaks directly
    3) no answer
    4) idealist with many fine ideas but no sense of reality

    --
    And there is no Alkibiades to come back and save us from ourselves.