Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

Politics
posted by takyon on Monday November 13 2017, @02:24AM   Printer-friendly
from the flame-on dept.

According to The Missoulian (archive):

Several of Missoula's top federal fire scientists have been denied permission to attend the International Fire Congress later this month, leading conference organizers to suspect censorship of climate-related research.

"Anyone who has anything related to climate-change research — right away was rejected," said Timothy Ingalsbee of the Association for Fire Ecology, a nonprofit group putting on the gathering. Ingalsbee noted that was his personal opinion, and that the AFE [Association for Fire Ecology] is concerned that a federal travel restriction policy may be more to blame.

The Missoulian also said (archive):

The scientists no longer attending include Matt Jolly, who was to present new work on "Climate-induced variations in global severe weather fire conditions," Karin Riley on "Fuel treatment effects at the landscape level: burn probabilities, flame lengths and fire suppression costs," Mike Battaglia on "Adaptive silviculture for climate change: Preparing dry mixed conifer forests for a more frequent fire regime," and Dave Calkin, who was working on ways to manage the human response to wildfire.

takyon: Also at Scientific American (thanks to another Anonymous Coward).


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This discussion has been archived.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: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 13 2017, @04:32AM (24 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 13 2017, @04:32AM (#596065)

    Scientists seem to think, correctly or not, that tying everything to climate change will get them funding, no matter how absurd the connection. That is an abuse of the trust placed in scientists.

    Here we have a conference supposedly on fire, but 2 of the 4 people have decided to make their talks about climate change. That of course draws suspicion on the other 2 and on the whole conference.

    Lots of us voters really don't want your politics. Cut that out, or we'll cut funding. We have no desire to fund a campaign to disadvantage American industry while giving India and China a free pass.

    Starting Score:    0  points
    Moderation   -1  
       Troll=2, Insightful=1, Total=3
    Extra 'Troll' Modifier   0  

    Total Score:   -1  
  • (Score: 5, Touché) by Azuma Hazuki on Monday November 13 2017, @04:42AM (12 children)

    by Azuma Hazuki (5086) on Monday November 13 2017, @04:42AM (#596069) Journal

    And while we're at it, fuck all this clean water legislation and the FDA and stuff. Because making sure we're not mainlining dimethylmercury gets in the way of PROFITS. God, you people are stupid.

    --
    I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
    • (Score: 0, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 13 2017, @04:59AM (11 children)

      by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 13 2017, @04:59AM (#596072)

      Seriously! Our competition is not restricted. Our competition is eating our lunch. We can't survive as a nation of web developers, beggars, and government bureaucrats.

      Our options: cut our regulatory burden, give up and die, genocide the competition via nukes... and that's about it. There is a short-term option of protectionism with huge tariffs, maybe 500%, but that would likely end up with us being a relatively weak country that ultimately, decades from now, ends up getting conquered. So the huge tariffs probably are a slow-acting form of the second option, to give up and die.

      Well? Be a genius now and tell us how to survive in this competitive world.

      • (Score: 4, Insightful) by Mykl on Monday November 13 2017, @05:37AM (6 children)

        by Mykl (1112) on Monday November 13 2017, @05:37AM (#596077)

        Easy. Take the long view (rather than the short view you are taking). In 50 years all of those countries with no health regulations will be full of cancer-induced cripples wading through piles of filth to reach their lead-tainted water. Lets see them rule the world with that!

        Or are you seriously suggesting that we should let industry kill us through poisoning our air, earth and water in order to make a profit?

        • (Score: -1, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 13 2017, @07:13AM (3 children)

          by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 13 2017, @07:13AM (#596089)

          We can't keep things pristine and actually get stuff done.

          In 50 years, we will be gone if we keep going with the regulations. You can see some effects now, with tiny families and badly nourished children. We either don't breed at all or we actually starve... possibly starving with stomachs full of useless filler. (In the Irish potato famine, increased potato prices strangely caused people to eat more potatoes, dropping more expensive meat from their diets so that they could fill their bellies.)

          Those people in polluted countries will then just move to our depopulated country. (which they will pollute) Why do you want us extinct?

          • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 13 2017, @08:54AM

            by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 13 2017, @08:54AM (#596107)

            False dichotomy.

            Trash everything now OR everyone dies.

          • (Score: 4, Insightful) by GreatAuntAnesthesia on Monday November 13 2017, @11:33AM

            by GreatAuntAnesthesia (3275) on Monday November 13 2017, @11:33AM (#596132) Journal

            Why do you want us extinct?

            Says the person arguing for poisoning everybody on the planet and the ecosystems upon which we all depend for survival.

          • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 13 2017, @05:05PM

            by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 13 2017, @05:05PM (#596302)

            Wow, that was a twisted line of reasoning!

            Hate to break it to you, but the best way to help those tiny families with badly nourished children is to raise taxes and reform welfare.

            Those people in polluted countries will then just move to our depopulated country. (which they will pollute) Why do you want us extinct?

            I love your circular logic, however!

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 13 2017, @10:38AM (1 child)

          by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 13 2017, @10:38AM (#596121)

          In 50 years all of those countries with no health regulations will be full of cancer-induced cripples wading through piles of filth to reach their lead-tainted water. Lets see them rule the world with that!

          Nothing easier, just use Wikipedia to get to know some history.
          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Stink [wikipedia.org]
          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Empire [wikipedia.org]
          Reality on planet Earth works quite differently from a hippie fantasy. It may be "bad", "not fair" and whatever, but it's what *is*.
          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guns,_Germs,_and_Steel [wikipedia.org]

          • (Score: 2) by Mykl on Tuesday November 14 2017, @10:54PM

            by Mykl (1112) on Tuesday November 14 2017, @10:54PM (#597039)

            You should read the links that you post. The "Great Stink" was an example of a country realizing they have a pollution problem and taking action to address it for the good of the country (including business!). If you are arguing against addressing pollution, then this link is the opposite of that.

            By the way, there's a great documentary series on Netflix called the Seven Wonders of the Industrial World [netflix.com]. Episode 5 focuses on the Great Stink and the building of the sewer system. Amazing stuff.

      • (Score: 4, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 13 2017, @06:02AM (1 child)

        by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 13 2017, @06:02AM (#596083)

        We can't survive as a nation of web developers, beggars, and government bureaucrats.

        You yourself run into this deadend by putting profit over life. Karma's calling the debt now.

        Our options: cut our regulatory burden, give up and die, genocide the competition via nukes... and that's about it.

        That's nature telling you something. The quickest and cheapest way to listen to it is using your beloved gun on yourself - do it right and it's quick and painless.

        • (Score: 3, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 13 2017, @08:32AM

          by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 13 2017, @08:32AM (#596098)

          The quickest and cheapest way to listen to it is using your beloved gun on yourself

          Do it in a forest and give back to the nature the resources you squandered.

      • (Score: 2, Troll) by Azuma Hazuki on Monday November 13 2017, @09:53PM (1 child)

        by Azuma Hazuki (5086) on Monday November 13 2017, @09:53PM (#596494) Journal

        Here's one way: get thorium fission in modular reactors, thermal-mass solar, and a shitload of wind power going. Change farming to work more with the available soils and resources. Cut ties with foreign powers for basic things like oil.

        Oh, and round up all the fucking corrupt greedheads and burn them alive, broadcasting their screaming, flailing, agonizing deaths on international TV. There's a start. Shithead.

        --
        I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday November 16 2017, @05:07PM

          by Anonymous Coward on Thursday November 16 2017, @05:07PM (#597769)

          You forgot several steps.

            - stripmine for thorium

            - stripmine for solar panel shit

            - stripmine for battery storage shit

            - stripmine for the fun of tearing the earth open to create barren, desert regions

            - watch your own grandchildren dying agonizing deaths from all the stripmine pollution

          Ahhhh, fuck the little mutants. Let them die.

  • (Score: 3, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 13 2017, @05:11AM (6 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 13 2017, @05:11AM (#596073)

    I looked at the titles of the work that are mentioned in the summary. In my opinion, it isn't absurd to suppose that global warming could bring more episodes of hot weather. Nor is it absurd to suppose that fires could be more frequent if the weather were hotter. I say "global warming" rather than "climate change" because most of the Earth is getting warmer.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 13 2017, @07:04AM (5 children)

      by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 13 2017, @07:04AM (#596088)

      If you are trying to deal with fire, you don't waste time on stuff that is way out of scope. Going on about possible climate change effects is unproductive. You may as well propose to pave the world like a giant parking lot to prevent fire -- which is sort of correct but completely out of scope of any reasonable discussion of fire.

      Oh, and global warming will reduce fire because flooded land is wet.

      • (Score: 2) by c0lo on Monday November 13 2017, @09:26AM

        by c0lo (156) Subscriber Badge on Monday November 13 2017, @09:26AM (#596115) Journal

        Oh, and global warming will reduce fire because flooded land is wet.

        FYI, the new beaches in Huston are some thousand miles away from forest fires in California.
        Dam'd forests, they managed to grow on hills, can't flood them that easy.

        --
        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 13 2017, @04:09PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 13 2017, @04:09PM (#596243)

        Or if you fix windows for a living you could just figure out how to fix windows better... or as an alternative stop the kid throwing rocks at the windows in order to have less windows to fix.

      • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 13 2017, @05:08PM (2 children)

        by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 13 2017, @05:08PM (#596308)

        Going on about possible climate change effects is unproductive.

        Uh... my take on those presentations is that they were describing how to fight fire in a changed climate... as in the climate's already changed, and here's what we need to know about fire prevention looking at 2018.

        Just wow. You're clearly triggered by "climate change," you haven't seen anything beyond "climate change," and you've leaped to the conclusion that these are talks about climate change and not forest fire management.

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 13 2017, @06:24PM (1 child)

          by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 13 2017, @06:24PM (#596354)

          It is only reasonable to believe that these talks are about climate change.

          Forest fire management doesn't need to be concerned with climate change. We already know the deal and handle everything:

          At the extremes, which won't be going away, there is no fire. The glaciers won't burn. The bare rock in southern Libya won't burn. Everything between those extremes is something that exists on Earth today, and is thus old news. We are not getting a new type of flammable landscape.

          So there is no reason to put "climate change" in the titles of the talks, unless that is exactly what they are about.

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 13 2017, @05:38AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 13 2017, @05:38AM (#596078)

    The other day I even heard somebody suggesting that changing climate was related to climate change! Fake news! What arrogance!

  • (Score: 4, Insightful) by unauthorized on Monday November 13 2017, @06:34AM (2 children)

    by unauthorized (3776) on Monday November 13 2017, @06:34AM (#596086)

    We have no desire to fund a campaign to disadvantage American industry while giving India and China a free pass.

    Yes, you (collectively) do because you buy cheap Chinese crap and thus indirectly subsidize the cost-cutting manufacturing in China which is what is killing the US industry.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 13 2017, @08:59AM (1 child)

      by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 13 2017, @08:59AM (#596109)

      Don't worry, we'll soon be buying Chinese solar panels and importing Chinese technology while we sell Real American coal to any country more backward than we are.

      • (Score: 2) by c0lo on Monday November 13 2017, @09:15AM

        by c0lo (156) Subscriber Badge on Monday November 13 2017, @09:15AM (#596114) Journal

        while we sell Real American coal to any country more backward than we are.

        I know such a place, it's Newcastle [wikipedia.org]

        --
        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford