Trump Administration Systematically Destroying Scientific Proof of Anthropogenic Climate Change: Orwell Only Missed It By 33 Years
If this doesn’t scream “1984” into your mind, it’s hard to know what will. We’re talking about the systematic deletion of government data that supports the theory of human-caused climate change.
Ask yourself: How much longer until we hear that the Trump administration invented the airplane?
This reminds me so very much of ancient peoples destroying ancient records and statutes because they didn’t agree with the beliefs of the new regime.
You would almost think it would be a violation of first amendment rights.
Obviously we need a law requiring the preservation of data and statistics.
Craig, Frank and Breath,
You can relax, no archived material is being “destroyed”. No government data is being destroyed.
All that is happening is the normal transitional process.
The data, reports and associated materials referred to, can be discovered by simply by googling ‘US National Strategy for the Arctic’.
The Obama administration did exactly the same thing.
Each new administration starts buy clearing old material from it’s website and starting with new materiel.
But what can you expect of the Guardian and it’s gullible over excited readers ? After all, what a great opportunity to use a picture of that bloody bear again ?
I wish someone would delete Victoria Herrmann, the picture of the Bear, and her absurd allegations. ( the bear Population has expanded so dramatically in recent years, they are depleting food sources).
Marco, I will grant you my suspicion that pre trump concerns about destroying data will easily feed into stories of data being destroyed and “oh by the way can you send your donation…” And it makes far less sense to destroy digital data that might easily be recovered from the “Way back” machine or other sites than to destroy statues that have no backup.
However there does seem to be a certain counter-climate-change climate in this administration.
Breath on the Wind,
You may well be correct that the present administration is far less friendly to climate change activism than the Obama administration.
However, these kind of false alarmist claims must equally damage the credibility of the climate change researcher.
After all, if Victoria Herrmann can’t accomplish a simple task like researching archival material correctly, instead jumping to the conclusion that it’s been deleted in a conspiracy, followed by erroneous information about the Polar Bear population, it must raise some doubts about her scientific rigor and integrity !
Craig,
Nothing has been deleted or altered, simply archived in a different location to make space for new material. This has been a long established practice dating back to the establishment of libraries.
With just a little diligent googling, your “huge amount of evidence ” evaporates.(Unlike the bears).
The way I understand this, it’s not the content itself that’s being removed, but rather the citations, thus reducing the credibility of the content. There seems to be a huge amount of evidence supporting this.
Regarding Polar Bear populations those who know don’t seem to agree with your assessment: http://www.factcheck.org/2016/03/polar-bears-far-from-strong-and-healthy/
Breath,
Thank you for your reply.
The source you cite is inconclusive,and the conclusion narrow and speculative. But it’s true all sources of “evidence” seems very biased depending on the source.
Some of the “evidence’ is not based on the bear numbers, but emotive speculation about the impact of ice flow reduction.
Al Gore’s film speculated on the grim fate of drowning bears. Very sad, except that bears can(and do) happily swim vast distances and catch a wide variety of food. (Like all semi aquatic mammals bears do occasionally drown, but very rarely).
Bears can, and have, survived ice free periods in the past. Here’s an article by Energy and Science Reporter, Andrew Follett,
http://dailycaller.com/2016/12/22/polar-bear-population-is-rising-despite-green-fears/
(Yes I know it’s the Daily Caller).
The Sunday Express supports bear population are prospering.
http://www.express.co.uk/news/nature/561014/Polar-bear-population-bounces-climate-change-warning-extinction-warning-WWF-global-warming
https://polarbearscience.com/2017/02/23/global-polar-bear-population-larger-than-previous-thought-almost-30000/
It seems that for every claim, there’s a counter claim, but all estimates agree the Polar Bear Population is between 26,000 and 32, 000. That’s a lot of bears for a species that due to it’s location was never very numerous.
Bears are very adaptive creatures. Most of the concern for the species ignores the bears ability to adapt and presumes that any change in environment will cause extinction.
Maybe the 1960 figure of only 5000 bears was a little low, and a 600 % increase a little excessive, but even if the low was doubled and the high was halved, it’s still an impressive increase.
The Arctic is an area that has perhaps not been studied as well as more accessible places. It is not surprising that data is limited and sometimes conflicting. But this does tend to emphasize the fragility of the environment.
If you have traveled around much on foot you may have had some learning about mountain top environments. Growth there is much slower. Unlike sea level environments they take a much longer time to recover from changes.
It seems reasonable that when we look at Arctic environments that are warming faster than the balance of the planet, populations there are also be more easily stressed. So when presented with conflicting data logic seems to support the data of stress.
I have no pretentions that polar bears are cute little animals. By accounts they are effective killers. Up front and personal they would as likely be friendly as a Mammoth. But both are/were adapted to an environment which we have less experience and it may be worthwhile to pause before plowing over their habitats.