Is the National Park Service an outlier in the Trump administration when it comes to climate change?
That question arises not only when you look at the president's efforts to halt President Obama's work on climate change, but also in light of news that the U.S. Department of Energy's website recently was sanitized of climate change materials adopted by the Obama administration. Meanwhile, the Park Service just rolled out a four-color brochure on climate change impacts around the country.
Gone from DOE's site are a video about the 2016 Paris climate agreement, the link to climate.data.gov, another link to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Adminstration's National Climate Data Center, and one to the National Climate Assessment. The changes were reported last week by E&E News.
The site does have a link to the president's Climate Action Plan, but it leads to a page with the message, "Thank you for your interest in this subject. Stay tuned as we continue to update whitehouse.gov"
Interestingly, that page does offer a link to the Obama Archive, which takes you to another page listing President Obama's work on health care, climate and energy, American leadership, economic progress, and equality and social progress.
As for the Park Service, the agency just released a brochure that discusses the many challenges the National Park System is facing due to climate change. It touches on melting glaciers, rising seas, altered ecosystems, and species endangered by climate change. Too, it mentions cultural aspects of the National Park System, such as Civil War-era Fort Jefferson at Dry Tortugas National Park, that are threatened by the changes.
Fort Jefferson sits at the water’s edge at Dry Tortugas National Park. Sea level has risen steadily since completion of the fort in 1875, threatening several islands of the Dry Tortugas.
The Park Service also took time to include information on the human causes of climate change and how they can be mitigated.
Using historical climate data, scientists create climate models to project potential future climate changes. Continued GHG emissions will cause further warming and long-lasting changes, increasing the likelihood of irreversible impacts.
However, limiting climate change is not beyond our control. Substantial and sustained reductions in GHG emissions now, along with efforts to adapt to change that is inevitable or already happening, can limit climate change impacts.
The NPS recognizes that human activities—especially fossil fuel use and transportation—are changing the Earth’s climate. Together with our communities, we are taking action to reduce our own GHG emissions and model climate-friendly behaviors through sustainable operations and adaptation efforts.
Comments
Here's the thing about the 97 percent. It asks that we put our thinking caps on hold. No need to look any further here, folks. The facts are already in.
That just isn't how science works, except yes, in a political environment where disagreement is roundly punished. How do you punish a Ph.D.? You just don't give him or her a grant. They'll get the message. Don't disagree.
What troubles me about the New McCarthyism is how pervasive it has become. All sides do it, not just the Left or Right. And they do it with a vengeance. Just last light, I was watching the American Experience on PBS, recalling how Woodrow Wilson "handled" dissenters during World War I. He simply threw them in jail. So much for "free speech" under that famous Democrat.
If you believe (know) that you are right, you will not need a ridiculous statistic. That so many people need this one--and quote it often--is frightening. When a statistic is used as a shortcut to debate, it is intended to shame one's opponent into silence.
I know many scientists who disagree with the so-called "findings" on climate change. They may not disagree that climate change is human caused, but they emphatically disagree as to the amount--and whether computer models can ever measure it accurately. Of course something about it has to be human-caused; the point is the purpose of the measurements. If to scare us into doing stupid things (there is a Communist under every bush), it is right and proper that we question those recommendations. Citizenship is always about questioning authority.
So, Woodrow Wilson won his war, but at what price to the democracy he hoped to save? What do you people hope to accomplish by silencing all opposition? I have a list, said Joe McCarthy. Well, we never saw the list. I would like to see the list of all those scientists, but you know, I don't think it exists.
Phipps, thanks for a couple of excellent comments.
As for lists of scientists who support and disagree with anthropomorphic climate change, here are two lists -- for whatever they may be worth:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_climate_scientists
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_scientists_opposing_the_mainstream...
Remember that any intelligent investigation into any controversy requires reading and considering information from BOTH sides. Then, when we have carefully done that, we may make our decision about which side we choose to sit upon. But we also need to be very, very leery of websites that are not actually based on science, but upon echo chambers of opinion. Those, unfortunately, are much easier to find and often much easier to read than the real thing. That's why so many good people have been fooled by what is essentially Fake News.
I've noticed that most of the times here when someone has tried to cite "proof" that climate change is a Chinese hoax, the source cited is one of those and not any kind of solid scientific study.
Dunno about anyone else, but I have made a very sincere study of as much information as I can find -- and if I were on a jury that had to decide based on evidence provided, I'd have to rule that humans are guilty of fouling our nest.
As for the current administration's efforts to silence any opposition, I find that downright frightening. Like Alfred, I watched three nights of American Experience and was horrified to learn an aspect of our history that I'd never been aware of in the past. I found myself shuddering frequently as I watched because I'm hearing tremors of exactly the same kind of thing rising from the swamp today. Are we heading toward resurrection of Wilson's Committee on Public Information when The Donald declares that anything he doesn't like is Fake and when he takes control over which news organizations will be allowed or denied access to the White House?
I hope Americans are smarter today than we were in 1918 --- but I'm not very optimistic because accurate news and good information isn't entertaining enough to catch the attention of too many of our fellow citizens. And, because we have very short memories, we seem doomed to repeat virtually all our past national mistakes.
You are going to have to do better than that ecbuck. Sorry, but a simple google search results in Skeptical Science as the first result. An antiquated website that has posts written by the likes of Daffy Duck and other obvious made up names. Of course, there are variables that are how science works. Those variables such as el Nino, the sun, and ocean currents do not disprove a human-induced climate change in the least. It only states that those variables must be considered. So I considered them and it did not work for me. We are burning the planet up real quick like.
As I said most of my climate knowledge comes from Bill Nye the science guy. Leonardo Dicaprio has some interesting things to say about the subject in his film Before the Flood but I still think of him as the little boy who died on the Titanic. Oh, and I managed to take a class. You can find them for free online. They explain how the atmosphere works and how the earth does its crazy stuff. It is a good learn and I would suggest maybe an open mind would allow you the chance to discover a few things about our planet. Those online pubs such as skeptical science are just that online publications. I am web dev guy so I should know anyone can say whatever they want online.
Climate Change is like God as far as I am concerned. What does it get you by not believing? You end up being dirt is what it gets you.
It seems we will have to agree to disagree in the end. I am sorry for the tone but I was pretty up front about having a certain skill set. Have a great life ecbuck. May the force be with you.
Bill Nye and Leonardo Dicaprio are your go to sources? LOL
Show me where they interviewed all the scientist in the world and found out that 97% believe that man is the primary cause of climate change? Heck, you probably aren't aware of any actual study. Do a google search and you might find a couple of absolutely flawed "studies" that manufacturer the numbers as fast as the IPCC makes up temperatures. Tell me, which study do you want to rely on to support the claim that 97% of scientist believe man is the cause of climate change?
Bill Nye the Science Guy, eh? He did get his start here in Seattle on a comedy show that was popular--then moved on to the Big Time, where Hollywood is considered the equivalent of a Ph.D.
Below is the link to a book by a legitimate Ph.D., Daniel B. Botkin, formerly of Rutgers, Yale, and the University of California, Santa Barbara. He is a biologist (Ph.D.) and a physicist (B.A.) and has written more than a dozen books. Forty years ago, Dan and I became colleagues when I was on the staff of the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars in Washington, D.C., where he was a fellow working on his book (Discordant Harmonies) later published by Oxford University Press. Dan has traveled all over the world studying the so-called balance of nature--which he declares to be a myth going back to the Greeks and Romans. As for us, we should long be past the myth, but something simplistic always wins the day. No effort required. Just listen to Bill Nye and Hollywood.
It is no laughing matter, EC. It is rather another example of the corruption of higher education into higher education lite. Go to college. Spend lots of money. Hide in your safe zone and play in the sandbox.
No sandbox here, and no safe zone either. Read the book; read the reviews; read the bibliography. Get an education. PS No one is asking you to agree, but yes, they are asking you to do some reading outside your safe zone for a change.
https://www.amazon.com/Myths-That-Destroying-Environment-Environmentalis...
Here's my take for what it is worth. Intelligent people make choices in their everyday lives and do what they can to not harm the environment they live in. To that end they have to rely on what the latest science tells them. After that, it is a matter of deciding what comforts, inconveniences and costs they are willing to sacrifice to lessen that harm.
Here is what troubles me. When has anyone read an article from a credible source about any debate on the science? When have you read an article about the benefits of climate change? Certainly there are many. When have you read an article stating that any industry might be better served by oil than say solar or wind? When have you read about the impact eliminating oil for energy production (to the extent that would be possible) will impact everything else that will still rely on oil? That includes the production of solar cells, wind turbines and just about every single thing you touch throughout your day.
All of those things should give you pause, especially as to the state of our media today.
Ever since Al Gore's famous Inconvenient Truth movie on global warming it seems the entire population has hopped aboard one of Al's trains and never looked back. Not only that but they are content to run over anyone who might be standing in the tracks saying slow down just for a minute. I suspect if you were to go back and watch that infamous movie today most (if not all) of the predictions would no longer be valid.
I try to view things from both sides of an issue as the truth is most often found somewhere in the middle. I am also always reminded of the parable " the emperor with no clothes". Those of you complaining that Trump or the Republicans are trying to silence things seem to have no trouble silencing opposing viewpoints. Do you really think the oil industry is the only industry trying to buy politicians? Unfortunately it is not just climate change that suffers from this but just about everything today.
Alfred is a bit wrong here again. No one claims we could reverse climate change. Most hope to slow it down so we don't eliminate most complex life forms. I could be wrong also, Trump has been flip flopping allot lately. I expected that we would not meet our Paris agreement goals because of the change in our policy due to our new president, and I believe most of the G7 would try and meet thiers, even China, which recently refused N. Korean coal for the rest of the year. We can only hope for the best and do our part. There is a planned march against the change in our power plan on April 29th. I plan on attending. Hopefully that will at least make the news. Beachdumb has the appropriate name. NASA actually measures the level of the sea
No apparently they rely on what a comedian and a high school dropout tells them. God forbid they go to the source and think for themselves.