4 ms·
The title is kind of misleading. From the article: >The program will use "red team, blue team" exercises to conduct an "at-length evaluation of U.S. climate sc
by creaghpatr 9y ago
The title is kind of misleading. From the article:
>The program will use "red team, blue team" exercises to conduct an "at-length evaluation of U.S. climate science," the official said, referring to a concept developed by the military to identify vulnerabilities in field operations.
- Beltiras 9y agoBiggest question being how the teams are chosen.
- maxxxxx 9y agoMost likely they will all come from affected industries since they are the only stakeholders in Pruitt's mind.
- ue_ 9y ago"U.S. climate science" Is US science any different to European or Japanese etc. science?
- thehardsphere 9y agoYes. European and Japanese science isn't funded by the US government, so it's not any business of the EPA.
- enraged_camel 9y agoI don't think it's misleading at all. Here is more context: "The administrator believes that we will be able to recruit the best in the fields which study climate and will organize a specific process in which these individuals ... provide back-and-forth critique of specific new reports on climate science," the source said. So they will recruit "the best in the fields which study climate" which basically means they will recruit a few of those "scientists" who get paid to reject climate science and put them on the "red team" or whatever, and that team will be listened to exclusively by the administration.
- m12k 9y agoI'm reminded of this wargame that was essentially scripted to give a specific outcome (and restarted and changed when that outcome did not happen): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millennium_Challenge_2002 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millennium_Challenge_2002 I wonder if they'll employ a similar approach here?
- theothermkn 9y agoAs Senator Franken pointed out, the scientific process itself is a "red team, blue team" exercise, and the settled result of that process, the consensus view of climate scientists, is that human-induced climate change via carbon emissions is happening and is a real threat. The article title is technically correct, in that at least one of those teams will be on the "critique" side. It is also substantially correct, germane, and honest in implying with its scare quotes that this new effort is superfluous, unless it is an effort to gum up the works with climate denial.
- kevinavery 9y agoGreat clip of Sen. Franken explaining to Rick Perry how science works: https://www.c-span.org/video/?c4674659/franken-vs-perry-climate-science https://www.c-span.org/video/?c4674659/franken-vs-perry-clim...
- beams_of_light 9y agoPerhaps relevant: https://fullfact.org/blog/2017/jun/awarded-500000-omidyar-network-open-society-foundations-automated-factchecking/ https://fullfact.org/blog/2017/jun/awarded-500000-omidyar-ne...