4 ms·

Well for one off the top of my head the terms climate change and global warming being scrubbed from government sites and reports politically altered or suppress

Well for one off the top of my head the terms climate change and global warming being scrubbed from government sites and reports politically altered or suppressed. Subtle but real. Steps in the wrong direction.

WillPostForFood 7y ago
It is not really happening though. The most egregious case was the EPA "removing" some references. But bad as it was, they were only removing links from the home page, making the data less prominent. Reports and information on global warming were, and still are available on the EPA website. https://weather.com/science/environment/news/2018-01-30-scott-pruitt-epa-climate-data-emails https://weather.com/science/environment/news/2018-01-30-scot...
- tempguy9999 7y ago
  That's suppressing it, exactly as the parent said. Why do you think it acceptable? Anyway <http://columbiaclimatelaw.com/silencing-science-tracker/references-to-climate-change-removed-from-epa-document-2/> http://columbiaclimatelaw.com/silencing-science-tracker/refe... "In or around March 2019, the White House Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) removed several references to “climate change” from a guidance document on “planning for natural disaster debris.” The document was drafted by the Environmental Protection Agency and submitted to OIRA for review. During review, OIRA staff deleted several references to “climate change,” [snip]" It's happening.
  - WillPostForFood 7y ago
    The EPA is a political office, run by a political appointee, so there will always be a political bias in what they choose to emphasize, and that's all that happened. Nothing was removed from public access, just moved from featured on the home page. If one admin put carbon tax on the home page, and the next replaced it with solar panels, is that suppressing the carbon tax? The document you reference simply strikes out a single reference to there being a causal relationship between climate change and specific extreme weather events. The document is all about climate change, so it seems like a minor and likely accurate correction. http://columbiaclimatelaw.com/files/2019/04/Oira.png http://columbiaclimatelaw.com/files/2019/04/Oira.png
    - tempguy9999 7y ago
      > The EPA is a political office, run by a political appointee Well I'm a brit so I dunno, but from wikipedia "The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is an independent agency of the United States federal government for environmental protection" > The document you reference simply strikes out a single reference to there being a causal relationship between climate change and specific extreme weather events I've skimmed the document and I have to agree with you. I think it's a pretty vital point and perhaps should not have been deleted, but it appears you are right. So upvoted.
      - WillPostForFood 7y ago
        > Well I'm a brit so I dunno, but from wikipedia "The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is an independent agency of the United States federal government for environmental protection" It gets complicated - it is considered independent because it doesn't directly roll up into a cabinet position under the president, but informally it is run like it is a cabinet position, the head is a political appointee of the president, and they can be removed by the president at will. So while more a grey area than something like the State Department, it is closer to that than more independent agencies Federal Reserve that acts without input from the Executive branch, and the appointees can't be fired by the president
    - CodiePetersen 7y ago
      Depends on the intent, if you go through every single website and agency and ensure that carbon tax is never mentioned by pre reviewing and screening them out, then yes. If its just one, then likely has nothing to do with support or lack of support, if its all and then there is a policy, then yes, obviously there is some intent and apparentness that you don't want it talked about.
      - WillPostForFood 7y ago
        I agree there is total intent. For example, imagine a environmental Republican who hates all taxes but wants to promote clean energy through solar/wind/nuclear. I'm just suggesting it isn't totalitarian, it isn't anti-science, and it is the prerogative of the President to have a wide latitude to promote different EPA policies.
- CodiePetersen 7y ago
  I'm not going to go through every example of agencies being told they can't use the term climate change on their twitter or every policy and action that has been done to undermine, something Trump does to everything he touches, the validity and efforts of the people behind climate science and education. But here are some PDFs and a articles that sum a lot of the stuff up. http://time.com/4649608/national-parks-climate-change-donald-trump-tweets/ http://time.com/4649608/national-parks-climate-change-donald... https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/10/climate/climate-change-trump.html https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/10/climate/climate-change-tr... https://envirodatagov.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/Part-3-Changing-the-Digital-Climate.pdf https://envirodatagov.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/Part-3-...

WillPostForFood 7y ago

It is not really happening though. The most egregious case was the EPA "removing" some references. But bad as it was, they were only removing links from the home page, making the data less prominent. Reports and information on global warming were, and still are available on the EPA website. https://weather.com/science/environment/news/2018-01-30-scott-pruitt-epa-climate-data-emails https://weather.com/science/environment/news/2018-01-30-scot...

tempguy9999 7y ago
That's suppressing it, exactly as the parent said. Why do you think it acceptable? Anyway <http://columbiaclimatelaw.com/silencing-science-tracker/references-to-climate-change-removed-from-epa-document-2/> http://columbiaclimatelaw.com/silencing-science-tracker/refe... "In or around March 2019, the White House Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) removed several references to “climate change” from a guidance document on “planning for natural disaster debris.” The document was drafted by the Environmental Protection Agency and submitted to OIRA for review. During review, OIRA staff deleted several references to “climate change,” [snip]" It's happening.
- WillPostForFood 7y ago
  The EPA is a political office, run by a political appointee, so there will always be a political bias in what they choose to emphasize, and that's all that happened. Nothing was removed from public access, just moved from featured on the home page. If one admin put carbon tax on the home page, and the next replaced it with solar panels, is that suppressing the carbon tax? The document you reference simply strikes out a single reference to there being a causal relationship between climate change and specific extreme weather events. The document is all about climate change, so it seems like a minor and likely accurate correction. http://columbiaclimatelaw.com/files/2019/04/Oira.png http://columbiaclimatelaw.com/files/2019/04/Oira.png
  - tempguy9999 7y ago
    > The EPA is a political office, run by a political appointee Well I'm a brit so I dunno, but from wikipedia "The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is an independent agency of the United States federal government for environmental protection" > The document you reference simply strikes out a single reference to there being a causal relationship between climate change and specific extreme weather events I've skimmed the document and I have to agree with you. I think it's a pretty vital point and perhaps should not have been deleted, but it appears you are right. So upvoted.
    - WillPostForFood 7y ago
      > Well I'm a brit so I dunno, but from wikipedia "The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is an independent agency of the United States federal government for environmental protection" It gets complicated - it is considered independent because it doesn't directly roll up into a cabinet position under the president, but informally it is run like it is a cabinet position, the head is a political appointee of the president, and they can be removed by the president at will. So while more a grey area than something like the State Department, it is closer to that than more independent agencies Federal Reserve that acts without input from the Executive branch, and the appointees can't be fired by the president
  - CodiePetersen 7y ago
    Depends on the intent, if you go through every single website and agency and ensure that carbon tax is never mentioned by pre reviewing and screening them out, then yes. If its just one, then likely has nothing to do with support or lack of support, if its all and then there is a policy, then yes, obviously there is some intent and apparentness that you don't want it talked about.
    - WillPostForFood 7y ago
      I agree there is total intent. For example, imagine a environmental Republican who hates all taxes but wants to promote clean energy through solar/wind/nuclear. I'm just suggesting it isn't totalitarian, it isn't anti-science, and it is the prerogative of the President to have a wide latitude to promote different EPA policies.
CodiePetersen 7y ago
I'm not going to go through every example of agencies being told they can't use the term climate change on their twitter or every policy and action that has been done to undermine, something Trump does to everything he touches, the validity and efforts of the people behind climate science and education. But here are some PDFs and a articles that sum a lot of the stuff up. http://time.com/4649608/national-parks-climate-change-donald-trump-tweets/ http://time.com/4649608/national-parks-climate-change-donald... https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/10/climate/climate-change-trump.html https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/10/climate/climate-change-tr... https://envirodatagov.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/Part-3-Changing-the-Digital-Climate.pdf https://envirodatagov.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/Part-3-...