11 ms·

US to rewrite its past national climate reports

• croes 1y ago
  Reminds me of King Arnulf when Hy-Brasil was sinking in Eric the Viking
• iand675 1y ago
  Has this data has been archived elsewhere?
  • exasperaited 1y ago
    Probably. But it is important to understand that this will matter to fewer and fewer people over time. Because they don't edit the data to make a new objective truth that survives scrutiny, they edit the data to demonstrate their power over data. People referring to the archived data will simply be denied access to the conversation moving forward; "our opponents keep fighting old battles when the world has moved on". It works. And it will continue to work shockingly well even when the underlying phenomenon asserts itself in ways that are predicted by the archive data. Look at how Florida is torn between climate change denial and the actual reality of sea-level rises affecting the Keys.
• Nukahaha 1y ago
  Who controls the past now controls the future, who controls the present now control the past...
• verisimi 1y ago
  We've seen this before with climategate - people seem to be endlessly editing the historical records.
  • jasonjayr 1y ago
    Historical records, especially pre-record keeping are revised when new techniques and sciences discover better, more reliable ways of interpreting the physical geological evidence left in the world behind us. What is the basis of these revisions?
    • raphaelj 1y ago
      > What is the basis of these revisions? Ideology
      • cluckindan 1y ago
        Money.
        • mlhamel 1y ago
          Stupidity
    • WillAdams 1y ago
      A good example of this is revisions EDIT: of the interpretations :ENDEDIT of historical data: https://www.science.org/content/article/world-1-3%C2%B0c-or-1-5%C2%B0c-warmer-historical-ship-logs-hold-answers https://www.science.org/content/article/world-1-3%C2%B0c-or-... Apparently the Japanese continued using wooden buckets longer than other navies, resulting in Pacific data being skewed.
      • defrost 1y ago
        Closer reading should tell you that no one, no data scientist at least, is rewriting raw historical data - the temperatures recorded in ships logs by various ships are preserved unaltered. What is discussed there is part of all data interpretation, the transfer functions between raw measures of <something> and the inferred values of <interest>.
        • WillAdams 1y ago
          Thank you for that, I have edited my (hasty/poorly-worded) comment.
          • defrost 1y ago
            No drama, as first worded it irked my experience in multichannel geophysical processing; every data source has potential biases, tweaks, scaling, shifts and normalizing applied to get them to best fit and reveal a larger picture. eg: https://www.ga.gov.au/bigobj/GA13928.pdf https://www.ga.gov.au/bigobj/GA13928.pdf as an example of stitching 40 years of survey data collected with a range of different instruments and procedures. In the climate domain the same care is taken to preserve raw data from historic methods, the challenge is syncing data streams that have covariant features (such as matching years against tree patterns from differing logs from a variety of species), in this case logs from a variety of ways of sampling sea water temperature. Glad you took my comment well, no offense was intended :)
  • exe34 1y ago
    Are you referring to "The Trick"?
• TrackerFF 1y ago
  “Every record has been destroyed or falsified, every book rewritten, every picture has been repainted, every statue and street building has been renamed, every date has been altered. And the process is continuing day by day and minute by minute. History has stopped. Nothing exists except an endless present in which the Party is always right.”
  • arethuza 1y ago
    "Who controls the past controls the future. Who controls the present controls the past."
• raphaelj 1y ago
  Meanwhile, according to the IEA, renewables investments exceed those in fossil fuels since +/- 2022 [1], and are expected to be the top electric power generator by 2026 [2]. The Trump administration is basically following Kodak's strategy from the early 00s. -- [1] https://www.iea.org/reports/world-energy-investment-2025/executive-summary https://www.iea.org/reports/world-energy-investment-2025/exe... [2] https://www.eco-business.com/news/iea-renewables-will-be-worlds-top-power-source-by-2026/ https://www.eco-business.com/news/iea-renewables-will-be-wor...
  • i_am_proteus 1y ago
    Kodak in the early 2010s, maybe? Eastman Kodak (the spun-off film business) in the 2020s has been more or less stable. They even brought a discontinued film (E100) back. Production and pricing are now in line with the limited demand from film studios and hobbyists.
    • raphaelj 1y ago
      Made a typo, I meant 00s. I edited it, thanks :)
  • seydor 1y ago
    That can be fixed with absurd tarriffs on PVs
  • xorcist 1y ago
    At least they don't follow Kodak's strategy from the late 10s, with KodakCoin. Oh, wait.
• throw9349494 1y ago
  > undermine the scientific consensus on human-caused global warming. Perhaps they should write "wide", "100%" or "unquestionable" concensus. I feel not using proper adjectives is undermining this consensus!
  • nlitened 1y ago
    Consensus is not a scientific thing, it’s a political thing
• mnmalst 1y ago
  Sorry for not being more eloquent about it but: You can't make this shit up.
  • jacquesm 1y ago
    You don't have to, you're living it.
• ManBeardPc 1y ago
  Ironically climate will also rewrite the US and the rest of the world in return. More so that we are losing several important years because the US as a big contributor is now governed by complete climate deniers. Currently having the hottest summer so far, but coolest summer we will see at the same time is something I hoped to never experience.
  • softwaredoug 1y ago
    I’m not sure the US matters as much as other economies. And our emissions peaked around 2005 and continues to decline. We will still continue to reduce emissions in the next few years because old energy sources just are losing economic viability. The US is just choosing to make a huge mistake and not participate in growth markets like clean energy, etc.
    • ManBeardPc 1y ago
      The US matters, it has a big influence and could force companies around the globe to hurry up the transition. Just because the emissions may have peaked a lot of it is just outsourced. Also just reducing is not enough. We already missed important goals. Fossil fuels losing economic viability is a small light at the end of the tunnel. But even that may not help if politic is making bad enough laws.
    • EasyMark 1y ago
      We don't emit as much as China and India now, but we're not small potatoes either. As bad as we consider ourselves, those two countries are worse and due to only increase it for the next 30 years or so. So that may be the only point the climate deniers really have, that any changes we make maybe be irrelevant since we're probably already over the point of criticality and it may become a self-driving cycle of wiping out the environment for the next couple hundred years.
  • Nervhq 1y ago
    Now do China. Four times the emissions of Europe and USA combined with no end in sight. Building 1000 coal power plants over the next two years. But do go on with your usa bashing because that's your actual motivation
• 28304283409234 1y ago
  "We are at war with EastAsia. We have always been at war with EastAsia."
• branko_d 1y ago
  Don't Look Up!
  • nntwozz 1y ago
    Also, Birds Aren't Real! https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birds_Aren't_Real https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birds_Aren't_Real
  • matwood 1y ago
    "If we stopped testing right now, we'd have very few cases, if any"
    • exasperaited 1y ago
      "All new numbers". Honestly I think this stuff goes very under-reported. The world has become so used to anti-intellectualism that simple ignorance in the highest office(s) is now excusable, and criticising it is implicitly cast as political. Which is a state of affairs that can be weaponised. (Lest people think I am sniping at the USA from the UK, I'd observe that we as a nation were bounced into a monumental decision by a series of politicians who flatly refused to make their numbers add up when challenged)
      • matwood 1y ago
        > Honestly I think this stuff goes very under-reported. It's not under-reported generally, it's that a large portion of the population only watches certain news channels that do not report what's going on. That's why the Epstein case is such a big issue for Trump, because it's been pushed so hard by the news his supporters watch. They don't care about the blatant corruption on a scale never seen because they don't know about it. But Epstein is a foundational MAGA conspiracy.
        • exasperaited 1y ago
          By underreported, I don't mean "nobody mentions it when it happens" in the sense of news reporting. What I mean is, there is no really deep reporting on what it means in terms of long-form journalism. And I mean this internationally and apolitically. There is very little serious discussion about what scientific, technological and economic illiteracy means when it is found in positions of power, and why it is that the new orthodoxy is simply to resist correction. We have these discussions (belatedly) about judges and lawyers, especially in the light of the Post Office scandal in the UK (and in relation to the Lucy Letby trial, where there appears to have been a simple, astonishing agreement between the prosecution and the defence to not use statistics). But we do not talk enough about how leaders on all sides are content to keep pushing the same uncorrected points, again and again, and it's not disqualifying. Politicians can simply choose not to "recognise" the correction, to use the parliamentary term, and that is sort of where it stops. I do think the Epstein story is interesting because it is one of those things where perhaps the base understands that someone in office has lied to them, regardless, because the story directly contradicts itself now. But I think it's survivable. If he doesn't complete this term it won't be the reason given, at any rate; his very obvious cognitive and physical decline will be.
• throwaway_trump 1y ago
  [dead]
  • Hikikomori 1y ago
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/It_Can%27t_Happen_Here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/It_Can%27t_Happen_Here
    • xtracto 1y ago
      >The novel describes the rise of Berzelius "Donald" Windrip, a demagogue who is elected President of the United States, after fomenting fear and promising drastic economic and social reforms while promoting a return to patriotism and "traditional" values. After his election, Windrip takes complete control of the government via self-coup and imposes totalitarian rule with the help of a ruthless paramilitary force [ICE], in the manner of European fascists such as Adolf Hitler and Benito Mussolini. The novel's plot centers on journalist Doremus Jessup's opposition to the new regime and his subsequent struggle against it as part of a liberal rebellion. Edited for LOLs...
      • os2warpman 1y ago
        > The novel's plot centers on journalist Doremus Jessup's opposition to the new regime Here in the real world, the number of professional journalists who would stick their necks out and risk losing access or a paycheck to "fight the powahhh" is exactly and precisely zero. It is, however, a supremely self-righteous profession full of people who THINK they would... As far as a liberal rebellion goes, they're too busy dividing themselves over foreign matters they have absolutely no chance of changing or even slightly influencing to even the tiniest degree to see that they are letting themselves be fucked. Russia and Iran spending a tiny amount of money and other peoples' lives was the best investment they ever made and the only smart one of the last decade.
  • throwaway4496 1y ago
    This is the tragedy of empires, "how could it fall?" until it is done.
• jacquesm 1y ago
  "For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." Feynman -- In this case, nature will not just not be fooled, it will extract retribution, unfortunately also on those that weren't fooled in the first place.
  • throwaway4496 1y ago
    Nature has no feelings, there will be no retribution, things will work out just fine, it will just be tough for us, maybe even wiped out, but nature will prevail. life will find a way, look at places where humans get excluded, everything regenerates. It is not a crises of nature, it is a crises of habitat for us as species, and a bunch of other like us.
    • simiones 1y ago
      "Save the planet? The planet's fine - it's us that are fucked." -- George Carlin
      • KingOfCoders 1y ago
        Yes, I always found environmental protection kind of funny, nature does not need protection, it will survive until Earth becomes finally uninhabitable [0], it's us that might not make it that long if we don't take enough care. [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_the_far_future https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_the_far_future
        • js8 1y ago
          What we call environmentalism is actually 5 different concerns: - human health, pollution - preservation of natural resources useful for humans - preservation of biodiversity, nature in its original state - concern for animal suffering - aesthetic concern for human habitat These things typically overlap, but sometimes they even contradict.
        • wffurr 1y ago
• jfengel 1y ago
  The study questioned whether heat records are truly increasing and whether extreme weather is worsening. I thought we were past that. I thought that it was now about questioning whether it was human caused, or the size of the impact. Apparently we really are going back, and revisiting basic arithmetic.
  • aeroman 1y ago
    I would say we are largely past the second threshold too (that the warming is human caused). The last IPCC report had as the first statement in the summary for policymakers (from WG1 - the physical science group) A.1 It is unequivocal that human influence has warmed the atmosphere, ocean and land. Widespread and rapid changes in the atmosphere, ocean, cryosphere and biosphere have occurred. The previous report (from 2013) only said (and much further in) Human influence on the climate system is clear. This is evident from the increasing greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere, positive radiative forcing, observed warming, and understanding of the climate system. The equivalent statement from AR4 (2007) was The understanding of anthropogenic warming and cooling influences on climate has improved since the TAR, leading to very high confidence that the global average net effect of human activities since 1750 has been one of warming, ... You could argue there is more of a question about what to do about it (e.g. try and mitigate climate change or just pay for the damanges). There is pretty good evidence at this point that mitigating the change through reducing CO2 emissions is a lot cheaper and comes with a host of other benefits (energy security, improved public health), but I can see wherer there might be arguments to have about this.
    • cloverich 1y ago
      OP is talking about people who reject climate change. If you know many, youll likely note most do not deny climate change but instead deny that it is man made, which is an easier delusion to maintain.
      • fc417fc802 1y ago
        It depends on which subset we're talking about though. Some are quite well educated and (IME) lately have taken the position that sure, it's happening and sure, it's human caused but that mitigation is far too expensive and economically disruptive to justify. Thus that we should simply let things run their course and deal with any fallout as necessary.
• croes 1y ago
  The sad part is it’s not only the US. In many countries this kind of denial brings more votes than reality and science
• thunfischtoast 1y ago
  "Then they went back to the barn, and there, sure enough, painted on the wall, it said: 'No animal shall sleep in a bed with sheets.' And underneath, in slightly smaller letters, it said: 'Sheets are a human invention.'"
• tornikeo 1y ago
  I'm thankful for the US administration to truly give other countries a chance to come forward and something good, and take the center stage. But, as good as that opportunity is, I'm afraid the 3 years this administration has left wouldn't be enough to fully disassemble the US advantage. :)
  • gschizas 1y ago
    It seems you might be too optimistic here. I doubt Trumpism will end with Trump.
    • rsynnott 1y ago
      In general, hard climate change denial as an ideology is only _really_ a thing in states that produce a lot of oil (or, specifically in the case of Australia, coal), and not all of them (notably it never caught on to any great degree in Norway). It's really very much motivated reasoning, and even Trump-esque movements outside the US generally don't push it too hard.
    • exasperaited 1y ago
      A fair assessment but then it didn't start with Trump either, really. He just exploited a renewable resource the most efficiently so far. Charles Coughlin and before him the Know Nothings did the same. Anti-intellectual illiberalism is a fundamental strain of US political belief.
• nntwozz 1y ago
  “I seek not to know the answers, but to understand the questions.” — Confucius
• ttiurani 1y ago
  As am environmentalist, I've talked to many people not living in the US who are losing hope on humanity because of this kind of constant stream of news coming out of the US. I understand how it happens, but I'd hope people understood that Trump's USA is not the world. Just like people in general know not to extrapolate what Putin's administration is doing in Russia, they need to be able to do the same for the USA. At the moment, in my opinion, both administrations are lost causes, and you can just choose to follow, support and advocate many other positive signals around the world.
  • hshdhdhj4444 1y ago
    Social media is overwhelming and dominated by the U.S. A lot of people in countries that are making positive steps are losing hope unnecessarily because of this. The U.S. is 25% of the world economy and declining. Growing economies are ripe for growing with more climate friendly policies, not just because of the environmental impact (both from an AGW and local environmental perspective) but because of energy security and sovereignty perspectives, but also to reduce dependence on the petro-dollar.
    • ethbr1 1y ago
      Even absent US involvement, getting China and India away from oil and coal is critical. https://ourworldindata.org/energy/country/china#what-sources-does-the-country-get-its-energy-from https://ourworldindata.org/energy/country/china#what-sources... https://ourworldindata.org/energy/country/india#what-sources-does-the-country-get-its-energy-from https://ourworldindata.org/energy/country/india#what-sources... China is decreasing the percentage of fossil fuels in its total mix over the last 15 years (while still growing total energy generation). India... less so.
      • AlecSchueler 1y ago
        Without US involvement we lose a lot of our ability to pressure others to do it.
        • 1y ago
• KingOfCoders 1y ago
  With rewritten histories and a fictional past - "Master Race", New Model Army, 1986
• vdupras 1y ago
  A few new facts we'll see pop up: 1. There has always been town-destroying wildfires every summer. It's always been like that. 2. It has always been the case that AC units were necessary for a human to survive an american summer. I mean, look at native americans, they always had AC units! 3. Los Angeles always flash flooded 10 feet up across every summer. 4. America has always been at war with Canada. 5. Wildfire smoke across the sky for the whole damn summer? Always been thus. What do you mean, blue?
• Havoc 1y ago
  Doctored Epstein vid. Inflation data full of estimates. Firing the guy that delivered bad job data. Shutting down monitoring satellites. Releasing modified constitutions. Now this …US really is going all in on detaching from reality
  • exasperaited 1y ago
    In the normal world, once you hitch yourself to a single implausible claim, you're bound by circumstance to try to keep it in line with reality, by making a series of supporting claims that inevitably build on weaker and weaker ground. One of the problems honest people have understanding habitual liars is that they think liars are always incentivised to try to keep their lies plausible within a world of shared truth -- that they will always ultimately be caught out. Hence the idea that the coverup is always worse than the crime. Everyone thinks the domino run of implausible claims ends with the liar being caught out when one lie does not move things on for the liar. But in systems of power, in fact, there comes a point where it doesn't really matter whether something you're saying is true, it just matters that you say enough things that people get caught up trying to make them make sense and are distracted from what you are doing. The dominos just keep falling forever. This isn't new at all: one of the most influential men in Russian politics, Vladislav Surkov, absolutely learned to weaponise theatrical untruth in this way: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vladislav_Surkov https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vladislav_Surkov And there have long been fears that Surkov's techniques were infecting the West (through Hungary, Turkey etc.) The problem is people simply don't want to believe, at any deep level, that these people lie for the sake of it, when in fact they clearly do. And they get caught up on the idea that since decent people think being caught lying is shameful, liars will always feel shame when caught out. Once you understand that they do not, you can understand that any given lie may not be told to hide a specific misdeed; it may simply be told to add to the haze of untruth that allows the liar to go about their business.
  • RGamma 1y ago
    Ex falso quodlibet.
• miroljub 1y ago
  [flagged]
  • exasperaited 1y ago
    Should the data not also reflect that there are more urban areas? I mean, if you raze the Amazon rainforest the honest thing is not to move the weather stations to the remaining bits that still self-regulate temperature.
    • miroljub 1y ago
      It depends on what you want to measure. Big cities are hotter than small are hotter than villages are hotter than forests. If you wish to show that baseline temperature increases, you let more measuring stations in urban areas. If you intend to compare apples with apples, you must consider the kind of location where your measuring station is. It's like bringing more and more Hobbits to Gondor, and then complaining that an average height of the Gondorian citizens decreased over time. But did the height of an ethnic Gondorian really decrease?
      • CorrectHorseBat 1y ago
        This is taken into account.
• Keyframe 1y ago
  Well, that's evil? It's deliberate so it can't be stupid. What else is there to say.
  • AlecSchueler 1y ago
    They're not stupid. They're evil. We can't rely on them failing because they're stupid, we need to fight against them because they're evil.
    • 1659447091 1y ago
      > They're evil. Malignant/Malicious/Malevolent yes -- absolutely; not evil -- not yet.
      • AlecSchueler 1y ago
        ?? Why not, where are you drawing that line? You say "yet" as if you at least recognise they're headed that way but the definition issue is still a formality.
        • 1659447091 1y ago
          Looking closely, they are pushing and testing the bounds of the system*. Our system works slowly enough (a design feature) that we only hear the actions of the testing and boundaries and they make sure thats all we hear all the time (by design, they want people in fear and anger so they can harness that and use it to fuel their support in manipulative ways; +sleight of hand, grifting etc). What we don't hear being shouted from the same people are the parts being reverted; for example, they say they can't and won't bring back people they illegally deported to a 3rd county prison. Yet people are being brought back; things are working/making their way through the system. Thats the line. We still have a system and it is working as intended. Evil is getting rid of the system, complete shattering so that the institutions of our republic cease to exist -- not by cohesion [I meant coercion but cohesion/falling in line too] or party politics/domination, but complete cessation. Where there are no non-violent options to course correct by the people. We still have that. For now. This is not the first time this country has gone through these types of challenges. It is the first in which so many people are aware of it and being used to fuel it and fuel fear at such a large scale (a method of control). They (current people causing the commotion) want the people who do not support them to be so angry and emotionally exhausted that they will stop resisting administrations efforts. As a lover of history [edit to help the unhinged llm bot that has blessed my comment: love of reading history], I still believe in this country and that we will get through it together. Like we have many, many times before. *It's like a caricature of a teenager that harms small animals. Not all of them turn into serial killers, sometimes that's all it is. Right now they are the teenagers harming small animals phase.
• jmclnx 1y ago
  The instruction manual called "1984" arrived forty years late. But the insurance companies are in the know. House insurance rates are raising a lot in many at risk states and areas. Just heard Texas joined that fun. So seems capitalists involved with insurance and finance know the real facts.
• misja111 1y ago
  Does anybody know where I can find a copy of the new report? I'd be interested to read what arguments they came up with.
  • aeroman 1y ago
    I think this is the one https://www.energy.gov/sites/default/files/2025-07/DOE_Critical_Review_of_Impacts_of_GHG_Emissions_on_the_US_Climate_July_2025.pdf https://www.energy.gov/sites/default/files/2025-07/DOE_Criti... It is really just a collection of 'skeptic' arguments form the last 20 years or so. Science magazie had an article about it https://www.science.org/content/article/contrarian-climate-assessment-u-s-government-draws-swift-pushback https://www.science.org/content/article/contrarian-climate-a...
    • jrmg 1y ago
      Last sentence in the executive summary, which I think really does sum up the report: “U.S. policy actions are expected to have undetectably small direct impacts on the global climate and any effects will emerge only with long delays.”
    • Hilift 1y ago
      This is part of the trend of "there needs to be room for opposing views". Similar to when JD Vance visited Europe in February and scolded the EU on not suppressing views from elements such as AfD, which is essentially East Germany in every demographic. When asked about the Indian Removal Act, President Andrew Jackson stated that if he had not taken the action, the native peoples would have been wiped out. Effectively he was saving them from genocide. "According to historian H. W. Brands, Jackson sincerely believed that his population transfer was a "wise and humane policy" that would save the Native Americans from "utter annihilation". Jackson portrayed the removal as a paternalistic act of mercy." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_Removal_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_Removal_Act https://www.npr.org/2025/02/15/nx-s1-5298683/jd-vance-afd-germany-olaf-scholz-musk https://www.npr.org/2025/02/15/nx-s1-5298683/jd-vance-afd-ge...
    • Joeri 1y ago
      Another take from a climate researcher on how the DOE report misrepresents (their) science: https://www.theclimatebrink.com/p/how-the-doe-and-epa-used-and-misused https://www.theclimatebrink.com/p/how-the-doe-and-epa-used-a... A coordinated response is being prepared by climate researchers debunking the whole thing, but the news story has already passed so I don’t know whether it will matter.
• throw0101d 1y ago
  “Those who control the present, control the past and those who control the past control the future.” — George Orwell, 1984
  • BenoitP 1y ago
    Now testify!
    • 1659447091 1y ago
      Rage Against the Machine[0] delivers it best & very fitting so many quotes in this thread (and thanks for the 90/00 playlist for the day) [0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q3dvbM6Pias https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q3dvbM6Pias
      • throw0101d 1y ago
        > Rage Against the Machine[0] delivers it best & very fitting Not really: this false equivalence between Democrats and GOP (especially their recent incarnation) is absolutely delusional. Contrast Obama, Trump 1.0, Biden, Trump 2.0 (so far). Like really? > [0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q3dvbM6Pias https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q3dvbM6Pias With a few decades worth of hind sight, does anyone actually think that Gore would have handled 9/11 (leading into Afghanistan and Iraq) the same was as Bush (and Cheney/Rumsfeld/Wolfowitz)? Even at the time (I'm a GenXer) it was strange thinking.
        • 1659447091 1y ago
          > Not really: this false equivalence between Democrats and GOP (especially their recent incarnation) is absolutely delusional. You may be more interested in reading the lyrics than watching the video, the song is not about "equivalence between Democrats and GOP". It's about the powerful who control the media and how the media is used to control the narrative. (some much worse than others) It's not only about <media bad>, but also how the American people (already with an insatiable searching for satisfaction in movies, glamour and tabloids) have become slaves to it [all media/types]; glaringly obvious today vs the 2000s as media heads have gained cult status in parts, to the point of earning government appointments only this cohort would be able to appoint and not get laughed out of office. Those who control the narrative controls the present, who controls the past -- controls the future. To bring it full circle, fitting in that rewritting reports is controlling the narrative; similar to firing a messenger of statistics I fully agree with you, it was strange thinking; and if we're drawing parallels -- interesting how real election scandals led to GOP presidents. [scotus/hanging chads & Mueller report] Oh, and the "delivers it best" part is biased as I like Rage; they deliver the line better than reading it imo
• evrennetwork 1y ago
  [dead]
• softwaredoug 1y ago
  I largely ignore this and just look around the world at the remarkable, sudden success of green energy and electric vehicles. We may solve the root of the problem while Republicans still call it a hoax. (It’s mostly a sad statement now about US ceding a huge growth area for its industrial base here.)
  • noobermin 1y ago
    I'm not in America anymore. But my general feeling jn America would be a sense of dread at being left behind.
    • softwaredoug 1y ago
      Yes except for Silicon Valley and finance, we are giving up any chance of market leadership in these areas. Ironically if we wanted manufacturing jobs we’d focus on growth areas. Our energy and automobile companies will suffer longer term by being able to hold onto old, not economically viable ways of doing things until the bitter end.
  • Barrin92 1y ago
    People will drive Chinese electric cars, while the US pulls up an Iron Curtain, people drive 30 year old diesel trucks and closes the universities down. What's next, a down to the countryside movement, everyone has to do five years of hard farm labor in Iowa?
    • softwaredoug 1y ago
      Yes it’s horrible for US economic leadership and IMO is less about climate change and more about US willful ignorance sacrificing market leadership.
    • e40 1y ago
      Probably the only way crops will be picked,after the wall goes up
• m000 1y ago
  Coming up next: US to rewrite its past laws of physics.
  • thrance 1y ago
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indiana_pi_bill https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indiana_pi_bill
• mrtksn 1y ago
  This is weird, it will cement climate change skepticism as crazy fascist thing unless it's followed by high-quality convincing body of work that discredit the current climate change work done globally. I wonder if that part will follow because it is possible to follow to some extent as it is very likely that there are plenty of low quality works done on the matter. They need to be right about fraud in climate change research only once and the climate change research needs to be right %100 of the time and they need to have had communicated that correctly %100 of the time. They will have some worst case scenarios or oversimplifications and predictions that did not come to be true in obviously demonstrable way. It will be tough. Regardless, this wouldn't mean much for EU, China, Japan and other fossil energy importing countries as with the Russian invasion of Ukraine this has become a matter of national security and not just some hippie ideal. It doesn't make sense anymore to drop clean and renewable energy even if the Trump administration proves that releasing smoke is the healthiest thing ever and helps with increasing the penis size. So they are going to re-write history to fuel some ideology, as the fossils were to be extracted anyway.
  • js8 1y ago
    I actually suspect once China moves to full electrification, they will become more demanding to other countries about climate goals. Geographically, they're in a tight spot so they have a big stake in mitigating climate change. EU is also somewhat pushing with more aggressive carbon pricing.
  • piva00 1y ago
    > So they are going to re-write history to fuel some ideology, as the fossils were to be extracted anyway. There's no ideology, you have it reversed, it's always about money. The oil industry is a huge donor of funds and spend 8-10x more on lobbying conservative politicians. The ideology is tacked on top of the money to justify the donations, and for their voters to gobble it up and repeat the lines as if rolling coal would be an ode to freedom.
• claiir 1y ago
  > Asked by CNN's Kaitlan Collins why previous editions of the National Climate Assessment were no longer available online, former fracking company CEO Wright responded [..] lol
• jacknews 1y ago
  War is peace Freedom is slavery Ignorance is strength
• rs186 1y ago
  Well, now that they can rewrite the constitution (although symbolically), rewriting previous reports isn't such a big deal by comparison.
• ChrisRR 1y ago
  And scientists who need the actual data will ignore the revised versions and just read the originals with the data they need
  • IYasha 1y ago
    While "rewrite" usually means source deletion, let us hope in material world originals will remain. )
• reustle 1y ago
  On a similar note, does anyone notice the issue of most official temperature readings in different climates often reading 5+C lower than what is actually observed locally?
  • jemmyw 1y ago
    If an official reading is an average over an area or over a time period then it'll always be lower than the peak observed temperature. It doesn't matter so long as it is consistent.
• kdavis 1y ago
  Despite a significant number of up votes in a short amount of time (174 in 1 hour as of this comment a comment to time ratio higher than anything on the front page) this got moved off the front page. Suspicious.
• treetalker 1y ago
  <Trump closes and covers his eyes> "I'm invisible and you can't see me!" Pair with the rewriting of Bureau of Labor Statistics data to fit his desired narrative / alternative reality: https://www.nytimes.com/2025/08/07/us/politics/trump-new-economic-numbers.html?unlocked_article_code=1.ck8.08e2.a75oBWRhYbXg&smid=url-share https://www.nytimes.com/2025/08/07/us/politics/trump-new-eco...
  • cindyllm 1y ago
    [dead]
• jaybrendansmith 1y ago
  “Every record has been destroyed or falsified, every book rewritten, every picture has been repainted, every statue and street building has been renamed, every date has been altered. And the process is continuing day by day and minute by minute. History has stopped. Nothing exists except an endless present in which the Party is always right.”
• throawaywpg 1y ago
  Can't wait for the re-rewrite in a few years