3 ms·
> ... “removal of all in-water infrastructure” belonging to the Ocean Observatories Initiative at sites along the coasts of Oregon, Washington, Alaska, and Nort
by x-complexity 4mo ago
> ... “removal of all in-water infrastructure” belonging to the Ocean Observatories Initiative at sites along the coasts of Oregon, Washington, Alaska, and North Carolina, and in the waters between Greenland and Iceland.
...Why is Europe reliant on the US for monitoring oceans between Greenland & Iceland, i.e within European territory & therefore European monitoring? Shouldn't they have their own infra to work from?
- armada651 4mo agoThat stretch of ocean is closer to Canada than it is to mainland Europe.
- x-complexity 4mo agoAll the more reason as to why it should be Canada monitoring that portion of the ocean.
- yoyohello13 4mo agoWhat should we be spending tax money on? The only thing this admin seems interested in paying for is killing Iranians and paying off J6th protesters.
- x-complexity 4mo agoThe tax money shouldn't have been collected in the first place. It should've stayed with the people.
- armada651 4mo agoThen stop using the roads and everything else that tax money paid for. If you keep using things that's been paid for using taxes the government will only feel more entitled to collect it.
- Starman_Jones 4mo agoThey aren’t. The US built monitoring infrastructure there because it’s our project, and that’s where the science needs to happen. It’s the same reason that many more countries than just Argentina built the Pierre Auger observatory, or that the Vatican built the Pope Scope in Arizona.