3 ms·

> When Renshaw peddled his altitude-suicide theory around the mountain states in 2008, he faced prickly reception. Renshaw heard that Utah's governor at the tim

> When Renshaw peddled his altitude-suicide theory around the mountain states in 2008, he faced prickly reception. Renshaw heard that Utah's governor at the time, Jon Huntsman, was disgusted that the state would fund the anti-Utah research. Huntsman's staff did not respond to a request for comment. You've got to be kidding me. Whether or not Renshaw's theory pans out, it's "disgusting" to me that a governor would hide research just because it interferes with the economy, rather than considering the well-being of his state's inhabitants. If I was a politician and there was research indicating something was (or might be) causing medical problems, I would increase funding to figure out what's going on and look for solutions. The laws of physics don't respect political correctness; you can't just shove them under the rug if it hurts your state's tourism.

js2 12y ago
The NC GOP legislated against recognizing studies on sea level rise. http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/07/03/us-usa-northcarolina-idUSBRE86217I20120703 http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/07/03/us-usa-northcaroli...
- javert 12y ago
  I'm not sure, but I think it would be more accurate to say they decided not to endorse a government panel's study (perhaps contrary to the default custom). Which is actually the correct course of action: the government should neither endorse or denounce scientific studies. Rather, it should be up to real estate investors, insurance companies, homeowners, etc. to decide the level of risk they face from rising water and whether or not they want to take that risk. And they should not all be required to go by the "official" North Carolina projections. That is just silly. They should be allowed to use their own, independent judgement.
001sky 12y ago
I would rather this scientist travel to all of these high-desert westen counties and live there for a year before making his claims. I've spent a lot of time in many of these areas, and this paper seems tone-deaf to common sense. These are harsh environments that are not hospitable to human habitation. Its not rocket science that these are tough places to live. Altitude is about a 3rd order issue. http://nepalitimes.com/news.php?id=2905 http://nepalitimes.com/news.php?id=2905 Its pretty irresponsible to extrapolate that the Nth order element of the environment is the "key issue", however. Thats a vast oversimplification. On the fip side, saying "people living in harsh environments on the edge of society, and with low pay, have sub-average mortality expectations" has so many caveats and banalities it doesn't make for a good Academic paper. I can't blame the governor on that one. I'm pretty sure there is an xckd about this topic somewher.

js2 12y ago

The NC GOP legislated against recognizing studies on sea level rise. http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/07/03/us-usa-northcarolina-idUSBRE86217I20120703 http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/07/03/us-usa-northcaroli...

javert 12y ago
I'm not sure, but I think it would be more accurate to say they decided not to endorse a government panel's study (perhaps contrary to the default custom). Which is actually the correct course of action: the government should neither endorse or denounce scientific studies. Rather, it should be up to real estate investors, insurance companies, homeowners, etc. to decide the level of risk they face from rising water and whether or not they want to take that risk. And they should not all be required to go by the "official" North Carolina projections. That is just silly. They should be allowed to use their own, independent judgement.

001sky 12y ago

I would rather this scientist travel to all of these high-desert westen counties and live there for a year before making his claims. I've spent a lot of time in many of these areas, and this paper seems tone-deaf to common sense. These are harsh environments that are not hospitable to human habitation. Its not rocket science that these are tough places to live. Altitude is about a 3rd order issue. http://nepalitimes.com/news.php?id=2905 http://nepalitimes.com/news.php?id=2905 Its pretty irresponsible to extrapolate that the Nth order element of the environment is the "key issue", however. Thats a vast oversimplification. On the fip side, saying "people living in harsh environments on the edge of society, and with low pay, have sub-average mortality expectations" has so many caveats and banalities it doesn't make for a good Academic paper. I can't blame the governor on that one. I'm pretty sure there is an xckd about this topic somewher.