Sunday, November 27, 2016

Dupuis - Documenting Trump's War on Science

This speaks for itself, written by John Dupuis at ScienceBlogs.com it's a partial compilation documenting Trump's War On Science.  I myself believe we (that would be, the science respecting fact-over-faith crowd) need something more, a dedicated website that has the space to document, categorize, catalogue, fact check and followup on the multi-frontal assaults serious science is going to be weathering, or folding to, these next years.    But, this is a good start and hopefully an inspiration for some others to pick up the ball and run with it.  One person can only do so much.  Although for these early days John has put together a pretty collection of important information.

Wake up America, this is not a drill!  The oligarchs want it all and they couldn't care less about you and your needs.  America, it's your move.


By John Dupuis on November 11, 2016, at http://scienceblogs.com

… This time around, I’m going to start a project about science in the new Donald Trump administration. I believe Trump will be terrible for science, technology, the environment and public health. And I intend to document that here. 


Of course, Trump won’t be terrible for science in exactly the same way that Harper was in Canada. For example, he may not target research funding in the same way. On the other hand, the environment may fare much worse and ultimately muzzling may also prove to be a problem. It’s only over the course of the next couple of years that we’ll really and truly get a sense of the implications.

But why wait until we see the share of how exactly Trump is bad for science to start keeping track?

If all these experiences have taught me anything, it’s that librarians may be the only first responders holding the line between America and a raging national pandemic of absolutism. More desperately than ever, we need our libraries now, and all three of their traditional pillars: 1) education, 2) good reading and 3) the convivial refuge of a place apart. In other words, libraries may be the last coal we have left to blow on.

First Responder — Information Division is a role I can live with.

(…)

My small contribution is focusing on the effects the Trump administration will have on science, technology, the environment and public health. (As with my Canadian project, I consider healthcare funding models outside of my scope.)

So let’s get started. I have a few sections to this post. The first will focus on documenting what happened before November 8, 2016. What he said about science and the environment. The second section will focus on commentary in the past few days since the election. The third section will be similar, but focusing on the implications for Canada. The final section will begin documenting actual anti-science actions and policies (yay, we already have a couple!)

Wish me luck. As usual, everyone should feel free to suggest things I’ve missed, either in the comments or privately at dupuisj-at-gmail.com. I’m not attempting to be comprehensive or complete in the commentary I’m picking up, but I do want to attempt to be fairly representative.

Pre-Election Commentary
Apr 2015. Trump Just Invented A New Federal Department by James Barrett  
Apr 2016. Trump vs NHPA  
May 2016. Trump outlines ‘America First’ energy plan by Timothy Cama and Devin Henry
May 2016. Trump vows to undo Obama’s climate agenda in appeal to oil sector by Valerie Volcovici and Emily Stephenson  
Jun 2016. Defending Science in the Age of Trump by Alan Singer
06/02/2016 06:38 am ET | Updated Jun 02, 2016
Sep 2016. The Donald Trump Environmental Scorecard by Christopher Solomon
Sep 2016. What would Trump’s wall mean for wildlife? by Jonathan Sullivan

Post-Election Commentary
Nov 2016. Trump win opens way for China to take climate leadership role by Valerie Volcovici and Sue-Lin Wong
Nov 2016. Trump’s victory shocks international climate negotiations by Chris Mooney and Brady Dennis
Nov 2016. What Will a Trump Presidency Mean for Science? By Laura Geggel and Kacey Deamer

Post-Election Commentary Added November 21, 2016
Nov 2016. Who Will Advise Trump on Science? by Ed Yong
Nov 2016. Global green movement prepares to fight Trump on climate change by Oliver Milman, Michael Slezak, Adam Vaughan
Nov 2016. Trump’s science policy remains unclear by David Kramer

Post-Election Commentary Related to Implications for Canada
Nov 2016. Donald Trump needs a science education by Bob McDonald

And finally, the beginning of the tally of cuts, etc.
Nov 2016. Trump Picks Top Climate Skeptic to Lead EPA Transition by Robin Bravender (and 1, 2, 3, 4)

Some Meta-Commentary Related More to Activism than Directly to Science
Nov 2016. Get Ready to Fight for What Matters by Barbara Fister
Nov 2016. The Way to Stop Trump by David Cole
Nov 2016. Trump Syllabus 2.0 by N. D. B. Connolly and Keisha N. Blain

To repeat. This initial list is quick and very preliminary. Please let me know if there’s anything you think I should include, either in the comments or at dupuisj-at-gmail.com. I’m not attempting to be comprehensive or complete in the commentary I’m picking up, but I do want to attempt to be fairly representative.


I will be updating this master list as time goes by.
By John Dupuis on November 11, 2016

Posted by at
Labels: , , , , ,

1 comment:

citizenschallenge said...


https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/nov/22/nasa-earth-donald-trump-eliminate-climate-change-research
Oliver Milman in New York
Trump to scrap Nasa climate research in crackdown on ‘politicized science’

"... This would mean the elimination of Nasa’s world-renowned research into temperature, ice, clouds and other climate phenomena. Nasa’s network of satellites provide a wealth of information on climate change, with the Earth science division’s budget set to grow to $2bn next year. By comparison, space exploration has been scaled back somewhat, with a proposed budget of $2.8bn in 2017.

Bob Walker, a senior Trump campaign adviser, said there was no need for Nasa to do what he has previously described as “politically correct environmental monitoring”.

“We see Nasa in an exploration role, in deep space research,” Walker told the Guardian. “Earth-centric science is better placed at other agencies where it is their prime mission. ..."

November 27, 2016 at 11:57 AM

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)