Jim, Please don't send personal copies of things that are also posted to the list.
Thanks Ray Jim Torson wrote: > http://climateprogress.org/2007/06/04/hansen-replies-to-his-critics-bluntly/ > > > * Hansen Replies to his Critics Bluntly > > <http://climateprogress.org/2007/06/04/hansen-replies-to-his-critics-bluntly/>* > > hansenpic.jpg > <http://climateprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2007/06/hansenpic.jpg> > > > Last week, NASA administrator Michael Griffin made some inane comments about > climate change on NPR > <http://climateprogress.org/2007/05/31/and-the-moon-is-made-of-green-cheese/>. > > NASA's James Hansen rightly called those remarks " *ignorant and arrogant* > <http://abclocal.go.com/ktrk/story?section=nation_world&id=5354934>." > > Some people told Hansen they thought his remarks were "excessive." Here is > his > no-nonsense reply, which links Griffin's comments and the "massacre" of > NASA's > Earth Science budget : > > 1) Our junior high school English teacher admonished us that 'ignorant' > was > not a derisive word, it means 'uninformed', not 'stupid'. Given that 15 > years ago, under George Bush the elder, the United States (and practically > all other countries in the world) signed and ratified the Framework > Convention on Climate Change, which calls for stabilizing climate, it > seems > that 'ignorant' or 'uninformed' is an appropriate adjective for describing > his remarks. Not to mention all the research results of NASA, other > agencies, the IPCC, etc. > (2) The other word that offended, 'arrogant', was an intentional rebound > of > the adjective Administrator Griffin used for people who suggest that > rapidly > changing climate is a danger. 'Arrogant', it seems to me, fits humans who > ignore destruction of other species when that is convenient, fits the > well-off people and nations who fail to acknowledge their responsibility > for > climate change and thus their greater obligation for actions to mitigate > climate change, and fits especially well those people who choose to remain > ignorant and uninformed. > The significance of the Administrator's remarks is the insight it provides > into the February 2006 massacre of the Earth Science Research and Analysis > budget (which funds NASA support of Earth Science research at universities > as well as NASA Centers, primarily Goddard Space Flight Center), as > discussed [here - a great piece > <http://www.columbia.edu/%7Ejeh1/worldwatch_nov2006.pdf> (JR)]. > This was done via a stealth budgeting maneuver, a 20 percent reduction in > Earth Science R&A funding retroactive to the beginning of the fiscal year, > inserted at the time NASA delivered a mid-fiscal year operating plan to > Congress. By making the reduction retroactive, the about-to-be-released > budget for the next year, the one that Congress pays attention to, > appeared > to show nearly flat funding for Earth Science R&A. > In the same document, the NASA Mission Statement was revised to drop the > first line: "to understand and protect the home planet". The Mission > Statement had been developed by a committee with representation from NASA > Centers and communication with the NASA troops. In contrast, the changes > appeared with the submission of the operating plan, which is a joint > product > of the Administrator and the White House OMB, to Congress, without > consulting or even informing lower levels in the agency. > > An interesting question is: was Congress explicitly informed about these > changes (Earth Science R&A budget and NASA Mission Statement) when the > Administrator presented the spending plan? Is there a record of > proceedings > that would clarify the matter? Does Congress, despite recent public > attention to global warming, really care about the topic, or about the > fact > that a unitary executive is usurping their constitutional authority? > > > > -- Raymond W. Arritt tel +1-515-294-9870 Professor, Department of Agronomy fax +1-515-294-2619 3010 Agronomy Hall, Iowa State University, Ames, Iowa 50011 USA http://www.mesoscale.iastate.edu Unit #02582 (TINLC) ---------------------------------------------------------------- When in doubt, keep it simple. -- Jack Casady --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Global Change ("globalchange") newsgroup. Global Change is a public, moderated venue for discussion of science, technology, economics and policy dimensions of global environmental change. Posts will be admitted to the list if and only if any moderator finds the submission to be constructive and/or interesting, on topic, and not gratuitously rude. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/globalchange -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
