Hooked on Huskers Posted June 29, 2017 Share Posted June 29, 2017 My daughter ordered to fill up R22 fluid (freon) in home air conditioners unit ....... outrageous price now days for some reasons. Anyway, tech guy said eventually phased out including R22. In other words, illegal, about 3 years or so in the future because ozone depletion thing. Thanks to feds. R410a replacement ...... legal and supposedly friendly environmental issues but R410 and R22 not mixed well at all ...... I think different compressor and copper lines. Best solution: new unit Link to comment
BigRedBuster Posted July 11, 2017 Share Posted July 11, 2017 I have the feeling environmental scientists would LOVE to do this. I wonder if scientists from the EPA and NASA would be allowed to participate. 1 Link to comment
Kiyoat Husker Posted July 11, 2017 Share Posted July 11, 2017 I have the feeling environmental scientists would LOVE to do this. I wonder if scientists from the EPA and NASA would be allowed to participate. I don't like the smell of this. Scientists ALREADY debate one another through the process of peer review of research. Consensus (like the consensus on global climate change) comes about in a lengthy, laborious, process. Some of these scientists that are experts in their fields are also good defending their views orally. Some are not. Creating persuasive arguments to "average" television viewers is more the realm of politicians and lawyers, not scientists. Seems like a set-up. 1 Link to comment
BigRedBuster Posted July 11, 2017 Share Posted July 11, 2017 OH...I agree. It seems like the prefect situations where a bunch of junk science can be thrown out there and all of a sudden a bunch of people latch onto it and never pay attention to the fact checking after it's over. 1 Link to comment
Moiraine Posted July 12, 2017 Author Share Posted July 12, 2017 I think it's a terrible idea. Trump won the election, and a huge number of his claims were made-up bullsh#t. But when someone just spouts bullsh#t endlessly, no amount of data-driven evidence can have an effect in real time. Trump could debate Neil deGrasse Tyson on astrophysics and probably "win" in many people's eyes. When you have a debate it's about who is believed by the largest # of people or even if they don't believe, who is liked by the largest # of people. It's easy to throw lies in as long as they sound good.It's just not a good forum for scientists. If Pruitt wants to do it, it's because he knows this. 2 Link to comment
funhusker Posted July 12, 2017 Share Posted July 12, 2017 The only way I would want to see it happen is if they roll out 100 scientists and it is 97 against 3. But that would probably be a bad idea because a chunk of the public would sympathize with the 3 and feel they are getting picked on. Link to comment
Red Five Posted July 12, 2017 Share Posted July 12, 2017 I have the feeling environmental scientists would LOVE to do this. I wonder if scientists from the EPA and NASA would be allowed to participate. This Steven A/Skip-ization of politics. Ugh 1 Link to comment
Danny Bateman Posted July 12, 2017 Share Posted July 12, 2017 I think it's a terrible idea. Trump won the election, and a huge number of his claims were made-up bullsh#t. But when someone just spouts bullsh#t endlessly, no amount of data-driven evidence can have an effect in real time. Trump could debate Neil deGrasse Tyson on astrophysics and probably "win" in many people's eyes. When you have a debate it's about who is believed by the largest # of people or even if they don't believe, who is liked by the largest # of people. It's easy to throw lies in as long as they sound good. It's just not a good forum for scientists. If Pruitt wants to do it, it's because he knows this. You're absolutely right. In political situations, people don't want to hear facts they don't agree with and realize the error of their ways. They want someone who makes them feel good and reaffirms their preexisting beliefs, even if it's with a bunch of dishonest garbage. Tribalism is badly hurting us as a nation. 2 Link to comment
Moiraine Posted July 12, 2017 Author Share Posted July 12, 2017 https://twitter.com/Pappiness/status/885108487885393921 There's nothing we can do about it or could have done about it knapp, 'cause humans didn't in any way cause it. 1 Link to comment
Danny Bateman Posted July 20, 2017 Share Posted July 20, 2017 Paging r/NotTheOnion... Link to comment
commando Posted July 20, 2017 Share Posted July 20, 2017 Paging r/NotTheOnion... will he have the same answers as the rest of the trump team? 1 Link to comment
zoogs Posted July 20, 2017 Share Posted July 20, 2017 How the Trump WH operates: I am not an accountant — but you don’t have to be one to see that the administration’s excuse for a reassignment such as mine doesn’t add up. A few days after my reassignment, Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke testified before Congress that the department would use reassignments as part of its effort to eliminate employees; the only reasonable inference from that testimony is that he expects people to quit in response to undesirable transfers. Some of my colleagues are being relocated across the country, at taxpayer expense, to serve in equally ill-fitting jobs. I believe I was retaliated against for speaking out publicly about the dangers that climate change poses to Alaska Native communities. During the months preceding my reassignment, I raised the issue with White House officials, senior Interior officials and the international community, most recently at a U.N. conference in June. It is clear to me that the administration was so uncomfortable with this work, and my disclosures, that I was reassigned with the intent to coerce me into leaving the federal government. From that article. https://thinkprogress.org/sam-clovis-officially-nominated-still-not-a-scientist-d47be4ffb1a8 4 Link to comment
Recommended Posts