A
Trump presidency, if it eventuates could take the world back to Year
Zero. Would a Hillary presidency that lies and pretends to be doing
something be any different.
No
doubt whatever transpires America will have the worst president ever.
Scientists
are frantically copying U.S. climate data, fearing it might vanish
under Trump
13
December, 2016
Alarmed
that decades of crucial climate measurements could vanish under a
hostile Trump administration, scientists have begun a feverish
attempt to copy reams of government data onto independent servers in
hopes of safeguarding it from any political interference.
The
efforts include a “guerrilla
archiving”
event in Toronto, where experts will copy irreplaceable
public data, meetings at the University of Pennsylvania focused
on how to download as much federal data as possible in the coming
weeks, and a collaboration of scientists and database experts who are
compiling anonline
site to
harbor scientific information.
“Something
that seemed a little paranoid to me before all of a sudden seems
potentially realistic, or at least something you’d want to hedge
against,” said Nick Santos, an environmental researcher at the
University of California at Davis, who over the weekend began
copying government climate data onto a nongovernment server, where it
will remain available to the public. “Doing this can only be a good
thing. Hopefully they leave everything in place. But if not, we’re
planning for that.”
In
recent weeks, President-elect Donald Trump has nominated a growing
list of Cabinet members who have questioned the overwhelming
scientific consensus around global warming. His transition team at
the Department of Energy has asked
agency officials for names of employees and contractors who
have participated in international climate talks and worked on the
scientific basis for Obama administration-era regulations of carbon
emissions. One Trump adviser suggested that NASA no
longer should conduct climate research and
instead should focus on space exploration
Those
moves have stoked fears among the scientific community that Trump,
who has called the notion of man-made climate change “a hoax” and
vowed to reverse environmental policies put in place by President
Obama, could try to alter or dismantle parts of the federal
government’s repository of data on everything from rising sea
levels to the number of wildfires in the country.
Michael
Halpern, deputy director of the Center for Science and Democracy at
the advocacy group Union of Concerned Scientists, argued that Trump
has appointed a “band of climate conspiracy theorists” to run
transition efforts at various agencies, along with nominees to lead
them who share similar views.
“They
have been salivating at the possibility of dismantling federal
climate research programs for years. It’s not unreasonable to think
they would want to take down the very data that they dispute,”
Halpern said in an email. “There is a fine line between being
paranoid and being prepared, and scientists are doing their best to
be prepared. . . . Scientists are right to preserve data and
archive websites before those who want to dismantle federal climate
change research programs storm the castle.”
To
be clear, neither Trump nor his transition team have said the new
administration plans to manipulate or curtail publicly available
data. The transition team did not respond to a request for comment.
But some scientists aren’t taking any chances.
“What
are the most important .gov climate assets?” Eric Holthaus, a
meteorologist and self-proclaimed “climate hawk,” tweeted from
his Arizona home Saturday evening. “Scientists: Do you have a US
.gov climate database that you don’t want to see disappear?”
Within
hours, responses flooded in from around the country. Scientists added
links to dozens of government databases to a Google spreadsheet.
Investors offered to help fund efforts to copy and safeguard key
climate data. Lawyers offered pro bono legal help. Database experts
offered server space and help organizing mountains of data. In
California, Santos began building an online repository to “make
sure these data sets remain freely and broadly accessible.”
Climate
data from NASA and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration have been politically vulnerable. When Tom Karl,
director of the National Centers for Environmental Information, and
his colleagues published a study in 2015 seeking to challenge the
idea that there had been a global warming “slowdown” or “pause”
during the 2000s, they relied, in significant part, on updates to
NOAA’s ocean temperature data set, saying the data “do not
support the notion of a global warming ‘hiatus.’”
In
response, the U.S. House Science, Space and Technology Committee
chair, Rep. Lamar S. Smith (R-Tex.), tried to subpoena the scientists
and their records.
That
effort launched by Holthaus is one of several underway to preserve
key federal scientific data.
In
Philadelphia, researchers at the University of Pennsylvania, along
with members of groups such as Open Data Philly and the software
company Azavea, have been meeting to figure out ways to harvest and
store important data sets.
At
the University of Toronto this weekend, researchers are holding what
they call a “guerrilla archiving” event to catalogue key federal
environmental data ahead of Trump’s inauguration. The event “is
focused on preserving information and data from the Environmental
Protection Agency, which has programs and data at high risk of being
removed from online public access or even deleted,” the organizers
said. “This includes climate change, water, air, toxics programs.
The
event is part of a broader effort to help San Francisco-based
Internet Archive with its End of Term 2016 project, an effort by
university, government and nonprofit officials to find and archive
valuable pages on federal websites. The project has existed through
several presidential transitions.
At
the American Geophysical Union’s fall meeting in San Francisco,
where more than 20,000 earth and climate scientists have swarmed the
city’s biggest conference center this week, an air of gallows humor
marked many conversations. Some young scientists said their biggest
personal concern is funding for their research, much of which relies
on support from NASA and other agencies.
“You
just don’t know what’s coming,” said Adam Campbell, who studies
the imperiled Ross Ice Shelf of Antarctica.
But
others also arrived at the meeting with a strengthened sense of
resolve. Campbell was planning to join hundreds of other people at a
rally Tuesday, organized in part by the activist group
ClimateTruth.org, encouraging researchers to “stand up for
science.” “People have felt a call to arms,” Campbell said. “We
need to be outspoken.”
Lawyers
with the Climate Science Legal Defense Fund — which provides legal
assistance to researchers facing lawsuits over their work on climate
change — will be holding one-on-one consultations with researchers
who think they might need help from a lawyer. And the organization’s
table in the AGU exhibition hall is piled high with booklets titled
“Handling Political Harassment and Legal Intimidation: A Pocket
Guide for Scientists.”
“We
literally thought about it the day after the election,” said Lauren
Kurtz, the legal defense fund’s executive director. “I have
gotten a lot of calls from scientists who are really concerned. . . .
So it’s intended in some ways to be reassuring, to say, ‘There is
a game plan; we’re here to help you.’”
The
16-page guide contains advice for government researchers who believe
their work is being suppressed, as well as how scientists should
react if they receive hate mail or death threats.
Holthaus,
who encouraged scientists to flag key databases, said the effort to
safeguard them is mostly precautionary.
“I
don’t actually think that it will happen,” he said of efforts by
an incoming administration to obscure or alter scientific data. “But
I think it could happen. . . . All of these data sets are
priceless, in the sense that if there is a gap, it greatly diminishes
their usefulness.”
That’s
the main concern for Andrew Dessler, a professor of atmospheric
sciences at Texas A&M University. He said he doubts that even the
most hostile administration would try to do away with existing
climate data, given the potential backlash.
“I
think it’s much more likely they’d try to end the collection of
data, which would minimize its value. Having continuous data is
crucial for understanding long-term trends,” Dessler said. “Trends
are what climate change is about — understanding these long-term
changes. Think about how much better off the people who don’t want
to do anything about climate change would be if all the long-term
temperature trends didn’t exist.”
He
added, “If you can just get rid of the data, you’re in a stronger
position to argue we should do nothing about climate change.”
The
Department of Energy said Tuesday it will reject the request by
President-elect Donald
Trump’s
transition team to name staffers who worked on climate change
programs.
Energy
spokesman Eben Burnhan-Snyder said the agency received “significant
feedback” from workers regarding a questionnaire from the
transition team that leaked last week.
“Some
of the questions asked left many in our workforce unsettled,”
Snyder said.
The
survey for department leadership included
more than 70 questions regarding what the agency does, its workforce,
costs, professional affiliations and more.
But
it also asked for a list of employees who worked on various climate
change priorities in President Obama’s administration, including
the Paris climate agreement and the social cost of carbon, an
accounting measure for the costs of climate change.
That
led to fears that Trump’s administration was undertaking a “witch
hunt” to single out those workers.
“We
are going to respect the professional and scientific integrity and
independence of our employees at our labs and across our department,”
Burnham-Snyder said in the Tuesday statement, first reported by The
Washington Post.
“We
will be forthcoming with all publicly-available information with the
transition team. We will not be providing any individual names to the
transition team.”
The
head of the union for workers at the Energy Department's Washington
headquarters had also expressed concern with the questionnaire.
“My
members are upset and have questions about what this means. These are
all civil servants who do their jobs,” Tony Reardon, national
president of the National Treasury Employees Union, said in a
statement.
“They
have no wish to be caught up in political winds — they are
nonpartisan employees — scientists, engineers, statisticians,
economists and financial experts — who were hired for their
knowledge and they bring their talent and experience to the job every
day,” he said, adding that the union “will do all it can to
ensure that merit system rules are followed.”
Laws
and regulations regarding civil service workers make it illegal to
fire or punish workers for political purposes, even when an
administration changes.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.