New Video: Surveilling the Scientists

April 21, 2016

 

supportdarksnowNow is the time to support the 2016 Dark Snow Field campaign. More about that here.

 

UPDATE: Below, a 2015 interview with Michio Kaku PhD, on the future of NASA under climate denier Ted Cruz.

Advertisements

12 Responses to “New Video: Surveilling the Scientists”

  1. painedumonde Says:

    It appears that other parliamentary bodies of the world aren’t the only ones with prostitutes in its ranks. šŸ˜¦


  2. I hope Smith and Barton are keeping their Emails. They will need close scrutiny when the court cases start!

    • skeptictmac57 Says:

      I suspect that self-awareness of their underhanded tactics, has caused them to cover their tracks as much as possible. Nobody is perfect though, and there likely is damning evidence to be found, but what would it take to get that investigation going?

      • dumboldguy Says:

        A Democrat in the White House (not a Socialist retread) and a Democratic majority in the Senate so that power and committee chairmanships would be taken from the Repugnants would be a good start.

        A more liberal-progressive Supreme Court, a redo on Citizen’s United, and campaign finance reform that eliminates dirty money would be nice also. Let’s throw in reform of the redistricting process in the states that allows the Repugnants to seize control of so many state legislatures and governorships.

  3. ubrew12 Says:

    Lamar Smith: “We cut NASA’s budget on Earth Science something like 40% in the last week” Here is where I repeat my ‘tin foil’ claims of the past: Out of ~3,000 payload launches in the last half-century, FIVE have failed due to a fairing mechanism failure. TWO of those failures (of a mechanism not substantially more complicated than your car door, but doubly- and even triply- redundant!) are easily put down to inexperience (an American Space program failure in the 1960s, and S Korea’s FIRST EVER rocket launch). The other three were ALL on Civil ‘Earth Science’ missions: looking down at Earth from Space, and TWO of those THREE were Climate Science related. It is frankly IMPOSSIBLE to produce the BULK (60%) of your fairing mechanism failures on the VANISHINGLY SMALL proportion of payloads dedicated to CIVIL SPACE (not Commercial or Military Space which compose the VAST MAJORITY of all PAYLOADS). Now we have Senator Smith saying he’s cutting NASA’s Earth Science budget by 40%. CLEARLY: according to Lamar Smith, there is a PROFOUND INTEREST in the GOP ranks to prevent CLIMATE PAYLOADS from performing Science from SPACE. Lamar Smith has basically ADMITTED AS MUCH. Put that together with
    1) the compete unlikelihood of a fairing mechanism failure in the first place, and
    2) the ease of FAKING such a failure by anyone with the right access (and a healthy supply of duct tape), and
    2) the statistically impossibility of 40% of those mechanism failures occurring on the vanishingly SMALL fraction of payloads whose purpose is to study Earth’s climate,

    and I AM CRYING FOUL. I’ve worked with Fairing Engineers. These are Good, Solid Engineers: It’s NOT FAIR to weigh them down with a failure they DIDN’T create.

    • dumboldguy Says:

      Move over, gingerbaker! Ubrew has a bigger and better windmill to tilt at, and I’m going to join him (although I’m a “modern” old guy and am going to bring my Barrett M107 .50 to the fray instead of a dopey old lance). OOH-rah and Semper Fi—-Kill ’em all and let God sort ’em out! (Sorry, got pumped a bit).

      We will likely never prove it, of course, because the bad guys are pretty good at hiding their tracks—-or at least the “operatives” that did the deed are—-they are not amateurs

      The morons like Smith, Cruz, Gohmert, and Burton that sling “destroy NASA” BS actually WANT to be discovered and heard—-that’s how they satisfy the fossil fuel interests that have bought them, and the “base” that keeps reelecting them in TX. (What is wrong with the voters in TX anyway, that they keep sending these guys to Washington? And OK as well, with Inhofe?))

      But don’t lose hope. My potential scenario for the “outing” of these people is this:
      1) There is a massive internal debate going on at the company that made the duct tape used to sabotage the fairings.
      2) The marketing geniuses there (who also worked on the “clean coal” and “CO2 is good for us” campaigns) want to capitalize on how well their duct tape worked with slogans like “We blinded NASA” and “We helped keep the bad news about climate change secret” and “If our tape works in space, just imagine….” etc.
      3) Cooler heads at the company prevailed and said, “No—we’d maybe go to jail if anyone found out” (and the bottom line might suffer a bit, although the right wing nuts might buy MORE of their tape). So the issue was buried (they thought).
      4) Some whistle blower or hacker sends copies of all the internal emails to InsideClimateNews, desmogblog, and Chris Mooney at the WashPost and then the SHTF.
      5) Near the end of Hillary Clinton’s second term, the duct tape company signs a “settlement” agreement, admitting no guilt but agreeing to not do again what they didn’t do this time, and pays a “fine” that amounts to 5% of one year’s profit from the duct tape (sales of which have skyrocketed among the folks in TX, OK, and the other “red” states”). Smith, Gohmert, Inhofe , and Burton continue to get reelected.

      (And 2021, 2022, and 2023 set new global high temperature records).

      • ubrew12 Says:

        I know part of the reason I’m posting this, ad nauseum, is because climate crocks graciously gave me a bully pulpit: so its probably NOTHING. But, to be clear: by the time a rocket fairing deploys it is out of the atmosphere, it is in Zero G, and there is no thrust load. There are NO environmental loads against deployment. Get it? Theoretically, you can fail a fairing deployment with a piece of your hair saliva’d into place across the fairing interface. At LEAST when you open the hood on your car it has to act against gravity. THAT doesn’t even apply to a fairing upon deployment. THAT IS WHY there are, statistically, NO payload failures by this mechanism: there is NO WAY they can occur. So I must ask again: how is it that 100% of the payload failures that have EVER occurred by this mechanism (that don’t simply apply to inexperience) apply to the ZERO PERCENT of payloads that are CIVIL Space payloads looking BACK AT EARTH to study some aspect of its Science?

  4. otter17 Says:

    Superb video. This one cuts deep into what has been the stumbling block for the public’s understanding of the science.


  5. One can easily say they are committing crimes against humanity, but who’s going to listen much less believe such accusations.


  6. […] historian Naomi Oreskes plays a role in my most recent video “Surveilling the Scientists” – and I took the opportunity to pull out some more clips from our 2014 interview in San […]


Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: