Writing from Texas from among families and friends with generations of Camp Mystic kids and the rest of us who spent our youth swimming rebelious swims in these Central Texas rivers: the folks, and I include non-human folks from these environs, are talking to us, singing to us, about what they hope we do. Listen.
Trump desires what he calls "Gold standard science". The only problem is that his science defunds NWS, NOAA, the NHC and removes satellite data sets from public access. He and Chip Roy are partners in the Texas disaster
What it unfortunately teaches the rest of the US - is that Texans care more about saving money - than spending money on making sure that their kids are safe; this in a State that is famous for being tight-assed about anything except making money -- anyway they can.
It's always a good idea to link scientific information to a real life situation. Those with children as well as those who were children can relate to this dreadful Texas tragedy and feel motivated to get even more involved. The joy of summer camp makes this story especially painful. What to do about all the conscienceless Chip Roys making all the decisions, tho???
I disagree in part. A well-run society should OPTIMIZE, not minimize or maximize opportunity an risk.
For example in traffic engineering, we identify the cost of least-cost safety measures to avoid (statistically) a traffic death. That value serves as a metric for other safety measures. In general, we don't spend more than that, because for that price we can safe a life. So, for example, lower speed limits DO save lives; but they also eat up time. The optimization lets us trade those off.
The same should be true for other parts of life. Yes, a camp could have one counselor per camper., It could have all of the cabins installed above the biblical high water mark, not just the 1000-year flood mark. They could test every camper every day for deadly diseases. All of that would make camp too expensive, and then parents would have to choose between camp and piano lessons, soccer club dues, or other education enhancements. .
And the same is true for climate action. Yes, hydrogen-powered cars would have advantages over BEV cars. But they cost A LOT MORE to operate. The energy that would make 1 kg of hydrogen to power a Toyota Mirai 100 miles could also charge a Nissan Leaf to go 300 miles. We should optimize our investments. Not minimize or maximize.
If you take all the risk out of life, you take all the life out of life.
Chis Roy's statement, “My belief is that the net positive impact of energy production relative to whatever the question-mark impact is on CO2 (carbon dioxide), to me, comes out very much on the positive.” is a great example of the difference between science and belief. First, he states that it's _his_ belief that he's acting on in setting policy for everyone. He's firmly in the belief camp, with no understanding of the science that determines the environment in which the belief camp. The laws of science - physics, chemistry, biology, geology, hydrology, climatology - are going to rule over any "belief" that he may have. Science doesn't care.
There is room for faith and doubt in science. We see both of these in the analyses of data when we discuss error. Roy does not exist in this realm. The opposite of faith is certainty, and that's where he rests his beliefs.
Writing from Texas from among families and friends with generations of Camp Mystic kids and the rest of us who spent our youth swimming rebelious swims in these Central Texas rivers: the folks, and I include non-human folks from these environs, are talking to us, singing to us, about what they hope we do. Listen.
You, one of the very best voices for the love of 🌎 earth.
Trump desires what he calls "Gold standard science". The only problem is that his science defunds NWS, NOAA, the NHC and removes satellite data sets from public access. He and Chip Roy are partners in the Texas disaster
What it unfortunately teaches the rest of the US - is that Texans care more about saving money - than spending money on making sure that their kids are safe; this in a State that is famous for being tight-assed about anything except making money -- anyway they can.
Thank you for your service. All the best from Montevideo
Rule number one in my book of campaign reform
If you receive any money from a lobbyist... it could be exxon, it could be the teacher's union, it could be the pink g-string company...
you can not vote on any bills that would affect that company/industry
either politicians would have to stop voting
or they would do the right thing - - - > stop being paid to play tools
The only exception would be the biggest non-self involved group in the United States
Entities of one person... and they are limited to donations of $1,027.
Having a daughter, the Mystic kids deaths hit me in the gut too. As when I see children murdered or mutilated by the Israelis in Gaza.
I don't know how you do it Bill, but Thank You for your tireless devotion to the earth and all its inhabitants!
It's always a good idea to link scientific information to a real life situation. Those with children as well as those who were children can relate to this dreadful Texas tragedy and feel motivated to get even more involved. The joy of summer camp makes this story especially painful. What to do about all the conscienceless Chip Roys making all the decisions, tho???
Thank you from a Texan
The sky 💥 is 🍁🌠 falling. Chicken 🐔🍗 Little was right 👍.
did you save the post card
yep. it's in the big box
cool, you should post it.. but I know what it is like to go thought history.... you start
you never stop
Another great shipment of news and analysis.
That computer game is interesting. I managed to win with green power.
I disagree in part. A well-run society should OPTIMIZE, not minimize or maximize opportunity an risk.
For example in traffic engineering, we identify the cost of least-cost safety measures to avoid (statistically) a traffic death. That value serves as a metric for other safety measures. In general, we don't spend more than that, because for that price we can safe a life. So, for example, lower speed limits DO save lives; but they also eat up time. The optimization lets us trade those off.
The same should be true for other parts of life. Yes, a camp could have one counselor per camper., It could have all of the cabins installed above the biblical high water mark, not just the 1000-year flood mark. They could test every camper every day for deadly diseases. All of that would make camp too expensive, and then parents would have to choose between camp and piano lessons, soccer club dues, or other education enhancements. .
And the same is true for climate action. Yes, hydrogen-powered cars would have advantages over BEV cars. But they cost A LOT MORE to operate. The energy that would make 1 kg of hydrogen to power a Toyota Mirai 100 miles could also charge a Nissan Leaf to go 300 miles. We should optimize our investments. Not minimize or maximize.
If you take all the risk out of life, you take all the life out of life.
Thank you for another powerful, lucid post.
Chis Roy's statement, “My belief is that the net positive impact of energy production relative to whatever the question-mark impact is on CO2 (carbon dioxide), to me, comes out very much on the positive.” is a great example of the difference between science and belief. First, he states that it's _his_ belief that he's acting on in setting policy for everyone. He's firmly in the belief camp, with no understanding of the science that determines the environment in which the belief camp. The laws of science - physics, chemistry, biology, geology, hydrology, climatology - are going to rule over any "belief" that he may have. Science doesn't care.
There is room for faith and doubt in science. We see both of these in the analyses of data when we discuss error. Roy does not exist in this realm. The opposite of faith is certainty, and that's where he rests his beliefs.