• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

Energy chief suggests Trump administration is altering previously published climate reports; staff for next iteration all fired already

essentialsaltes

Fact-Based Lifeform
Oct 17, 2011
42,232
45,340
Los Angeles Area
✟1,009,175.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Legal Union (Other)
LINK

Energy Sec. Chris Wright said Tuesday night the Trump administration is updating the National Climate Assessments that have been previously published, which the administration recently removed from government websites.

The National Climate Assessments are congressionally mandated research reports authored by hundreds of scientists and experts, intended to inform the country of the latest climate science and the current and future impacts of climate change in the US. The reports take years to research, draft and publish and go through multiple rounds of peer review, with all 13 federal agencies that conduct climate research. An independent National Academy of Sciences panel signs off on the content.

The first Trump administration signed off on and released the Fourth US National Climate Assessment in 2018, although it attempted to bury the report’s news by releasing it on Black Friday. The current administration has deleted all previous reports from government websites, fired the scientists working on the next iteration of the report, and recently issued a separate report compiled by five researchers that questioned the severity of climate change.

Wright told CNN that he hand-picked the four researchers and one economist who authored the Trump administration report: John Christy and Roy Spencer, both research scientists at the University of Alabama at Huntsville, Steven E. Koonin of Stanford University’s Hoover Institution, Georgia Tech professor emeritus Judith Curry and Canadian economist Ross McKitrick.

Altering or revising previously published assessments would be a significant escalation in the administration’s attempts to wipe credible climate science off the record.
 

Tuur

Well-Known Member
Oct 12, 2022
2,454
1,299
Southeast
✟86,841.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
That's Orwellian.
Um...you are aware that we've had news organizations alter archived reports for years? In looking for cites of instances I recalled, found this little gem: https://medium.com/@stevensaus/ai-powered-sites-are-republishing-altered-news-articles-4bc8f4411b34 . Oddly, can't find the instances I recalled. Will not attribute it to the articles dropping down a memory hole when my "Google-fu" could simply have failed.

Memory holing is a nice term. During the pandemic things, particularly posts in places, tended to disappear if what was posted wasn't "approved." You can make the argument the same thing has happened to these reports. What has not happened is altering reports: changing original reports and leaving them in place. Per the cited link, the articles have been removed. You can make the argument they've gone down the memory hole, but that's not altering the reports.

Note that the article is claiming the assessments are "altered." Note that current assessments of practically anything changes. So it is that when I started work around power lines, we could wear a cotton and polyester blend but now such violates OSHA regulations. Is it more correct to say that OSHA regs were altered or that OSHA regs were revised? Then there was the CDC change of the assessment on masking early during the pandemic. Was that assessment altered or revised?

Most important, assessments based on science are going to change, one way or the other. It's not like we're dealing with holy scripture here. Whether we agree with the changes, now that's another question.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ozso
Upvote 0

RocksInMyHead

God is innocent; Noah built on a floodplain!
May 12, 2011
9,129
9,862
PA
✟431,496.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Democrat
Um...you are aware that we've had news organizations alter archived reports for years? In looking for cites of instances I recalled, found this little gem: https://medium.com/@stevensaus/ai-powered-sites-are-republishing-altered-news-articles-4bc8f4411b34 .
That article doesn't say what you think it says. The cases it's discussing are where made-up news aggregator sites are using AI to scrape articles from legitimate news sites, then making modifications to them and republishing them, whether in an attempt to avoid copyright claims or to generate "new" content. It's the modern iteration of "fake news;" now done by AI rather than underpaid writers in Romania.

Don't get me wrong - this is still an issue. But it's in no way comparable to the government or a legitimate media company "memory holing" information.
 
Upvote 0

essentialsaltes

Fact-Based Lifeform
Oct 17, 2011
42,232
45,340
Los Angeles Area
✟1,009,175.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Legal Union (Other)
Um...you are aware that we've had news organizations alter archived reports for years?
Even if true, this is different from changing published reports.

The Bureau of Labor Statistics updates its numbers, but the original estimates are still available.

Changing the previous published reports is indeed Orwellian.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: DaisyDay
Upvote 0

ozso

Site Supporter
Oct 2, 2020
27,851
15,136
PNW
✟971,301.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Even if true, this is different from changing published reports.

The Bureau of Labor Statistics updates its numbers, but the original estimates are still available.

Changing the previous published reports is indeed Orwellian.
Unless it's really a case of where false and or inaccurate information in the reports is being corrected.
 
Upvote 0

Tuur

Well-Known Member
Oct 12, 2022
2,454
1,299
Southeast
✟86,841.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
That article doesn't say what you think it says. The cases it's discussing are where made-up news aggregator sites are using AI to scrape articles from legitimate news sites, then making modifications to them and republishing them, whether in an attempt to avoid copyright claims or to generate "new" content. It's the modern iteration of "fake news;" now done by AI rather than underpaid writers in Romania.

What do you know: It said what I thought it said. I posted that as a heads up when looking for articles.
 
Upvote 0

Tuur

Well-Known Member
Oct 12, 2022
2,454
1,299
Southeast
✟86,841.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Even if true, this is different from changing published reports.

The Bureau of Labor Statistics updates its numbers, but the original estimates are still available.

Changing the previous published reports is indeed Orwellian.
Per your link they're dropping the previous assessments and publishing new ones. They're not leaving the old ones up and editing them, or altering documents in the archives.
 
Upvote 0

Tuur

Well-Known Member
Oct 12, 2022
2,454
1,299
Southeast
✟86,841.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Unless it's really a case of where false and or inaccurate information in the reports is being corrected.
I think he's using that as an example of revision. OTOH there are industry bulletins I know off that are revised with the old ones not archived, unless someone scanned it and put it on Google Books or something like that. What he's describing is like the examples I cant' seem to find right now of news organizations altering stories in their archives. But that's not what the cite claims.

Let's go back to the very first sentence in the OP:

Energy Sec. Chris Wright said Tuesday night the Trump administration is updating the National Climate Assessments that have been previously published, which the administration recently removed from government websites.
"...removed from government websites." That's not altering what was previously published and leaving it up. The Orwellian term would be memory holing them.

The third paragraph of the OP repeats that they are removed from government web sites. Removing, not altering them.
 
Upvote 0

DaisyDay

I Did Nothing Wrong!! ~~Team Deep State
Jan 7, 2003
41,866
19,864
Finger Lakes
✟308,557.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
Unitarian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Um...you are aware that we've had news organizations alter archived reports for years?
Um...sure. So what? New organizations are private companies, not the government.
In looking for cites of instances I recalled, found this little gem: https://medium.com/@stevensaus/ai-powered-sites-are-republishing-altered-news-articles-4bc8f4411b34 . Oddly, can't find the instances I recalled. Will not attribute it to the articles dropping down a memory hole when my "Google-fu" could simply have failed.

Memory holing is a nice term. During the pandemic things, particularly posts in places, tended to disappear if what was posted wasn't "approved." You can make the argument the same thing has happened to these reports. What has not happened is altering reports: changing original reports and leaving them in place. Per the cited link, the articles have been removed. You can make the argument they've gone down the memory hole, but that's not altering the reports.

Note that the article is claiming the assessments are "altered." Note that current assessments of practically anything changes. So it is that when I started work around power lines, we could wear a cotton and polyester blend but now such violates OSHA regulations. Is it more correct to say that OSHA regs were altered or that OSHA regs were revised? Then there was the CDC change of the assessment on masking early during the pandemic. Was that assessment altered or revised?

Most important, assessments based on science are going to change, one way or the other. It's not like we're dealing with holy scripture here. Whether we agree with the changes, now that's another question.
 
Upvote 0

ozso

Site Supporter
Oct 2, 2020
27,851
15,136
PNW
✟971,301.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
I think he's using that as an example of revision. OTOH there are industry bulletins I know off that are revised with the old ones not archived, unless someone scanned it and put it on Google Books or something like that. What he's describing is like the examples I cant' seem to find right now of news organizations altering stories in their archives. But that's not what the cite claims.

Let's go back to the very first sentence in the OP:


"...removed from government websites." That's not altering what was previously published and leaving it up. The Orwellian term would be memory holing them.

The third paragraph of the OP repeats that they are removed from government web sites. Removing, not altering them.
Wouldn't there still be digital copies of the originals in the possession of various people even if they're removed from the public website?
 
Upvote 0

Nithavela

you're in charge you can do it just get louis
Apr 14, 2007
30,651
22,285
Comb. Pizza Hut and Taco Bell/Jamaica Avenue.
✟589,385.00
Country
Germany
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Single
Wouldn't there still be digital copies of the originals in the possession of various people even if they're removed from the public website?
No need to go to various people.

 
  • Informative
Reactions: DaisyDay
Upvote 0

ozso

Site Supporter
Oct 2, 2020
27,851
15,136
PNW
✟971,301.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
No need to go to various people.

Then what's the worry about?
 
Upvote 0

essentialsaltes

Fact-Based Lifeform
Oct 17, 2011
42,232
45,340
Los Angeles Area
✟1,009,175.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Legal Union (Other)
Then what's the worry about?
If the Fifth Assessment is reissued with 'alternative facts' and different conclusions, then the Trump Administration can push that narrative and point to "its own" version of the Fifth Assessment, rather than the conclusions the Fifth Assessment actually reached.
 
Upvote 0

Tuur

Well-Known Member
Oct 12, 2022
2,454
1,299
Southeast
✟86,841.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
If the Fifth Assessment is reissued with 'alternative facts' and different conclusions, then the Trump Administration can push that narrative and point to "its own" version of the Fifth Assessment, rather than the conclusions the Fifth Assessment actually reached.
And? Seriously. Everything is politicized up to our eyeballs, like, during the pandemic, condemning conservative gatherings as super-spreader events while encouraging liberal gatherings. Last time I checked, viruses don't check for political affiliation.

Right now we've got "Carbon Passports" talk going on in the UK ('Carbon Passports' Designed to Restrict Travel Coming Soon To The UK - Report - TFPP Wire),. Then again, Europe has historically been big on sumptuary laws.
 
Upvote 0

Pommer

CoPacEtiC SkEpTic
Sep 13, 2008
22,486
13,882
Earth
✟242,887.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Deist
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
US-Democrat
LINK

Energy Sec. Chris Wright said Tuesday night the Trump administration is updating the National Climate Assessments that have been previously published, which the administration recently removed from government websites.

The National Climate Assessments are congressionally mandated research reports authored by hundreds of scientists and experts, intended to inform the country of the latest climate science and the current and future impacts of climate change in the US. The reports take years to research, draft and publish and go through multiple rounds of peer review, with all 13 federal agencies that conduct climate research. An independent National Academy of Sciences panel signs off on the content.

The first Trump administration signed off on and released the Fourth US National Climate Assessment in 2018, although it attempted to bury the report’s news by releasing it on Black Friday. The current administration has deleted all previous reports from government websites, fired the scientists working on the next iteration of the report, and recently issued a separate report compiled by five researchers that questioned the severity of climate change.

Wright told CNN that he hand-picked the four researchers and one economist who authored the Trump administration report: John Christy and Roy Spencer, both research scientists at the University of Alabama at Huntsville, Steven E. Koonin of Stanford University’s Hoover Institution, Georgia Tech professor emeritus Judith Curry and Canadian economist Ross McKitrick.

Altering or revising previously published assessments would be a significant escalation in the administration’s attempts to wipe credible climate science off the record.
Will there be a side-by-side site to view just what alterations corrections have been made?
 
Upvote 0

essentialsaltes

Fact-Based Lifeform
Oct 17, 2011
42,232
45,340
Los Angeles Area
✟1,009,175.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Legal Union (Other)
And? Seriously. Everything is politicized
We're not talking about policy differences. We're talking about cooking the books and changing the assessment.
 
Upvote 0

rjs330

Well-Known Member
May 22, 2015
28,241
9,090
65
✟431,854.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Pentecostal
Well after browsing the 5th assessment its obviously created by human caused catastrophic climate we change believers. So, its not accurate. It does need to be re-addressed without the hype.

How about just addressing the provable situation that the planet's climate is changing. What are we going to do to adapt to it. Since we didn't create it, we cant stop it. But we CAN adapt to it.

We've been told far to many times now that we had to do something right now or we'd be beyond rhe point of no return. Which was back in rhe 80s or 90s now. Which means we aee WAY beyond that. Which means we cant do anything to stop or correct it. We can just hang on for the ride and try to mitigate the impact as much as possible on all of us.
 
Upvote 0

ozso

Site Supporter
Oct 2, 2020
27,851
15,136
PNW
✟971,301.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Some folks are worried the manmade climate crisis sensationalism will finally come to an end. Because it's a democrat platform. It will weaken the "vote for us if you want to save the planet" routine.
 
  • Like
Reactions: rjs330
Upvote 0