Although I think we are going in the right direction we also need to look at cleaning the air too.
There are several ways of doing this:
1. Government funds projects that scrub the air in small and medium size projects:
This option would be more inspirational then anything else, but even the smallest amount of help still helps. But rich people or more to the point money managers will never want to pay for it, even if they are the main people that benefits from of making pollution, and getting rid of it too.

2. Replanting forests: This is by far one of the main big projects with big results that we can do. We can also start this by making logging companies replant trees from harvest within 30 to 60 days of harvesting them. In northern California I have seen square miles of land where forests have been harvested for years and not replanted. That helps no one, and makes a quick buck without thought for where they are going to find trees to harvest 10 years form now. Also NGO planting trees is always good move.

3. Finding a cost effective way of removing CO2 from the air and repackaging the byproducts for sale at a profit. This would be for now the best option by far since it pays for itself and its growth. Though Government will probably have to fund the research to get the ball rolling.
Thankfully we have some crazy out of the box thinking from people like Elon musk that is looking to make rocket fuel out of CO2. And not all of it will be burned in Earths atmosphere and would create a net negative carbine foot print in theory.

Just my thoughts on the matter

We have lost a good actress, and an even better human being. This makes us all a little less then before. Fair winds Mira

Ok I grew up and lived in Silicon Valley (San Jose, Santa Clara, Militiptas) until 1992, and my family has lived there till 2010.
Silicon Valley started in the 1960's but its roots go back to Companies that either Moved their, statrated labs there, or started there in the 40's and 50's.
HP
Xerox Park
IBM
Lockheed Martin
NAS Moffett Field
Lawrence Livermore National laboratory.
GE
US Army Presidio Labs (Yep they had a lot of researchers there, and not just the future home of Star Fleet)
Treasure Island Navel Base.
Science & Technology Schools:
Stanford University (SLAC was not started building till 1962)
UC Berkeley

So with the advent of of Nasa Ames, SLAC, and national Semiconductor manufacturing being built in the 60's is what started it all.
That is when my beloved Orange, and cherry orchards started to disappear.
With that was a house boom and bust cycle that that ran every 10 years.
So in the 70's you had Tech people move out to other parts of the country, and move in due to the economy about every 10 years or so.With one company or another downsizing due to either major greed such as Monolithic Memories, and major screw ups at National Semiconductor, and the oil price drop that literally stopped China's Tech buying spree in the late 80's.
But it never really felt any of the national recessions pressure tell the 90's, and that is when I moved. It also felt the one in 2008 as well. Which is strange because even the great depression did not hit it that hard as elsewhere in the country. (Y2k was barely a pothole)

So will Tech people start a new influx, well that is a given, but I am sure that in the future the ebb and flow will slow down to the point no one will notice, or the ocean will rise and wipe it off the map.

Ok former Law Enforcement taking this Point by Point
1. Initial search warrant was honestly invalid, and the Judge that issues should be investigated, and have all his judgements come under scrutiny. This being Florida I doubt that will happen at the local level, but might happen after the 20th.

2. The firing should have also gone under Federal scrutiny, and may still do so. If it smells fishy chances are there are fish involved.

3. The Arrest Warrant sounds fishy since they are not releasing the charge which is a matter of public record. Most people that get warrants for their arrest get information released to the press before they are arrested, but there is a good argument for withholding till they make the arrest.

4. If true, and if she has evidence that Law Enforcement Officers told her to be quiet or more charges we be brought. Then that is extortions, and the FBI should investigate and any officers or state officials proven involved in this will go to Federal prison.

5. At some point she will have to explain how she got the info. If someone leaked it to her she is fine, and if she actually hacked the system with or without help then she is screwed. But could get pardoned due to the health risk, and conspiracy she exposed.

From now on I will say "By Neptunes Balls"

All I am gonna say is about time. We need Science represented in to top tiers of Government, and so this is a good first step. We still have to worry about sudeo and crack pots though.

She was yelling the equivalent of fire in a crowded theater on a private site. This is not a 1st Amendment issue, but a safety issue that was long overdue.

Has no one ever heard of a Faraday cage?
What is a faraday cage you ask?
Well it is a box made out of conductive metal, or wire that is grounded to earth. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faraday_cage)
Now depending on how strong the EMP is you could just make a big box out of some type of wire fence, or better yet a metal shed, and ground it with a copper earth grounding rod driving in to the earth.
Also your car is a metal box so ground it and it just may not get fried. (50/50)
Unless your vehicle is constructed out of plastic, fiberglass, or some other non-metal composite then your fracked.
What about your solar panels, well wrap the tops in tin foil, and make sure they are grounded.
Building a new house wrap it in a layer of metal and ground it. (Get the idea)
The best Faraday cages are made with multi-layers out of wire mesh with very small holes that I have seen.

Just so you know I am not saying the system even works as intended, because it does not.
It is better than most law enforcement systems out there, but bit still sucks.
But the only way to change it is to take a stand and make some noise.
In your case with state police I would hit up the state legislators, State Attorney General, and the Governor’s Office.
But there is a down side.
You have to have solid evidence because the burden of proof is on you, and even with that you may still get screwed.
Also there may be some blow back either way.
I have ended up on police sh1t lists before and it sucks, but it goes away after a while.
Sometimes taking a stand comes with cost you just have to be willing to pay.
But you do have to pick your fights and be smart about it.

Me I have paid my dues taking a stand and still do.
Because I can’t just stand there and say thank you Sir can I please have another.

Although many officers seem to get away with some outrages and possibly illegal behavior there are ways to counter this.
At the City level you have the following options:
1. Most large Cities have an internal affairs office which is works as a peer review and is only accountable to a police commissioner or possibly the chief of police.
                              But they are also sill accountable to the Mayor and city council.
2. Some large cities also have a citizen review board that reviews any suspicious behavior conducted by the police.
3. Some large cities have both an internal investigation and citizen review board.
4. Also the state police agencies usually have some kind of mandate to investigate police departments with a history of misbehavior.
5. Small departments are usually monitored by the mayors and city council.

Bottom line you have avenues to lodge a complaint, just make sure you have all your ducks in a row first, and have solid evidence to back it up.

At the State level:
Many State Law enforcement Agencies are accountable to the Governor, the State Attorney General, and State Legislators.
They will also have some kind of internal review process.

At the Federal level:
All Federal Law Enforcement Agencies are accountable to the Office of the President, and Congress.
They will also have some kind of internal review process.

So my story:
I once got harassed and ticketed illegally while my car was parked at a park on the street swapping a flasher solenoid for my blinkers, and I was an Air force Security Police but not in uniform.
After running up the city chain of command I resorted to writing to my congressman Leon Panetta.
The charges were dropped, and the officers involved were suspended without pay. (Circa 1979)
Thank god or I would have had a really awkward meeting with my commander.

Since we have on going operations in the Horn of Africa and have trouble spots like Iran, Pakistan, and Afghanistan are fairly close by.
Could it be my Uncle Sam is using a spy sub to cut the cables and attach a device to bug the cable?
I ask this because it is something I would consider if I was the head of the NSA or CIA.
(Not that it makes it right)

But it would be a way to keep tabs on all the data traffic between Africa and that part of the Middle East.

Dude what color is the sky in your world?

Here is a good place to start but it is incomplete:
http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Water_memory

It does not really recount everything or consider all the repeated experiments since then.

In a nutshell.
A paper was published around 1980 in the Journal Nature using the standard chemistry testing protocols still in use today that suggested that water had some form of memory.
The experiments were meant to disprove homeopathy, but suggested that it may in fact be the real deal. (I have no opinions on homeopathy)
The experiment had been recreated around the world resulting in the same data.
The editor in charge of the magazine wanted the experiments rerun with Randi controlling the protocols.
Remember Randi is not a PHD or a chemist.

Randi came up with a new chemistry protocol where no one person knew what they were doing with what samples. Basically it was a completely blind testing protocol, and there have been a few TV shows on this and it was on 60 minutes and NOVA too.
Now they never ran Statistical error analysis on the new protocol so no knew what the error ratereally was.
The experiment came up inconclusive and could not prove that water had memory.

But the cool thing is this that both experiments have been recreated using both protocols several times and came up with the same data results.
Standard protocol’s says water has memory, and Randi’s protocol was inconclusive suggesting that water does not have memory.
Also Randi’s protocol has only been used to recreate this experiment.
So all other chemistry experiments still use the standard protocols today.

So my beef with Randi is that he butted in to a science lab experiment and never followed up with why the data was different and repeatable.
Although these experiments have been repeated a lot since then research in to why was dropped because of the journal bringing in Randi.

My belief is:
The data would suggest that test results are subjective much like the physic experiments done in Princeton Engineering Labs and may give us additional clues towards solving some Quantum Mechanics and M theory unresolved issues.
Then again it could just bring up more interesting questions.

Dude can you miss my point any more?