I think you mean "was institutionalized". Biden is no longer in office.

Remember the MASSIVE lie perpetrated over four years that Biden wasn't senile? Or that his son's laptop wasn't his son's laptop - as attested to by 50-some professional liars? Where's that apology?

A. That was a lie, it didn't happen. The Biden administration was going to buy a bunch of Tesla trucks (Tesla being the only company to submit a quote), the Trump administration cancelled the order.

B. He doesn't have that ability. Now that the cabinet secretaries are in place, they do all the hiring and most of the firing.

C. The government already has that data. Don't act like there is some additional risk because employees have access to the data employees get access to. And it's not like the people already there don't ever misuse or leak that data. Democrat bureaucrats have leaked tax returns for political effect in the past. Has DOGE leaked any personal data yet?

D. The only reason to resist an audit is to cover up wrongdoing. Why are the people you're listening to so resistant to an audit?

Air, because it is an aeronautics research agency. Aeronautics != climate research.

Well, it shouldn't. That's outside the mission. NASA should be lifting satellites for relevant researchers and agencies, not wasting time doing someone else's work.

And by your logic, the experience of a cellular biologist would be just as applicable. Or, an astrophysicist. They study very complex systems. The same ones NASA deals with.

The chief scientist at a space agency should probably be focused on space, no? I'd have expected her to be an astrophysicist or rocket scientist, but no, she's a climate specialist. Not appropriate, therefore not a loss to the agency's mission. Nor are the policy specialists, policy should come from elected officials, not bureaucrats.

Well, if they're tracking changes, like you'd think they should be, the file bloats like crazy and needs to be repaired (losing the audit trail) on a regular basis. Which would be fine for an executive summary, but not if they're using it the way the article makes it seem like they are.

Running and maintaining fiber isn't cheaper than a dish? And note that "wireless" meant 4/5G, not satellite. They didn't include satellite at all, even though Starlink and Hughes (yeah, absurdly expensive, hence Starlink) already provided coverage to the rural areas of concern.

I'm sure it's just coincidence that Musk had turned on the Democrats by the time the bill was passed.

Yeah, but there are two pieces of evidence cited here. One slightly older than myself, the other is the approximate age of my parents.

Maybe if we want to measure the change in temps since the beginning of the industrial era, we should use an appropriate timeframe and records. "Last half of the 19th century" (coal was king and pea-soup fog) and "Since your parents were born", are not an appropriate frame of reference.

Pinball? Interesting point!

I wasn't talking about commercially available, I meant Spacewar! the 1962 mainframe version. I had forgotten someone made a game from an oscilloscope.

50 years of satellite data and maybe 80 of other records. Are the north Pole records old and detailed enough to say if temps were actually anomalous?

To me, this comes across as, "Well, there is less ocean ice than there was when you were born in the 70's. But since your life is insignificant on a geological timescale, it means dick."

This could just reflect the reduction in reflective emissions since the EPA was formed in the early 70's.

Or just be more BS from The Guardian. Who just lied to us about CISA keeping an eye on Russia. Why do we keep seeing articles from a lying propaganda outlet?

That is not evidence of anything but a man's opinion. If anything, I should suspect you are the Russian agent.

Last I saw Trump was at 52%. On key issues he is favored 60-40 or 80-20. DOGE approval was around 60%.

Or it was Biden that made the corrupt decision to favor big cable over a more cost-effective and already-deployed solution?

I want the government to pick the most economical, even if it isn't perfect, because that is proper stewardship of my tax dollars. Running fiber where it was never cost effective is not the right solution. Starlink exists to solve the same problem that this bill was supposed to solve, but it was ignored by Biden. Why? Why assume the corrupt decision is this one when the decision to cut Starlink out looks far more corrupt?