Science

n2doc

(47,953 posts) Thu Apr 30, 2015, 11:20 AM Apr 2015

House GOP Wants to Eviscerate NASA Earth Sciences in New Budget

By Phil Plait

There’s no other way to put this, so I’ll be succinct: A passel of anti-science global warming denying GOP representatives have put together a funding authorization bill for NASA that at best cuts more than $300 million from the agency’s current Earth science budget.

At worst? More than $500 million.

The actual amount of the cut depends on whether some caps enacted in 2011 are removed or not. If they are, then Earth sciences gets $1.45 billion. If not, it gets $1.2 billion. The current FY 2015 budget is $1.773 billion.

Compare that with the White House request for FY ’16 of $1.947 billion for Earth sciences. The bill will be marked up (amended and rewritten) by the House Science, Space, and Technology Committee today.

This, for the space agency which has a critical role in understanding climate change and its effects on our planet.

more

http://www.slate.com/blogs/bad_astronomy/2015/04/30/nasa_budget_gop_committee_wants_to_slash_and_burn_earth_sciences.html

4 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

House GOP Wants to Eviscerate NASA Earth Sciences in New Budget (Original Post) n2doc Apr 2015 OP

1.45 billion is a lot of money yeoman6987 Apr 2015 #1

You have no clue n/t n2doc Apr 2015 #2

Oh wow. So prolific in your replies. yeoman6987 Apr 2015 #3

that's interestingly been one of those *very sly* arguments the use on NASA: MisterP Apr 2015 #4

yeoman6987

(14,449 posts)

1. 1.45 billion is a lot of money

Reply to n2doc (Original post)

Thu Apr 30, 2015, 11:35 AM

Apr 2015

Going to 1.2 billion is going to destroy everything? Maybe too dramatic to complain about?

n2doc

(47,953 posts)

2. You have no clue n/t

Reply to yeoman6987 (Reply #1)

Thu Apr 30, 2015, 11:36 AM

Apr 2015

yeoman6987

(14,449 posts)

3. Oh wow. So prolific in your replies.

Reply to n2doc (Reply #2)

Thu Apr 30, 2015, 12:20 PM

Apr 2015

Your telling me 200 million out of a 1.45 billion dollar budget is awful? Actually you are not sure if looking at your last reply.

MisterP

(23,730 posts)

4. that's interestingly been one of those *very sly* arguments the use on NASA:

Reply to n2doc (Original post)

Thu Apr 30, 2015, 12:31 PM

Apr 2015

"we oughtta be going to Mars! LEO will just trap us here until we go extinct!"

of course their case rests on Earth being such a nasty little mudball everyone ought to be fleeing from--and yet they seem very averse to any downward-pointing satellites that might actually show it getting less inhabitable ...

Reply to this discussion