Scientists are taking the unprecedented step of staging marches in more than 600 cities worldwide in the face of what they see as a growing political assault on evidence-based knowledge.

Thousands of scientists and their supporters are attending March for Science events Saturday across the globe, including those in Australia, Brazil, Canada, Cape Town, London Madrid, Nigeria and Seoul.

In Berlin, organizers said about 10,000 people marched toward the Brandenberg Gate holding up placards that read “Facts not feelings” and We love experts — those with evidence.”

Marchers in Geneva carried signs that said “Science — A candle in the Dark” and “Science is the Answer.”

In London, demonstrators marched from the Science Museum to Parliament Square in Westminister holding placards supporting science.

The March for Science thrusts scientists, who generally avoid advocacy and whose work is based on impartial experimentation, into a more visible spotlight.   

For nuclear physics graduate student Chelsea Bartram, White House adviser Kellyanne Conway’s “alternative facts” were the last straw.

President Donald Trump had disputed photographic evidence of the size of his inauguration crowd. Reporters challenged him, prompting Conway to respond that the administration gave “alternative facts.”

“Many scientists I know, myself included, spend so many hours in the lab sacrificing enormous amounts of their life for this abstract idea” that understanding reality can benefit human civilization, said Bartram, who is pursuing a doctorate at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.

 

“And then to have someone say, ‘Well, that’s not important anymore,’ it’s so devastating,” Bartram added.

So Bartram planned to support science’s role in government decisions on health, safety, the economy and more by joining demonstrators at the flagship March for Science event in Washington.

The Washington event featured speakers and several large teach-in tents on the National Mall where scientists, educators and leaders from a variety of disciplines discussed their work, effective science communication strategies and training in public advocacy. Organizers say the event is non-partisan and is not aimed against the Trump administration or any politician or party.

Organizers of the international event, which coincides with Earth Day, say it is the first step in a global movement to acknowledge and defend the vital role science plays in everyday life.

“Science extends our lives, protects our planet, puts food on our table (and) contributes to the economy,” says Caroline Weinberg, national co-chair for the March for Science.

“Policymakers threaten our present and future by ignoring scientific evidence when crafting policy, threatening scientific advancement through budget cuts and limiting the public’s knowledge by silencing scientists,” Weinberg said.

Trump’s most recent budget proposal calls for cuts to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) that would eliminate some 56 programs and drastically reduce funding for the agency’s Office of Research and Development and Science Advisory Board. Trump’s budget proposal also recommends some $6 billion in cuts to the National Institutes of Health, the largest public funder of biomedical research funding in the world.

Dr. Mona Hanna-Attisha, a first-generation Iraqi immigrant, is the pediatrician who alerted officials in Flint, Michigan that the city’s water was contaminated with lead. She is a March for Science honorary national co-chair. “We march for science so that scientists have the freedom like I did, to speak out, free from politicization and to continue to make the world a better place.”

Tipping point

Organizers have not released expected crowd size estimates. But the dispute over crowd sizes was just one small example of what scientists see as a larger pattern. During the U.S. presidential campaign, Trump dismissed the scientific consensus about the dangers of human-induced climate change. His appointee to lead the EPA, Scott Pruitt, also does not accept climate science. He has repeatedly clashed with the agency he now heads.  

But scientists say their frustration has been building for decades.

“We might have reached a tipping point now, but acting as though this is a new thing is giving too much credit to the current administration,” said Weinberg.

And it goes far beyond climate change, Weinberg added. “It’s about not paying attention to the best research on things like food stamps. It’s about cutting things like Head Start and after-school programs,” to name a few. “And that all affects health, because that’s a time to set kids on the right path.”

Critics say a public protest risks further politicizing science, turning scientists into just another interest group.

Bartram sums up a widespread response: on hot button issues like climate change, opponents have already done it. “I don’t think anything we do is going to further politicize it,” she said.

Disconnect

But if the goal is to get policymakers to listen, “A march isn’t going to change anything,” said Rob Young, head of coastal research at Western Carolina University.

Young says much of the problem stems from the growing disconnect between scientists and voters, especially the rural and working class people who voted for Trump. He says most probably have never met a scientist.

Scientists need to get out of the lab more, he said, and explain how their work affects people’s health and livelihoods.

That’s what march organizers hope, too.

The American Geophysical Union’s Davidson said a major post-march goal is more public engagement.

“I think the day is gone when scientists can stay in their ivory towers and assume that everyone is going to recognize their value,” he added.
…

your ad here

The desperate effort this week to find two hikers who disappeared at the bottom of the Grand Canyon represented the National Park Service’s most extensive use yet of drones in a search-and-rescue mission.

 

The Grand Canyon is the only national park with its own fleet of unmanned aircraft for locating people who have gotten lost, stranded, injured or killed. Under a program that began last fall, it has five drones and four certified operators.

 

While the aerial search for the two hikers came up empty, it threw a spotlight on technology that can enter crevices and other rugged spots unreachable by foot while sparing searchers the dangers of going up in a helicopter.

Beautiful and dangerous

 

With its steep cliffs, nearly 2,000 square miles and mesmerizing views, the Grand Canyon can be as dangerous as it is captivating. 

Rangers were confronted with 1,200 medical emergencies, 293 search-and-rescue missions and 17 deaths in 2016, a year in which the park had nearly 6 million visitors. Last summer, a 35-year-old Yelp executive tripped while hiking, fell backward and was found dead 400 feet below.

 

“Our historic model was to take the helicopter to look and see,” said Grand Canyon chief ranger Matt Vandzura. But now, drones can offer “that same close look but without putting any people at risk. It has dramatically increased our ability to keep our people safe.”

 

The drones are about 18 inches across and 10 inches high, with a battery life of about 20 minutes. Drone operators watch the video in real time and then analyze it again at the end of the day. 

Missing hikers

 

The aircraft were used Monday through Wednesday in the search for LouAnn Merrell, 62, and her step grandson, Jackson Standefer, 14. The park also sent out three ground search teams of about 20 people in all, an inflatable motorboat and a helicopter.

 

Merrell and Standefer vanished last weekend after losing their footing while crossing a creek near the North Rim. They were on a hike with Merrell’s husband, Merrell Boot Co. co-founder Randy Merrell, and the boy’s mother. 

 

The park soon scaled back the operation and stopped using the drones but continued the search. In a statement, the hikers’ families backed the decision and said they were “still praying for a miracle.”

 

Drones used before

 

In November, after a visitor drove off a cliff and died, drones were sent in to examine the trees and brush and make sure it was safe for a helicopter to fly in and lift the car out.

 

The next month, rangers used a drone to locate a woman who had jumped to her death. Then they rappelled down to retrieve the body.

 

The dangers of flying choppers in the canyon were illustrated in 2003, when a Park Service helicopter experienced a mechanical failure and crash-landed on the North Rim. Those aboard suffered only minor injuries; the helicopter was totaled.

 

Other national parks use drones, but for wildlife research. The use of private drones is prohibited in national parks. 

 

James Doyle, a spokesman for the park service’s Intermountain region, said other national parks would probably seek their own drone fleets, too. He said the Grand Canyon’s extreme topography, it is a mile deep, makes it a perfect candidate.

 

“It’s a wonderful tool for the unfortunate situation we just found ourselves in at Grand Canyon,” Doyle said. 
…

your ad here

Lawmakers from coal-mining states are pushing to extend health benefits for more than 22,000 retired miners and widows whose medical coverage is set to expire at the end of April.

West Virginia Sen. Joe Manchin and other coal-state Democrats threatened to shut down the government over the issue in December, but they retreated after winning a four-month extension that preserves benefits through April 30.

As lawmakers return to the Capitol following a two-week recess, Manchin says the time for extensions is over.

“We will use every vehicle we can, every pathway we can, to make sure we do not leave here … until we have our miners protected,” he said in a speech on the Senate floor before the break.

“We’ve been very patient,” Manchin said. “I am not going to have another notice sent out to our retired miners, to their widows, saying we’ve given you 90 days or 120 days extension. That’s not going to happen this time.”

Deadline is Friday

But as a Friday deadline looms to keep the government open, lawmakers have not reached agreement on extending the benefits. A plan pushed by GOP leaders in the House would extend health benefits for 20 months, through the end of 2018.

Manchin said Senate Democrats are against that idea because it’s only a partial fix. At least a dozen Senate Republicans are willing to join Democrats in support of a more complete plan that addresses health benefits and a related issue over failing pension plans for nearly 100,000 unionized miners, Manchin said.

“This shouldn’t be a Republican or Democrat issue,” he said in an interview. “This is an issue of fairness.”

A spokesman for Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., said McConnell supports legislation to protect and permanently extend the health benefits, but had no word on the progress of talks related to the spending bill.

A spokesman for House Speaker Paul Ryan also offered no update.

Pieces and parts

President Donald Trump, who has vowed to revive the struggling coal industry, has given “verbal support” for the miners’ benefits, Manchin said, but needs to do more.

“I need him now to either tweet or call Senator McConnell and tell him it’s time to act,” Manchin said. “Mr. President, if you are listening, please tweet out: ‘Mitch, help us. We need you.’”

Trump and Republicans have decried what they describe as a “war on coal” waged by the Obama administration, and have taken a series of actions since Trump took office to boost coal production and reduce regulations, including a rule to protect streams from coal-mining debris.

Trump’s budget director, Mick Mulvaney, told reporters that the White House is “happy to talk … about pieces and parts of the miners’ programs” as part of negotiations on a bill to keep the government open.

“I don’t think we’re very interested in the pension component of that but more interested in talking about the health care component of that,” Mulvaney said.

Pension problem is bigger

Phil Smith, a spokesman for the United Mine Workers of America, said he is hopeful a compromise can be reached on health benefits, but he complained that Republicans appear unwilling to address the far more costly pension issue. Congress scrapped a $3 billion, 10-year measure to stabilize failing pension funds last year.

“The pension part is not going to go away. It only gets worse by the day,” he said.

Account balances have dwindled amid the coal’s industry steep decline, including continued layoffs and a rash of bankruptcy filings that have spread to the industry’s largest companies. Without congressional intervention, some pension funds could run out of cash by next year, the union says.

For the moment, Congress appears focused on health benefits.

In West Virginia, about 8,500 retired miners and their families face loss of benefits if Congress does not act. Some mining families have been unable to make doctor’s appointments after May 1 because of uncertainty over whether medical bills will be paid, Smith said.

Other states affected include Pennsylvania, Kentucky, Ohio, Illinois, Indiana, Virginia and Alabama.
…

your ad here

U.S. officials who have been toughening their stance toward Iran in recent weeks have said almost nothing about its presidential election, now less than one month away.

And, some Iran observers say the silence regarding the May 19 vote could be a reflection of broad skepticism about its significance.

Wednesday during a State Department briefing, U.S. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson made no mention of the Iranian presidential election as he gave his most detailed outline yet of the Trump administration’s toughening Iran policy. But he did accuse Tehran of being the world’s “leading state sponsor of terrorism” and carrying out “provocative actions” that threaten the United States, such as ballistic missile testing.

On Capitol Hill

On Capitol Hill, U.S. lawmakers also have said little about the impending Iranian vote. There has been no action in the Senate or House since legislation was introduced by bipartisan groups of lawmakers on March 23. The legislation would impose new U.S. sanctions on Iran in retaliation for its January ballistic missile test.

A sponsor of the Senate bill, Republican Bob Corker, said at a hearing this month that the Iran sanctions legislation has been delayed by concerns about “elections that are coming up,” an apparent reference to the May 19 vote.

U.S. news site The Weekly Standard also quoted Democratic Senator Chris Coons as saying, “Some members have concerns about Iran’s domestic politics, and I think we have to be mindful of the potential impact” of the proposed U.S. sanctions.

Learning process

It may be too soon to expect the 3-month-old Trump administration to express any view on Iran’s electoral process, said Alex Vatanka, an Iran observer at the Washington-based Middle East Institute.

“The administration really has not had the time to get down to the key aspects of Iranian domestic politics, and whether the U.S. needs to or can in any way take sides in support of one Iranian faction against another,” Vatanka told VOA Persian in an interview.

In a Thursday report, Iranian state television said the country’s 12-member Guardian Council has vetted and approved six candidates to compete in the May 19 presidential vote, most notably the relatively moderate incumbent President Hassan Rouhani, and prominent conservative Ebrahim Raisi, appointed last year as custodian of one of Iran’s holiest shrines by Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

Behnam Ben Taleblu, a Washington-based Iran analyst at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, says Iran’s system of vetting candidates for a presidential post that is subordinate to Iran’s supreme leader has long been understood by U.S. executive and legislative branches of government.

“They know Iran’s president is not the ultimate commander in chief nor the ultimate person who has the say over foreign policy, that person is the supreme leader and his affiliated institutions like the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps,” Taleblu said.

Presidential influence

But Washington still has a basis for being interested in who wins the presidential race, Taleblu said. 

“Iranian presidents can say or do things to impact the tone of Iran’s foreign policy,” he added.

Vatanka said that tone would be evident if Rouhani wins re-election. 

“In that case,” he said, “there is a strong likelihood that Rouhani can continue to push for Iran to enter mainstream international politics.”

A win by a conservative candidate such as Raisi could push Iran in a different direction, Vatanka said.

“Hard-line challengers to Rouhani openly have said that the 2015 nuclear agreement (between Rouhani’s government and six world powers) has not delivered what Rouhani promised (in economic benefits), and have suggested it might not be a bad idea to revisit this deal or to even walk away from it,” he said.

Taleblu says there is an even greater reason for the U.S. to care about Raisi’s presidential candidacy.

“Should he win, Raisi has a clear path to being the likely candidate for Iran’s next supreme leader,” he said. “But should Raisi lose, that would erode the little political clout that he has, in terms of public support, and likely negatively impact his chances to become the supreme leader.”

Vatanka says Raisi, a former little-known Iranian judiciary official, is unlikely to win the presidency without election-rigging help from his conservative allies. The last Iranian presidential vote to be overshadowed by allegations of massive fraud — conservative Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s 2009 re-election — triggered months of nationwide streets protests.

“The Obama administration, which at the time was very new, didn’t know what to do about the unrest that engulfed Iran in 2009,” Vatanka said. “The Trump administration can start thinking about what would be their response to more political turmoil — would they seek to engage directly with Iran’s so-called moderates, or would they think it is not worth the time? That is the big test.”

This report was produced in collaboration with VOA’s Persian Service.
…

your ad here

U.S. Secretary of Homeland Security John Kelly and U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions vowed Friday to continue their tough approach to illegal immigration, warning of the dangers of cross-border gangs and sanctuary cities.

Speaking in San Diego on the second day of a trip through the U.S. Southwest, where border concerns are most prominent, Kelly told reporters, “We will continue to expand our approach to deterring illegal migration. That includes constructing a physical barrier, supporting it with technology, and patrolling it with dedicated and professional men and women of DHS. It also includes our approach of prosecuting anyone who pays traffickers to smuggle people into our country. That includes especially those who smuggle children.”

Kelly, Sessions and Senator Ron Johnson of Wisconsin, chairman of the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, spent Friday meeting with officials and observing immigration detention operations on the San Diego-Tijuana border.

Sanctuary cities

Sessions used the encounter with reporters to criticize sanctuary cities, which he said sabotage the effort to rid the country of illegal immigrants who commit crimes, sometimes as part of cross-border gangs.

“Sanctuary jurisdictions put criminals back on the streets,” he said. “They help these gangs to refill their ranks, and put innocent life, including the lives of countless law-abiding immigrants, in danger by refusing to share vital information with federal law enforcement.”

Sessions said he urged jurisdictions that allow sanctuary cities to exist “to reconsider.” He said, “Our federal law enforcement officers and prosecutors stand ready to work with you because every neighborhood, every street corner, deserves to be free from gang violence.”

Prodded by a reporter, Sessions also defended his statement of apparent indignation from earlier this week that a judge “sitting on an island in the Pacific,” a reference to the U.S. state of Hawaii, could hold up President Donald Trump’s new travel ban.

Sessions answered Friday’s query by noting that the judge in Hawaii was just one of hundreds of U.S. federal judges. He vowed that the ruling would be reversed.

Hawaiians offended

Hawaiian politicians have objected to Sessions’ characterization of Hawaii, saying the tone was insulting.

Protesters gathered at the news conference as well, to declare their objections to the federal government’s stance on immigration, including the building of a wall along the border with Mexico. The organizing group, the Southern Border Communities Coalition, has complained that officials have “declared war on our communities.”

The statement echoed those of some community leaders in El Paso, Texas, a day earlier, who objected to Sessions’ use of terminology such as “ground zero” and “beachhead” to describe their community on the border. During his Thursday visit, Sessions was describing El Paso as important territory in the struggle against cross-border drug cartels and violence.

“That language and that attitude and that rhetoric is un-American,” said El Paso County Judge Veronica Escobar, according to the El Paso Times.
…

your ad here

Young immigrants brought to the U.S. as children and now here illegally can “rest easy,” President Donald Trump said Friday, telling the “dreamers” they will not be targets for deportation under his immigration policies.

 

Trump, in a wide-ranging interview with The Associated Press, said his administration is “not after the dreamers, we are after the criminals.”

 

The president, who took a hard line on immigration as a candidate, vowed anew to fulfill his promise to construct a wall along the U.S.-Mexico border. But he stopped short of demanding that funding for the project be included in a spending bill Congress must pass by the end of next week in order to keep the government running.

 

“I want the border wall. My base definitely wants the border wall,” Trump said in the Oval Office interview. Asked whether he would sign legislation that does not include money for the project, he said, “I just don’t know yet.” Throughout the campaign, he had firmly and repeatedly guaranteed that Mexico, not U.S. taxpayers, would pay for the wall.

 

Eager to start making progress on other campaign promises, Trump said he would unveil a tax overhaul package next week — “Wednesday or shortly thereafter” — that would include a “massive” tax cut for both individuals and corporations. He would not provide details of rate proposals or how he planned to pay for the package but asserted the cuts for Americans will be “bigger, I believe, than any tax cut ever.”

 

Congressional Republicans seemed caught off guard by Trump’s announcement and did not appear to have been briefed on the details of the White House’s forthcoming plan.

 

Trump spoke with the AP ahead of his 100th day in office.

 

He panned that marker as “artificial.” Still, the White House is eager to tout progress on the litany of agenda items he promised to fulfill in his first 100 days, despite setbacks including court bans on his proposed immigration limits and a high-profile failure in repealing and replacing the current health care law.

 

The president said Friday he spent his first 100 days laying the “foundation” for progress later in his administration, including by building relationships with foreign leaders. He cited German Chancellor Angela Merkel as a leader he was surprised to have developed strong chemistry with, given that he has been critical of her handling of immigration policies.

 

As a candidate, Trump strongly criticized President Barack Obama for “illegal executive amnesties,” including actions to spare from deportation young people who were brought to the country as children and now are here illegally. But after the election, Trump started speaking more favorably about these immigrants, popularly dubbed “dreamers.”

 

On Friday, he said that when it comes to them, “This is a case of heart.”

 

This week, attorneys for Juan Manuel Montes said the 23-year-old was recently deported to Mexico despite having qualified for deferred deportation. Trump said Montes’ case is “a little different than the dreamer case,” though he did not specify why.

 

The Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program was launched in 2012 as a stopgap to protect some young immigrants from deportation while the administration continued to push for a broader immigration overhaul in Congress.

 

Obama’s administrative program offered a reprieve from deportation to those immigrants in the country illegally who could prove they arrived before they were 16, had been in the United States for several years and had not committed a crime since being here. It mimicked versions of the so-called DREAM Act, which would have provided legal status for young immigrants but was never passed by Congress.

 

DACA also provides work permits for the immigrants and is renewable every two years. As of December, about 770,000 young immigrants had been approved for the program.

 

On foreign policy, Trump said it was “possible” the U.S. will withdraw from the nuclear accord with Iran forged by Obama and five other world leaders. He said he believes Iran’s destabilizing actions “all over the Middle East and beyond” are violating the spirit of the accord, though the State Department this week certified that Tehran is complying with the tenets of the deal aimed at curbing its nuclear program.

 

The president also appeared to side with his advisers’ increasingly harder line on Julian Assange, the founder of WikiLeaks. Attorney General Jeff Sessions said Assange’s arrest was a priority for the Justice Department as it steps up efforts to prosecute people who leak classified information to the media.

 

The president said that he was not involved in the decision-making process regarding charging Assange but that the move would be “OK with me.”

 

During the campaign, Trump and his allies publicly delighted in WikiLeaks’ release of stolen emails from a top adviser to Democrat Hillary Clinton.
…

your ad here