That article doesn’t say what you’re asserting. It says that they’re cutting OAR, National Marine Fisheries Service, and some other things. The writer then goes on to say that OAR, in particular, does climate research. But it’s the research arm of NOAA, so that’s to be expected.
To go from this to “being shut down exactly and entirely because it is a station that performs climate research” is not a defensible statement.
I’m not saying that it’s inconceivable that the current administration is cutting funding that affects Mauna Loa because of climate ideology; I’m saying that without evidence, you’re leaping to conclusions that may or may not be justified.
> I’m not saying that it’s inconceivable that the current administration is cutting funding that affects Mauna Loa because of climate ideology; I’m saying that without evidence, you’re leaping to conclusions that may or may not be justified.
Okay, but if I had to make an assumption, I, and any reasonable person on Earth, would assume it's because of the extremist ideology of this administration.
They're anti-science, anti-fact, and pro-oil. Explicitly. I'm not saying this, they're bragging about it. And then things like this keep happening.
Hmm. Now if I were naive and stupid, I might say that it's just a coincidence. Luckily I am not, and I'm confident in say that yes, almost certainly the current administration and political climate has something to do with this.
I think there is more than enough evidence and that article covers it well enough, but here’s another one.
‘[Current OMB director Russ] Vought wrote in Project 2025 that NOAA should be disassembled because it is the “source of much of NOAA’s climate alarmism” and said the “preponderance of its climate-change research should be disbanded.”’
It was one of the stated goals of Project 2025, explicitly for the reasons stated, and now one of the proposers of that specific goal is in charge of executing it, and it is being executed in precisely the way outlined in the Project 2025 manifesto.
To go from this to “being shut down exactly and entirely because it is a station that performs climate research” is not a defensible statement.
I’m not saying that it’s inconceivable that the current administration is cutting funding that affects Mauna Loa because of climate ideology; I’m saying that without evidence, you’re leaping to conclusions that may or may not be justified.