Tuesday, February 06, 2007

Addendum to AEI and ExxonMobil Reporting

In addition to ExxonMobil underwriting global climate change confusion, the United States government continues to obfuscate the issue. Recently, the Union of Concerned Scientists and the Government Accountability Project investigated federal climate science by questioning 1,600 climate scientists at several federal and non-federal agencies.

Together, they found that “political interference in climate science is no longer a series of isolated incidents but a system-wide epidemic.” Dr. Francesca Grifo, Director of the UCS Scientific Integrity Program continued, “Tailoring scientific fact for political purposes has become a problem across many federal science agencies.” The UCS survey also found:

Nearly half of all respondents (46 percent) perceived or personally experienced pressure to eliminate the words "climate change," "global warming," or other similar terms from a variety of communications. Forty-three percent of respondents reported they had perceived or personally experienced changes or edits during review of their work that changed the meaning of their scientific findings. UCS
Rep. Henry Waxman confronted this exact problem January 30th. In front of the Congressional Oversight and Government Reform Committee NASA scientist, Dr. Drew T. Shindell testified to the fact that the government often interfered with his work. He stated:

While it was frustrating for me to see my work suppressed, even more importantly it is a disservice to the public to distort or suppress the information needed for decision-making. But that experience is only one example of a series of actions that attempted to suppress communication of climate science to the public. Also during the fall of 2004, NASA Headquarters insisted that a NASA press officer monitor all interviews either in person or on the phone, a measure unbefitting a democratic society. Some scientists were told their scientific presentations had to be cleared by NASA in advance. Oversight Committee Hearing
If this is not enough, in his most recent budget proposal, President Bush has cut funding of the Environmental Protection Agency by about 4% from $7.6 billion in 2006 to $7.3 billion in 2007. As much as the Bush administration attempts to suppress the truth, one way or another, it will come out.


Sources:
UCS
Oversight Committee Hearing
EPA Budget

2 comments:

Jeff said...

Here's more bad EPA news, from the desk of Sen. Barbara Boxer, Senate EPW committee chair.

One thing I like about the EPA is that they do have several programs to advocate for Smart Growth. On the other hand, the news above is unfortunate.

Mike said...

The intentions of the EPA have been questionable for decades.

Just look at this case study:

"WHO YA GONNA C(S)ITE?" GHOSTBUSTERS AND THE ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATION DEBATE
http://www.law.fsu.edu/journals/landuse/vol131/CORC.HTMl