Posted on 12/18/2010 7:29:36 AM PST by Cincinatus' Wife
The Obama administration issued long-awaited, long-delayed guidelines on Friday to insulate government scientific research from political meddling and to base policy decisions on solid data.
Under the guidelines, government scientists are in general free to speak to journalists and the public about their work, and agencies are prohibited from editing or suppressing reports by independent advisory committees.
And the agencies are instructed that when communicating a scientific finding to the public, they should describe its underlying assumptions. For instance, they are told to describe “probabilities associated with both optimistic and pessimistic projections” — a guideline that, had it been in place last summer, might have helped the administration avoid overly optimistic estimates of the BP oil spill.
In a blog entry on the White House Web site, John P. Holdren, President Obama’s science adviser, said the guidelines set “minimum standards” that federal agencies will be expected to meet.
[snip]
With the delay, some Republicans have charged that the Obama administration was manipulating scientific data in the same way it said the Bush administration had done — to justify policy decisions on climate change, fuel mileage standards, nuclear waste disposal and other issues.
“In fact, what I see from this administration, seems to me they’re holding on to the idea that the world is flat,” Representative Paul Broun, Republican of Georgia, said at the panel hearing.
Francesca T. Grifo, director of the scientific integrity program at the Union of Concerned Scientists, praised the guidelines but cautioned, “A lot of the details are left to the agencies.”
The document states, “Federal scientists may speak to the media and the public about scientific and technological matters based on their official work,” but then adds a caveat: “with appropriate coordination with their immediate supervisor and their public affairs office.” ....
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
Only the 'fittest' have 'survived'.
We’ll see if this is just politcial sleigh of hand.
On this topic:
Federal Judge Rules Fish Study that Forced Officials to Cut Off California Water was Based on Junk Science
A federal judge has ruled that a landmark 2008 environmental study laying the groundwork for controversial water cutbacks from the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta relied on faulty science.
In his much-anticipated decision released Tuesday, U.S. District Judge Oliver Wanger ordered the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to re-examine and rewrite its plan for the threatened delta smelt.
The agency’s solution for shoring up the collapsing species – namely cutting water exports to California cities and farms – is “arbitrary” and “capricious,” the Fresno judge wrote in his 225-page decision.
Article link: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2010/12/14/BAKO1GQMTH.DTL
supervisor and their public affairs office.” ....
Scientists can say anything they want as long as it is approved by government. What a joke!!! This is why we still have this global warming myth!!
...to insulate government scientific research from political meddling and to base policy decisions on solid data. Under the guidelines, government scientists are in general free to speak to journalists and the public about their work, and agencies are prohibited from editing or suppressing reports by independent advisory committees.IOW, to make sure no scientific findings are issued that are not in accord with NGO political agendas. Thanks Cincinatus' Wife.
The games are not played after reports are written, but very early in the process by determining WHICH reports are written, and what lines of research will receive government funding.
Man, that has the ring of totalitarianism in it.
Tom Weller ("Science made Stupid: One of the best books ever written!) said it best (emphasis added):
Welcome to Chicago style ‘ghetto ethics’ being forced onto scientists.
Alston Chase’s Playing God In Yellowstone covered the issue of environmental science and politics. He dealt with political bafflegab such as this jewel: “The document states, “Federal scientists may speak to the media and the public about scientific and technological matters based on their official work,” but then adds a caveat: “with appropriate coordination with their immediate supervisor and their public affairs office.””
Note the “with appropriate coordination with their immediate supervisor and their public affairs officer”.
Same old, same old - but with the “In their facees” attitude of the Ghetto Trash we sent to DC two years ago.
Her is the best summation of government reorganization yet written:
“I was to learn later in life that we tend to meet each new situation with reorganization, .....and a wonderful way it is to produce the illusion of progress while creating demoralization and inefficiency.”
It was written by a Roman named Petronius, who died in A.D. 66.
Same old, same old - indeed!
Doesn’t anyone ever ask why a scientist needs a “supervisor”?
Bump!
RATS only tell the truth if it is politically expedient to do so. John Holdren is a GRAND GURU RAT, so anything this Marxist says has to be taken with a grain of salt. Assume there is a subversive aspect to any action taken by this Administration.
In other words, the present government is saying, “We’re going to give you ALL the scientific facts, EXCEPT what we don’t want you to know.” True scientists who work for the government must be tearing their hair out.
After the first line I looked for your name as poster... twice.
Anyone want to buy a bridge over the East River...cheap?
Hi freedumb2003.
It’s hard to find graduate students who know how to research past scientific work. They also have great difficultly posing an answerable question. Either they’re not cut out for research or they were not taught how it’s done.
I like this statement from the above article: "The document is unlikely to stem widespread complaints that government scientists are under pressure not to speak to the media and wider public. It says the researchers may speak to the media and the public "with appropriate communication with their immediate supervisor" - wording that may provide scope for gagging within some branches of government."
No S#@$ Sherlock!
As John P. Holdren recently told a group of graduate students, “The U.S. can’t expect to be number one in science and technology forever.”
But Wikileaks gets a mere yawn from Holder and the gang in the WH. I don't buy their latest "anger."
And I am sure what he meant was, “...and I will do everything in my power to give away every critical technology to my Chicom buddies or any other LEFTIST country bent on the destruction of the United States.”
Never forget that the Clintons facilitated the transfer of top secret submarine technology to the CHICOMS so that they can run silent and avoid detection. WAS THAT A CHINESE MISSLE FIRED OFF THE COAST OF CALIFORNIA? No other plausible explanation has been put forward.
Or swoon over NASA "search for life" or "global climate disruption."
Backing off an arsenic-eating claim (NASA search for life)
White House: Global Warming Out, 'Global Climate Disruption' In
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.