Posted on 11/09/2001 8:09:36 AM PST by jimkress
Edited on 04/22/2004 12:31:34 AM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
A scientific study that spawned a federal law requiring the testing of chemicals for their potential to interfere with hormonal processes has been found to be the product of scientific misconduct.
The federal Office of Research Integrity just ruled that Steven F. Arnold, a former researcher at the Tulane University Center for Bioenvironmental Research, "committed scientific misconduct by intentionally falsifying the research results published in the journal Science and by providing falsified and fabricated materials to investigating officials." Arnold lied and then covered up.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
They do not even read the bills they vote for much ess they go by what their staff tell them.
These reprots that come from the U.N. and environmental agencies are misleading so they can get their agenda acted into law in America.
Let me givew you one example;
on the clean air act, in reference to particle matters,
Carol Browner in 1996 over ruled her own board of scientist that on particle matters, it was junk science.
Here we have one person without approval of Congress affecting every citizen of America.
This reminds me of an allegedly true story about a famous German aerodynamicist and ardent Nazi (the name escapes me) who wanted to demonstrate the superiority of "Aryan Science." His data became suspiciously "cleaner," because he had begun making it up.
In that case, as well as this, we see that scientific accuracy was not the "persuasive" part -- it was the provision of helpful "evidence" to support a pre-determined political conviction.
Russia has a key role to play in global warming talks
By the BBC's Elizabeth Blunt in Marrakech Delegates to a UN meeting on climate change in the Moroccan city of Marrakech are pressing on with their discussions to finalise the details of the Kyoto Protocol.
This is the international treaty under which industrialised countries would commit themselves to legally-binding cuts in their emissions of the gases which are believed by many scientists to be warming the planet.
But one country which could yet block agreement is Russia, which is playing a key role now that the United States is no longer part of the negotiations.
The moment President Bush decided the United States would stay outside the protocol, Russia stepped into the spotlight.
After the US, it is listed as the next biggest producer of greenhouse gases in the industrialised world. If neither Russia nor the United States take part, the whole plan will collapse.
Substantial concessions were already made to Russia in the last round of talks in Bonn in July.
Forest sinks
Russia was allowed to argue that its vast forests soaked up at least 17 million metric tonnes of carbon a year, thus sparing it the need to reduce its use of coal and oil by that amount.
But now the Russian delegation is asking for further concessions, and threatening not to ratify the agreement unless the allowance for its forests is almost doubled.
In his formal statement, the Russian representative talked grandly of using national potential and creating incentives for sustainable development. But other delegates are calling it blackmail.
The spokesman for the developing countries said that Russia's demands were definitely far too high. But it looks as if Russia will get an increase in the allowance that it can claim for its forests, just in the interests of keeping it inside the agreement.
The problem is that every extra tonne of carbon on the allowance allows the burning of an equivalent amount of coal and oil, and that giving way to Russia could open the floodgates to claims from other countries.
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.