We can argue semantics if you want, but the incoming President's people have requested the information. What for if not to hold it against them?
Dude, it’s not an argument. I was just confused. If you meant Trump, I further understand you. I just wasn’t sure who you meant.
I agree that it looks like Trump wants to purge them, but I thought you meant Obama.
Hence the confusion.
Peace.
Well, let's just suppose that what was presented or learned by them at some of these conferences might be actual science that could be of use to study, with an open mind, the case for and against man-made climate change. And someone in the management doesn't want to disclose who those experts are?
It kind of makes the case that they themselves don't believe in the science, as science is based on provable facts, not opinion.
The refusal also brings attention to it more than if they had just complied. A cop pulls you over, which he has a right to do, and asks where you were going. Instead of answering, you refuse to disclose your purpose and destination. That ain't gonna go so well for you...
It puts them on notice right now that the information better be there when he takes office. If there is a HDD failure, there will be even MORE hell to pay. The agency should be backing data anyway, and it better be there.