« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

FRONT PAGE CONTRIBUTOR

More Obama say one thing do another – science suppression edition

In his December 20, 2008 weekly address, President-elect Obama set forth some soaring rhetoric regarding science:

Because the truth is that promoting science isn’t just about providing resources – it’s about protecting free and open inquiry.  It’s about ensuring that facts and evidence are never twisted or obscured by politics or ideology.  It’s about listening to what our scientists have to say, even when it’s inconvenient – especially when it’s inconvenient.  Because the highest purpose of science is the search for knowledge, truth and a greater understanding of the world around us.  That will be my goal as President of the United States – and I could not have a better team to guide me in this work.

Just words.

Contrary to Obama’s rhetoric his administration has suppressed inconvenient scientific evidence clearly showing that global warming isn’t as bad as the cap and trade advocates have been telling us.

The following video outlines the story:

Declan McCullagh reports that according to recently disclosed emails, the Environmental Protection Agency suppressed an internal report that was skeptical of claims about global warming:

Less than two weeks before the agency formally submitted its pro-regulation recommendation to the White House, an EPA center director quashed a 98-page report that warned against making hasty “decisions based on a scientific hypothesis that does not appear to explain most of the available data.”

The EPA official, Al McGartland, said in an e-mail message (PDF) to a staff researcher on March 17: “The administrator and the administration has decided to move forward…and your comments do not help the legal or policy case for this decision.”

The e-mail correspondence raises questions about political interference in what was supposed to be an independent review process inside a federal agency–and echoes criticisms of the EPA under the Bush administration, which was accused of suppressing a pro-climate change document.

E-mail messages released this week show that Alan Carlin, the primary author of the 98-page EPA report, was ordered not to “have any direct communication” with anyone outside his small group at EPA on the topic of climate change, and was informed that his report would not be shared with the agency group working on the topic.

The suppressed Carlin report was especially inconvenient for Obama’s cap and trade push:

Carlin’s report listed a number of recent developments he said the EPA did not consider, including that global temperatures have declined for 11 years; that new research predicts Atlantic hurricanes will be unaffected; that there’s “little evidence” that Greenland is shedding ice at expected levels; and that solar radiation has the largest single effect on the earth’s temperature.

If there is a need for the government to lower planetary temperatures, Carlin believes, other mechanisms would be cheaper and more effective than regulation of carbon dioxide. One paper he wrote says managing sea level rise or reducing solar radiation reaching the earth would be more cost-effective alternatives.

How long will President Obama get away with saying one thing while he does the opposite?

COMMENTS

  • ciscoguy

    Obama’s been bastardizing science since he repealed the Mexico City Policy and started funding stem-cell research. To people like him, science is only seen as a political tool which can be twisted to fit their agenda and presented as truth. They have no interest in holding themselves accountable to the truth, only in advancing their ideals. Leftists cannot tolerate scientific dissention to their global warming ? sorry, climate change ethos, since it?s hard to control your behavior unless everyone is on board. Rational, clear-thinking people know when human life begins and don?t try to nuance it behind euphemisms like ?choice?.

    In a way, these two issues are similar in that leftists try to wrap them up in an ambiguous label in order to get people to buy in. Climate change? Sure, I believe the climate is constantly changing ? I just don?t believe that man is causing it. Choice? I love choice. I just don?t think the choice to an abortion should be a legal option any more than strangling a guy on the street.

  • gonzo55

    This current brand of liberals are the epitome of know-nothing anti-intellectualism… global warming and evolution are simply facts, which can’t be disputed without childish name calling, tax cuts increase deficits, regardless of what 65 years of history tell us in the US, killing an innocent human being is not murder because… they say so, and protecting traditional marriage actually weakens the American family because… they say so. Arguing with these people by presenting “facts” and “evidence” is pointless. They just fall back on their tiresome platitudes and bizarre theories.

  • 6eorge Jetson

    The effects on the atmosphere have been noticable in the US and Europe.

    Sulfur Dioxide Escapes into Atmosphere

    We gotta do something about those darn volcanos

    • DONTREADONME

      sulfur dioxide into the upper atmosphere becomes a scatterer of incoming solar radiation. If enough of it can be injected into the upper atmosphere, the already cool summer will turn colder. Don’t expect AWG propenents to talk about this.

  • redneck_hippie

    to fight global warming.

    Check out other Ras results on generic congressional polling (R +2), another negative pres approval index (-1).