Scientists Challenge U.S. on Scientific Distortions

rocketjam writes "The Union of Concerned Scientists, an independent organization which includes 20 Nobel laureates, issued a statement accusing the Bush administration of distorting scientific fact and supressing findings to fit administration policy decisions on the environment, health, biomedical research and nuclear weaponry. They also issued a 37-page report detailing the accusations. Bush's science adviser, John Marburger, called the report biased and said he was troubled that some very prestigious scientists had signed the statement. Numerous complaints from the scientific community about the administration's scientific policy-making prompted the The Union of Concerned Scientists to begin investigating the issue last summer. As an example, the group noted the panel that advises the Centers for Disease Control on lead poisoning had been prepared to recommend strengthening regulations due to new findings on lead toxicity, but had their recommendation rejected by the administration and two panel members replaced by individuals with ties to the lead industry." Other articles: Sydney Morning Herald, New York Times, The Guardian.

Comments

Re:Who to believe?

[Shuh]

The fact is, the scientists are releasing a paper about science, and the fact it has political ramifications is just sad. Scientific facts are not political. They just exist.

The fact also is this: this paper has been conveniently released after the fact and before the election. Ask yourself, if these "scientific" facts were so vital to the question of the war and our leadership, why weren't they promulgated before the war?


My personal "theory" on this is that now that the war has happened and the risks have not panned out, it's time to bicker by any means necessarily and politically destroy the people who made the policies.


If these Nobel scientists had made these same scientific pronouncements before the war, they would have put their reputations on the line because finding chemicals and WMDs would have put egg on their face. Conveniently releasing the "scientific fact" after all the risk seems to have dissipated is more like arm-chair quarterbacking now for political purposes, especially when there are primaries going on and an ensuing election in the next few months.

Re:Who to believe?

[b-baggins]

OK. Read my post again. The Nobel Committee themselves publicly stated they gave the prize to Carter specifically to send a political message to Bush.

The Union of Concerned Scientists is a political action group. The scientists in this group are there because they share a political ideology. They are most certainly politically active.

Bush? Distort the Facts?

[webzombie]

WTH!