Rewriting Environmental Science

Aqua OS X writes to tell us CBS News is reporting that government scientist James Hansen recently spoke out against the White House in an appearance on 60 Minutes. From the article: "Hansen is arguably the world's leading researcher on global warming. He's the head of NASA's top institute studying the climate. But this imminent scientist tells correspondent Scott Pelley that the Bush administration is restricting who he can talk to and editing what he can say. Politicians, he says, are rewriting the science."

Comments

Re:Parallels with Easter Island

[kfg]

Actually, he's up on the latest proposed model:

http://www.livescience.com/history/060309_easter_i sland.html

KFG

Video of 60 Minutes Report

[ortcutt]

Windows Media

Quicktime

Re:Video of 60 Minutes Report - Link Here

[ortcutt]

The links above don't work. Go here instead and click on the links.

Some notable quotes and comments from the article

[Beryllium Sphere(tm)]

You can't spin this as a liberal versus conservative thing, this is science versus politics:

Politically, Hansen calls himself an independent and he's had trouble with both parties. He says, from time to time, the Clinton administration wanted to hear warming was worse that it was. But Hansen refused to spin the science that way.

The Clinton administration, however, didn't go so far as to muzzle the scientist:

"In my more than three decades in the government I've never witnessed such restrictions on the ability of scientists to communicate with the public."

One of the worst ways to interfere with communications is to put words in someone's mouth. The article says that before Hansen's reports were published the Council on Environmental Quality's chief of staff would rewrite them. What credentials did the chief of staff have for changing the work of a climatologist? He used to be a lobbyist for the American Petroleum Institute. He's at Exxon Mobil now.

The other important, if not newsworthy, quote was

"Even to raise issues internally is immediately career limiting," says Piltz. "That's why you will find not too many people in the federal agencies who will speak freely about all the things they know, unless they're retired or unless they're ready to resign."

An organization with a culture like that might be right about something someday, but only by coincidence.

Re:Thanks for the laugh

[Stephan Schulz]

...And frankly, I'm a lot more afraid of WW3 than global warming. While I'm all for alternative energy, recycling, minimizing fossil fuel consumption, and what not, all the bullshit from BOTH SIDES of the global warming argument have made me extremely cynical of wether or not it should be taken seriously.

Frankly (and I have absolutely no credentials to back up my opinion) I think the sea levels rising several meters of more in the next 20-30 years has about as much chance of occuring...

...except that noone serious proposes that. I would suggest to get some information about the state of the science. The IPCC Third Assessment Report gives a good overview. It is a bit dated now (published in 2001), but available online for free. The Fourth Assessment Report should come out next year. And no, the IPCC is not some front organization of Black Helicopters United, but an organization whose reports are generally supported by the scientific community, including most individual researchers as well as formal bodies like the national academies of science. Wikipedia also has a number of good articles - start at global warming.

...as Bush resigning from office so he can star in the next gay cowboy movie.

Now there's a thought!

Re:Indian Wisdom: "The Earth Does Not Belong to Ma

[1u3hr]

As for the how ... well people aren't gonna like it, but its gonna have to happen

Actually, if not for immigration, most of the first world would already be in population decline. When people get reasonably comfortable, and childhood mortality is negligible, children are deferred and one or two are sufficent for most to satisfy their need for procreation. We've got one and that was enough for us.

Re:Easy Way to Limit Population

[Captain Bonzo]

Japan is a perfect example of the opposite. They have a NEGATIVE birthrate because the affluence of their society has led many to chose not to have children.

I'm busy trying to work out how it is possible to have a negative birthrate. The best I can do is imagine some kind of reverse aging field affecting parts of Japan, where adults become children, children become babies, and babies crawl back into... No, better stop right there.

Negative population growth, on the other hand, is easier to explain.

Re:Indian Wisdom: "The Earth Does Not Belong to Ma

[Zoop]

You misspelled "Dated Wisdom from a Hollywood Hack."

Re:imminent scientist?

[InsertCleverUsername]

Yeah... It's sad when paid writers can't get it right.

In The Twilight of American Culture (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/039332169X/sr=8- 1/qid=1142947630/ref=pd_bbs_1/103-3152913-4802223? _encoding=UTF8) Morris Berman points out the spelling mistakes in Roman graffiti near the fall of Rome, in addition to many other parallels with the current state of our empire.

Re:MoreBadAnalogies

[sgtrock]

Sigh. Doesn't anyone recognize a joke these days?

How to quote a misspelling

[rubato]

There is an idiom in English for reporting a text containing a misspelling or other inappropriate usage. The poster should have written:

But this imminent (sic) scientist tells correspondent Scott Pelley that the Bush..."

This points out the mistake to the reader while indicating that the poster recognized it.

Re:How to quote a misspelling

[rubato]

Sigh. No good deed goes unpunished.

Instead of just complaining about the bad spelling and grammar around here, I thought I would take a moment to show how it should have been done. There are a great many SD readers whose native language is not English. (Unfortunately they are learning the language from SD posts.) Not all of them, at least, would know about "sic".

As to your point, it doesn't matter where the submitter's italicized text came from; the relevant point is that it is verbatim and not the submitter's own writing. In such circumstances it is not pedantic to include "sic"; it is just good usage, colloquial or otherwise.

I don't know whether the submitter recognized the error or not. I'm really not convinced that it's obvious from the posting.

I do agree with you that the editor might have fixed it. The "editing" of Slashdot scarcely deserves the name.

Proof Provided in Thornburgh Report

[Derling Whirvish]

And in fact, the documents were never proven to be forgeries.

The documents were proven to be forgeries by Peter Tytell, proof of which was even included in CBS's own Thornburgh-Boccardi report. It's in Appendix 4.

Whoops.

[rossifer]

Of course not. Japan has eaten through it's tree population and is not having to import every square inch of wood.

Actually, Japan has the highest percentage of forestation of any first world country (almost 70%).

As for other imports of Japan, you are more correct: they import much of their food, including staples like rice and seafood. This puts the population of the island at risk in the event of instability of their trading network. The modern economic environment, however, means that the population of Japan is not at risk as long as the world remains somewhat stable and demand for their products remains strong.

The declining birth rate there and in most developed countries is one of the few pieces of good news in the long-term story of human survival on this planet. IMO anyway.

Regards,
Ross