Smithsonian 'Toned Down the Science' In Climate Change Exhibit

An anonymous reader writes "According to an International Herald Tribune article, the Smithsonian pre-emptively toned down the scientific content of a climate change exhibit put into place last year. The changes, including removal of scientist conclusions and muddying of displayed data, were made to ensure that the exhibit would not offend the Congress or the White House. Pressure brought to bear by Institute officials resulted in the resignation of Robert Sullivan, a sixteen year veteran of the organization. 'This is not the first time the Smithsonian has been accused of taking politics into consideration. The congressionally chartered institution scaled down a 1995 exhibit of the restored Enola Gay, the B-29 that dropped the atomic bomb on Hiroshima, after veterans complained it focused too much on the damage and deaths. Amid the oil-drilling debate in 2003, a photo exhibit of Alaska's Arctic National Wildlife Refuge was moved to a less prominent space.'"

Comments

Now hold on here

[stratjakt]

It's pretty common knowledge that the IPCC writes its summary first, then goes looking for "data" that supports it, and ignores all research to the contrary.

Perhaps that kind of shit doesn't need to be enshrined in the constitution, and perhaps the decisions weren't quite so political. Not everyone thinks doomsday is tomorrow.

Maybe they're waiting for some more credible proof. Maybe they don't want egg on their face when some of the "OMG 900 foot waves is a-comin tomorrow unless you buy a Prius RIGHT NOW" hysteria is shown to be shit.

Well waddaya know....

[DiamondGeezer]

Lets see Slashdot's censorship system work its magic:

Many leading scientists have come to believe that human activity is contributing to warming of the planet.

"I see it in some ways as similar to the sort-of debate that has taken place with regard to the science of evolution," said Professor Michael Mann, director of Pennsylvania State University's Earth System Science Center. "Just as I would hope that the Smithsonian would stand firmly behind the science of evolution, it would also be my hope that they would stand firmly behind the science that supports influence on climate. Politically, they may be controversial, but scientifically they are not."

Would this be the same Michael Mann, author of the incredibly flawed and fraudulent "Mann Hockey Stick" which has been extensively debunked by Steve McIntyre and Ross McKitrick?

Yes it is.

So let me guess - they put in the Hockey Stick and then someone pointed out that its a scientific crock of shit. So they hid it behind spaghetti and made it fuzzy like they did in the IPCC 4th Assessment. Would I be close?

If I was you Dr Mann, I'd be hoping for the fuzzy version because the sharp version is a demonstrated pile of crap.

Shall we see who is the biggest abuser of censorship? Step right up.

Re:Well waddaya know....

[DiamondGeezer]

No disinfomation at all. The Mann Hockey Stick remains as devoid of statistical significance as it always has been. It's also not sensitive to the removal of dendroclimatological proxies, especially the bristlecone pines of Colorado, without which it loses its Hockey Stick shape.

Oh and the others? All of the others have similar negligible statistical significance and nearly all of them use Mann's PC1 as a proxy.

It ain't just debunked. What we have here is the "walking undead" of climate science.

Re:Well waddaya know....

[DiamondGeezer]

As I predicted, censorship is the way to go. Well done those slashdot cowards.

The day will come...

[iknownuttin]

when the US of A seriously lags the rest of the World in science. The US will become an economic backwater, trailing China and India, the EU will continue to grow and Asia will become their main trading partners.

Then, we as a country, will look around and see how our way of life was destroyed and how poor we have become. The blame will, of course, be placed on others for their "unfair" business practices and their "unAmerican" culture - never will the finger be pointed at the folks who are the actual culprits.

Re:science

[JustNiz]

People themselves are to blame. Actually the most selfish ones who'd rather not face the truth if it means they have to take some responsibility for their own actions.
Its no coincidence that all the denial is coming from USA, as they are also the worst polluters per capita, and the most ignorant, greedy, self-centred and gluttonous nation in the world. They are also quickly becoming the most hated because of it.

Anyone defending Bush's policies can enlist or die

[FatSean]

How yah like that one, jerk-face?

Re:Sometimes...

[Glock27]

You don't launch the exhibit with "Hey look at our horrid atrocities!" splattered all over it.-- Absolutely not! That would ruin the image people are trying to indoctr..errr...teach our children that slavery didn't exist, and we didn't bomb two cities into rubble. We just relocated them into an ethereal presence is all. If you don't like owning up to your actions....don't do the actions. When did that get so difficult?

Are you somehow implying that bombing Hiroshima and Nagasaki was wrong? If so, you're a fool.

A country that can't seem to absorb fewer than 4,000 dead today had lost close to half a million people. Anything to reduce US casualties was acceptable. If the Japanese had won, there would have been a never-ending bloodbath, so mercy wasn't a consideration. In any event, ending the war earlier was merciful to both sides in the long run.