The Obama Administration – A Return To Science Based Policy.

Share Button

Err…. not so much.

So the EPA is prepared to issue the latest Endamgerment Report. It’s supposed to be based on the latest scientific research. Well, not if it interferes with an ideology. An EPA scientist tried to have the agency include some of the latest peer reviewed science that points away from carbon dioxide as the main source of warming for the last thirty years. He was completely rebuffed and reassigned to a menial position having nothing more to do with the report. I was skeptical as the first whiff of the controversy appeared through the Competitive Enterprise Institutes, which is not exactly an unbiased player. But it looks like another source has backed the claim:

The source, who chooses not to be identified for fear of retaliation, said that Carlin was rebuffed in his attempt to introduce scientific evidence that does not accord with the EPA’s view of global warming, which largely relies on IPCC reports. The source also saw Carlin’s report and said that it was ‘based on 8 points of peer-reviewed, recent and relevant scientific publications’ that cast doubt on the wisdom of regulating CO2 as a pollutant.

The EPA’s draft Endangerment Finding was initially written over a year ago during the Bush administration, and Lisa Jackson (the new head of the EPA) and her team wanted to get the Finding out on or near Earth Day, according to a schedule that was made public about a week before formal publication of the proposal. The draft was submitted to agency workgroups with only one week for review and comment, which is unprecedented, and received only light comments–except for Carlin’s.

Alan Carlin, who had hosted a series of seminars featuring peer-reviewed scientists who disagree with the IPCC reports (but were unattended by members of the workgroup developing the Endangerment Finding) went public via the Competitive Enterprise Institute after realizing that there would be no debate about the science. The lectures by the scientists are available on the EPA website, but were not even mentioned in the Finding. Carlin was advised to get an attorney–and has since been reassigned to mundane work, some of which is normally performed by outside contractors.

Here is more details from Watts Up With That.

PS. The EPA was supposed to consider public opinion in this report, but that was apparently a sham.

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a Reply