Why do Republicans even spend money on scientific studies when they don’t believe in science? Do they have them done just so they can do some creative writing in the name of science, like they did with history? If that was the intention of Texas’ attempt to purge a scientific study on Galveston Bay of the words “climate change”, then they have set in motion the law of unintended consequences. Scientists are revolting at being made climate change denial pawns in disregard to the evidence.
From the Guardian:
Officials in Rick Perry's home state of Texas have set off a scientists' revolt after purging mentions of climate change and sea-level rise from what was supposed to be a landmark environmental report. The scientists said they were disowning the report on the state of Galveston Bay because of political interference and censorship from Perry appointees at the state's environmental agency.
By academic standards, the protest amounts to the beginnings of a rebellion: every single scientist associated with the 200-page report has demanded their names be struck from the document. "None of us can be party to scientific censorship so we would all have our names removed," said Jim Lester, a co-author of the report and vice-president of the Houston Advanced Research Centre.
It seems the editing was done with a bias:
"They just simply went through and summarily struck out any reference to climate change, any reference to sea level rise, any reference to human influence – it was edited or eliminated," said John Anderson, an oceanography at Rice University, and author of the chapter targeted by the government censors.
Anderson. "That's not scientific review that's just straight forward censorship."
From Mother Joneswho is tracking the changes:
It's not surprising that people appointed by Perry, the climate deniers' favorite climate denier, would excise references to climate change from a scientific paper. But the commission's response to the Chronicle's request for a comment was pretty classic:
TCEQ spokeswoman Andrea Morrow gave no reason for the deletions in an e-mail response, saying only that the agency disagreed with information in the article.
"It would be irresponsible to take whatever is sent to us and publish it," she said.
Hmmm...the people appointed by Perry on the commission are qualified to disagree with the scientific research? We know Perry is not Mr. Science Guy.
First, Perry was asked whether he thinks climate change is happening. He responded with the old trope that the "science isn't settled" on climate change. The models could be wrong, he said, and he asserted that we shouldn't make political decisions based on what could be flawed science. And even if a lot of scientists (actually, 97 percent of them, to be exact) agree that the science is settled, that's not enough according to Perry. "Galileo got out-voted for a spell," he said.
Even though Galileo ended up being forced to recant by the Inquisition and spent the rest of his life on home arrest, he wasn’t wrong. But don’t let facts or science get in your way.
3:11 PM PT: TY, my first time on the Rec list.