"We are restoring science to its rightful place. On March 9th, I signed an executive memorandum with a clear message: Under my administration, the days of science taking a back seat to ideology are over. (Applause.) Our progress as a nation –- and our values as a nation –- are rooted in free and open inquiry. To undermine scientific integrity is to undermine our democracy. It is contrary to our way of life."
On June 26 cbsnews.com reported that the author of a 98 page EPA report critical of global warming apparently had his report squashed by the Obama administration. According to CBS news...
"Less than two weeks before the agency formally submitted its pro-regulation recommendation to the White House, an EPA center director quashed a 98-page report that warned against making hasty "decisions based on a scientific hypothesis that does not appear to explain most of the available data."
The author of the report one Alan Carlin- a long time EPA researcher -said in the CBS interview that he felt as though his boss ,Al McGartland, was in danger of losing his job if he didn't get Carlin working on "something else." Carlin also stated that he felt as though the source of this attempt to deep six his report was "obviously coming from higher levels." In other words the White House.
This is truly intriguing, especially in the light of the Presidents statement to the National Academy of Science on April 27 of this year that science taking a backseat to ideology are over. It brings to mind remembrances of the accusations against the Bush administration of suppressing studies that were favorable to the theory of global warming.
In the preface to his report to the EPA Carlin writes... " We have become increasingly more concerned that EPA and many other agencies and countries have paid to little attention to the science of global warming. EPA and others have tended to accept the findings of outside groups, particularly the IPCC and the CCSP, as being correct without a careful critical examination of their conclusions and documentation. If they should be found to be inncorrect at a later date... it appears likely ... that EPA may be blamed for this error."
This is truly interesting that these remarks-as well as- the rest of this report may have been censored especially considering that in the afore mentioned address to the The National Academy of Sciences Mr. Obama went on to state... "I want to be sure that facts are driving scientific decisions -- and not the other way around."
Which way is it going to be Science driving policy or policy driving science? It looks as though science may be losing out-and considering that a growing number of scientists are increasingly critical of global warming- one has to ask is the present agenda of Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, and Barack Obama, to enact sweeping global warming legislation, legislation that could severely impact all areas of the United States economy, based on science or ideology? This writer is forced to conclude it is based on ideology.