Some subscribers may be interested in Juliet Eilperin's (2006)
Washington Post article "Climate Researchers Feeling Heat From White
House."
For other reports of the Bush administration's manipulation of
science see, e.g., Dawn (2006), Hobson (2006), Revkin (2006), and
Schoenfeld (2006a,b). For reliable information on Global Warming see
UCS (2006).
"Since the general or prevailing opinion on any subject is rarely or
never the whole truth, it is only by the collision of adverse opinion
that the remainder of the truth has any chance of being supplied."
John Stuart Mill (1806-1873)
Revkin, A.C. 2006. "Climate Expert Says NASA Tried to Silence Him,"
New York Times, 29 January; online at <http://tinyurl.com/r5auc>.
Revkin wrote: "The top climate scientist at NASA says the Bush
administration has tried to stop him from speaking out since he gave
a lecture last month calling for prompt reductions in emissions of
greenhouse gases linked to global warming. The scientist, James E.
Hansen, longtime director of the agency's Goddard Institute for Space
Studies, said in an interview that officials at NASA headquarters had
ordered the public affairs staff to review his coming lectures,
papers, postings on the Goddard Web site and requests for interviews
from journalists. Dr. Hansen said he would ignore the restrictions.
'They feel their job is to be this censor of information going out to
the public,' he said."
Schoenfeld, A.H. 2006a. "What Doesn't Work: The Challenge and Failure
of the What Works Clearinghouse to Conduct Meaningful Reviews of
Studies of Mathematics Curricula," Educational Researcher 35(2);
online at <http://www.aera.net/publications/?id=1148>. For a
discussion see Hake (2006a).
Schoenfeld, A.H. 2006b. "Reply to Comments From the What Works
Clearinghouse on 'What Doesn't Work,'" Educational Researcher 35(2);
online at <http://www.aera.net/publications/?id=1148>. Schoenfeld
wrote (my CAPS: "Let me be clear about the stakes involved in this
case. THE ISSUE
HERE IS THE SUPPRESSION OF A REPORT THAT CHALLENGES THE SCIENTIFIC
UNDERPINNINGS OF THE CURRENT FEDERAL POLICY AGENDA. The What Works
Clearinghouse (WWC) website claims that WWC was funded by the
government 'so that you know what the best scientific evidence has
to say.' The evidence suggests otherwise. IN RECENT YEARS THERE HAS
BEEN MOUNTING EVIDENCE OF ATTEMPTS TO SUPPRESS RESEARCH ON GLOBAL
WARMING . . .[see e.g., Revkin (2006)]. . . THAT CHALLENGES THE
RATIONALE FOR FEDERAL POLICY IN THAT AREA. At stake there, and here,
are the integrity of the research process and the academic freedom on
which it depends. Also at stake is the public trust in results vetted
by federally sponsored groups that claim to represent the best that
science has to offer. The academic community must strive to preserve
the integrity of the research process and its contributions to our
society. In the words of John Philpot Curran, "Eternal vigilance is
the price of liberty."
UCS. 2006. Union of Concerned Scientists. Global Warming Information at
<http://www.ucsusa.org/global_warming/>. "Global warming is one of
the most serious challenges facing us today. To protect the health
and economic well-being of current and future generations, we must
reduce our emissions of heat-trapping gases by using the technology,
know-how, and practical solutions already at our disposal."