Imagine if the head of a federal agency announced a new policy for its scientific research: from now on, the agency would no longer allow its studies to be reviewed and challenged by independent scientists, only democrat scientists, and its researchers would not share the data on which their conclusions were based. The response from scientists and journalists would be outrage. By refusing peer review from outsiders, the agency would be rejecting a fundamental scientific tradition. By not sharing data with other researchers, it would be violating a standard t***sparency requirement at leading scientific journals. If a Republican official did such a thing, you’d expect to hear denunciations of this latest offensive in the “Republican war on science.”

That’s the accusation being hurled at Scott Pruitt, the Republican who heads the Environmental Protection Agency. But Pruitt hasn’t done anything to discourage peer review. In fact, he’s done the opposite: he has called for the use of more independent experts to review the EPA’s research and has just announced that the agency would rely only on studies for which data are available to be shared.

Well, that's the last thing the Al Gore people want, that will show how they are laying about the facts.

https://www.city-journal.org/html/scott-pruitt-warrior-science-15821.html

Imagine if the head of a federal agency announced a new policy for its scientific research: from now on, the agency would no longer allow its studies to be reviewed and challenged by independent scientists, only democrat scientists, and its researchers would not share the data on which their conclusions were based. The response from scientists and journalists would be outrage. By refusing peer review from outsiders, the agency would be rejecting a fundamental scientific tradition. By not sharing data with other researchers, it would be violating a standard t***sparency requirement at leading scientific journals. If a Republican official did such a thing, you’d expect to hear denunciations of this latest offensive in the “Republican war on science.”

That’s the accusation being hurled at Scott Pruitt, the Republican who heads the Environmental Protection Agency. But Pruitt hasn’t done anything to discourage peer review. In fact, he’s done the opposite: he has called for the use of more independent experts to review the EPA’s research and has just announced that the agency would rely only on studies for which data are available to be shared.

Well, that's the last thing the Al Gore people want, that will show how they are laying about the facts.

https://www.city-journal.org/html/scott-pruitt-warrior-science-15821.html

I'm a scientist and I can confirm that science has become politicized mostly through issues that have been pushed by our l*****t brethren. However, this is not unexpected as, after all, science is a human activity that is subject to all of the human failures, including bias. That is why one of the treasured requirements of scientific data is reproducibility by independent researchers. That is hard to f**e as the proponents of N-rays, polywater, and cold fusion came to learn. Of much greater concern to me, at least, is the use of unsubstantiated data in formulating government regulations and policy, as is discussed in today's issue of the Wall Street Journal. Your example of DDT is classic, not so much whether the data were right or wrong, but because of the irresponsible way in which the data were used to support policy.

Imagine if the head of a federal agency announced a new policy for its scientific research: from now on, the agency would no longer allow its studies to be reviewed and challenged by independent scientists, only democrat scientists, and its researchers would not share the data on which their conclusions were based. The response from scientists and journalists would be outrage. By refusing peer review from outsiders, the agency would be rejecting a fundamental scientific tradition. By not sharing data with other researchers, it would be violating a standard t***sparency requirement at leading scientific journals. If a Republican official did such a thing, you’d expect to hear denunciations of this latest offensive in the “Republican war on science.”

That’s the accusation being hurled at Scott Pruitt, the Republican who heads the Environmental Protection Agency. But Pruitt hasn’t done anything to discourage peer review. In fact, he’s done the opposite: he has called for the use of more independent experts to review the EPA’s research and has just announced that the agency would rely only on studies for which data are available to be shared.

Liberals have accomplished the very successful dumbing down of our citizenry during the past 40 years. This was an absolute long-term plan so that less and less people would have the ability to think and understand complex issues in science and politics. It is the Lemmings affect so that all of their brainwashed followers simply nod their heads and simply believe wh**ever their supposed leaders say without thought or logical review or challenge. G****l W*****g is a prime example of group think without challenge. None of the scientific model predictions have come true and that is why they were force to change their talking point message to C*****e C****e. The earths climate has never been static for any long period of time so their basic premise is farcical. Since our last Ice Age, the earths average temperatures have been bot much higher and much lower than they are now. There are ice core samples that prove my last statement as simple t***h. The reason for G****l W*****g/C*****e C****e has been promoted by supposed leaders is to create another simple method for taxation and to add another layer of control over your everyday life. A docile and conformatly stupid citizenry is much easier to manage and control.

Well, that's the last thing the Al Gore people want, that will show how they are laying about the facts.

https://www.city-journal.org/html/scott-pruitt-warrior-science-15821.html