| Topic: |
Science > Prophecies-Of-Nostradamus |
| User: |
"Aidan" |
| Date: |
10 Feb 2005 11:37:30 PM |
| Object: |
Environmental Scientists instructed to alter finding in favor of big business |
Where's our old friend dishonest wanker (a.k.a dreamwalker) to refute this
one, eh?
============================================================
More than 200 Fish and Wildlife researchers cite cases where conclusions
were reversed to weaken protections and favor business, a survey finds
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-scientists10feb10,0,4954654.story?coll=la-home-nation
By Julie Cart, Times Staff Writer
More than 200 scientists employed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service say
they have been directed to alter official findings to lessen protections for
plants and animals, a survey released Wednesday says.
The survey of the agency's scientific staff of 1,400 had a 30% response rate
and was conducted jointly by the Union of Concerned Scientists and Public
Employees for Environmental Responsibility.
A division of the Department of the Interior, the Fish and Wildlife Service
is charged with determining which animals and plants should be placed on the
endangered species list and designating areas where such species need to be
protected.
More than half of the biologists and other researchers who responded to the
survey said they knew of cases in which commercial interests, including
timber, grazing, development and energy companies, had applied political
pressure to reverse scientific conclusions deemed harmful to their business.
Bush administration officials, including Craig Manson, an assistant
secretary of the Interior who oversees the Fish and Wildlife Service, have
been critical of the 1973 Endangered Species Act, contending that its
implementation has imposed hardships on developers and others while failing
to restore healthy populations of wildlife.
Along with Republican leaders in Congress, the administration is pushing to
revamp the act. The president's proposed budget calls for a $3-million
reduction in funding of Fish and Wildlife's endangered species programs.
"The pressure to alter scientific reports for political reasons has become
pervasive at Fish and Wildlife offices around the country," said Lexi Shultz
of the Union of Concerned Scientists.
Mitch Snow, a spokesman for the Fish and Wildlife Service, said the agency
had no comment on the survey, except to say "some of the basic premises just
aren't so."
The two groups that circulated the survey also made available memos from
Fish and Wildlife officials that instructed employees not to respond to the
survey, even if they did so on their own time. Snow said that agency
employees could not use work time to respond to outside surveys.
Fish and Wildlife scientists in 90 national offices were asked 42 questions
and given space to respond in essay form in the mail-in survey sent in
November.
One scientist working in the Pacific region, which includes California,
wrote: "I have been through the reversal of two listing decisions due to
political pressure. Science was ignored - and worse, manipulated, to build a
bogus rationale for reversal of these listing decisions."
More than 20% of survey responders reported they had been "directed to
inappropriately exclude or alter technical information."
However, 69% said they had never been given such a directive. And, although
more than half of the respondents said they had been ordered to alter
findings to lessen protection of species, nearly 40% said they had never
been required to do so.
Sally Stefferud, a biologist who retired in 2002 after 20 years with the
agency, said Wednesday she was not surprised by the survey results, saying
she had been ordered to change a finding on a biological opinion.
"Political pressures influence the outcome of almost all the cases," she
said. "As a scientist, I would probably say you really can't trust the
science coming out of the agency."
A biologist in Alaska wrote in response to the survey: "It is one thing for
the department to dismiss our recommendations, it is quite another to be
forced (under veiled threat of removal) to say something that is counter to
our best professional judgment."
Don Lindburg, head of the office of giant panda conservation at the
Zoological Society of San Diego, said it was unrealistic to expect federal
scientists to be exempt from politics or pressure.
"I've not stood in the shoes of any of those scientists," he said. "But it
is not difficult for me to believe that there are pressures from those who
are not happy with conservation objectives, and here I am referring to
development interest and others.
"But when it comes to altering data, that is a serious matter. I am really
sorry to hear that scientists working for the service feel they have to do
that. Changing facts to fit the politics - that is a very unhealthy thing.
If I were a scientist in that position I would just refuse to do it."
The Union of Concerned Scientists and the public employee group provided
copies of the survey and excerpts from essay-style responses.
One biologist based in California, who responded to the survey, said in an
interview with The Times that the Fish and Wildlife Service was not
interested in adding any species to the endangered species list.
"For biologists who do endangered species analysis, my experience is that
the majority of them are ordered to reverse their conclusions [if they favor
listing]. There are other biologists who will do it if you won't," said the
biologist, who spoke on condition of anonymity.
.
|
|
| User: "Michael Johnathan McDonald" |
|
| Title: Re: Environmental Scientists instructed to alter finding in favor of big business |
11 Feb 2005 02:45:56 PM |
|
|
Aidan wrote:
LET's dissect this LA TIMES Article for what is the real gist of their
complaint, shall we?
Bush administration officials,
Along with Republican leaders in Congress,
"Political pressures influence the outcome of almost all the cases,"
Welcome to history Aiden. This is as old as politics itself. Examples
of pressures for business over others interests pervades history ( All
parties included - they all do it).
If you read carefully this is the 'Bias' article put out be a
majority-lefty newspaper that has the brains of a flee.
Funny that all that military rocket fuel waste that was damaging the US
environment under Bill Clinton caused the Times to go silent, eh?
Isn't that business? Billy & buds were selling to the Chinese
military dual-use military apps. for conversions into WMD. Now you know
that WMD do not harm the environment, eh smart-pants? Or about Clinton
NAFTA and other US business screwing up other nations environments out
of the American's dialogue, eh?
WOW! China is one of the biggest environmental polluters on earth and
Clinton told them to GO..GO..GO... when he Ok'd and brought them into
the WTO.
Did you see LA Times Harp on This? Nope!
So conclusion:
Bush bashing!
In other words the article reads...blaaa, blaaa ,blaaa. ;)
.
|
|
|
| User: "Krib" |
|
| Title: Re: Environmental Scientists instructed to alter finding in favor of big business |
11 Feb 2005 02:48:50 PM |
|
|
"Michael Johnathan McDonald" <abookoflife@yahoo.com> wrote in message
If you read carefully this is the 'Bias' article put out be a
majority-lefty newspaper that has the brains of a flee.
"brains of a flee" that's so funny it's a keeper ;0)
--
krib
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Aidan" |
|
| Title: Re: Environmental Scientists instructed to alter finding in favorof big business |
11 Feb 2005 06:26:01 PM |
|
|
Michael Johnathan McDonald wrote:
Aidan wrote:
LET's dissect this LA TIMES Article for what is the real gist of their
complaint, shall we?
Bush administration officials,
Along with Republican leaders in Congress,
"Political pressures influence the outcome of almost all the cases,"
Welcome to history Aiden. This is as old as politics itself. Examples
of pressures for business over others interests pervades history ( All
parties included - they all do it).
If you read carefully this is the 'Bias' article put out be a
majority-lefty newspaper that has the brains of a flee.
Funny that all that military rocket fuel waste that was damaging the US
environment under Bill Clinton caused the Times to go silent, eh?
Why is it that you always try to divert people's attention away from
nearly every topic by saying "oooh, Bill Clinton did this and that, but
no one complained then".
Well guess what? I did complain then, just not on this news group. And
not only that, I'll let you in on something not in the article that I
found from reading other sites talking about this:
the survey was meant to cover the last 15 years, so a little over half
of that time was spent under a Clinton administration. But making
Clinton your straw-man for today, doesn't excuse what is going on *right
*now* under the Bush administration. IOW, Environmental complacency in
the past is not an excuse for what is happening right now. And it is
still happening...
Isn't that business? Billy & buds were selling to the Chinese
military dual-use military apps. for conversions into WMD. Now you know
that WMD do not harm the environment, eh smart-pants? Or about Clinton
NAFTA and other US business screwing up other nations environments out
of the American's dialogue, eh?
Yes, many American administrations have disregarded environmental
matters in favor of business... along with many other developed nations...
WOW! China is one of the biggest environmental polluters on earth and
Clinton told them to GO..GO..GO... when he Ok'd and brought them into
the WTO.
Did you see LA Times Harp on This? Nope!
So conclusion:
Bush bashing!
In other words the article reads...blaaa, blaaa ,blaaa. ;)
In other words, you stuck your fingers in your ears and sang 'lalalala'
before you even finished reading the article, right?
You've completely missed the point in that case... Scientists in
*your*country*, are being told to alter their scientific findings and
doctor them to be business friendly.....
Is that science at all? No! Who or what else do you have to rely upon
when the people who's job it is to research these things, are not
allowed to report their true findings?
It's just another example of the American propaganda machine trying to
shape opinions in spite of the truth... and you're right, it's been
happening through-out history... so when does the resistance begin? How
will things ever change, if we don't? Would you prefer to sit flaccid
in the knowledge you're being lied to, on purpose? Knowing that the
world your grandchildren will inherit is currently being sold off to the
highest bidder, under the pretense of false research?
I dunno..... maybe you like being lied to...
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Woodswun" |
|
| Title: Re: Environmental Scientists instructed to alter finding in favor of big business |
11 Feb 2005 09:55:04 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 11 Feb 2005 05:37:30 +0000, Aidan wrote:
Where's our old friend dishonest wanker (a.k.a dreamwalker) to refute this
one, eh?
I think he's still in the kitty box. Su won't let him out until he
behaves.
Woods
(Yes, that was just a joke about not being in the dog house).
.
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
