Yes, I watched most of that 60 Minutes episode. During the episode, they essentially said that the White House isn't actually denying that global warming exists, but it is trying to control information about global warming as it comes out of NASA and other agencies.
At some point during the Bush administration, the White House decided that they need to review any public statements that are going to be made by NASA regarding global warming. Repeatedly during the show, they showed copies of NASA Press Releases with handwritten notes on them (written by white house lawyers) changing words like "dramatic" and "significant" to things like "potential" and "unknown". The real problem I have with this is that an attorney is editing a scientific paper. I think that the scientific peer review system pretty well handles proving data and theories right or wrong. I'm not really sure why attorneys are even involved. The White House has the right to be informed of data, and maybe even to have a little influence over it's release schedule, but I don't really see why non-scientists are hand-editing scientific papers. -Cameron On 3/22/06, Vivec <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > CBS News is reporting that government scientist James Hansen recently > [1]spoke out against the White House in an appearance on 60 Minutes. > From the article: "Hansen is arguably the world's leading researcher > on global warming. He's the head of NASA's top institute studying the > climate. But this imminent scientist tells correspondent Scott Pelley > that the Bush administration is restricting who he can talk to and > editing what he can say. Politicians, he says, are rewriting the > science." > > As a government scientist, James Hansen is taking a risk. He says > there are things the White House doesn't want you to hear but he's > going to say them anyway. > > What James Hansen believes is that global warming is accelerating. He > points to the melting arctic and to Antarctica, where new data show > massive losses of ice to the sea. > > Is it fair to say at this point that humans control the climate? Is > that possible? > > "There's no doubt about that, says Hansen. "The natural changes, the > speed of the natural changes is now dwarfed by the changes that humans > are making to the atmosphere and to the surface." > > "In my more than three decades in the government I've never witnessed > such restrictions on the ability of scientists to communicate with the > public," says Hansen. > > http://tinyurl.com/qoo59 > --------- > > It's amazing that this stuff is happening now...all around us.And it's > out in the open, making the news...and so many are either in complete > agreement, exhibit utter apathy, or are just too stupid to see the > dangers of what's happening. Freedom taken for granted. > > At least there are still Americans who hold true to that country's > ideals, but I find facts such as these when applied to what is > supposed to be the Lead country of hte Free World...very, very > alarming. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:201114 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
