Climate Expert Says NASA Tried to Silence Him

[tusaki]

nytimes

Climate Expert Says NASA Tried to Silence Him
January 29, 2006

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. ... The fight between Dr. Hansen and administration officials echoes other recent disputes. At climate laboratories of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, for example, many scientists who routinely took calls from reporters five years ago can now do so only if the interview is approved by administration officials in Washington, and then only if a public affairs officer is present or on the phone. Where scientists' points of view on climate policy align with those of the administration, however, there are few signs of restrictions on extracurricular lectures or writing.

Scary, regardless of the varacity of his claims about the causes of global warming... Only propanda is allowed now.

[SteveA]

Scary, regardless of the varacity of his claims about the causes of global warming... Only propanda is allowed now.

If dissenting views weren't allowed to science it would stagnate. Either way Washington has too much influence for my comfort.

Science is largely owned by government in the U.S. If you're a good scientist you're probably employed either directly or indirectly as a subcontractor. Grants for research aren't simply intended to promote science, IMO, but largely to assure they know what people are working one and assure they've got first dibs on the best things. I'd have fewer complaints if they were paying it with money they'd truly earned.

[RickSp]

How dare this scientist try to tell the truth! Doesn't he know that we are at war? Telling the truth only emboldens the terrorists.

The Bush administration has no shame. Arrogance, dishonestesty and incompetence personified.

[tman_ndsu08]

Quote by: tusaki Scary, regardless of the varacity of his claims about the causes of global warming... Only propanda is allowed now.

Who cares if there is global warming?

Sea levels are not rising.

[Athena]

Quote by: SteveA If dissenting views weren't allowed to science it would stagnate. Either way Washington has too much influence for my comfort. Science is largely owned by government in the U.S. If you're a good scientist you're probably employed either directly or indirectly as a subcontractor. Grants for research aren't simply intended to promote science, IMO, but largely to assure they know what people are working one and assure they've got first dibs on the best things. I'd have fewer complaints if they were paying it with money they'd truly earned.

It is the public that gives the government this much power to control the media, and it was education that manifested this reality. One of the most important things education for technology does is, promote dependency on authority. This advances technology because it means scientist rely on the findings others and do not have to do every experiment for themselves, once those in "authority" have approved of a scientific finding.

However, this same taught and learned dependency on authority is devastating to a democracy, because it also means, the media is trained to rely on authority, and will publish only what those in "authority" say is the truth and newsworthy. What would happen to any reporter who interviewed a scientist without government approval? Nothing except maybe not being chosen by government for reports. However, the journalist taught to rely on authority, and excessive consquences for saying anything not approved that could can be faulted as inaccurate, has given government excessive control, and we have allowed this to happen. When reporters are dismissed we all click our tongues and say the person did wrong and should loose his job.

Education did this to our culture and now our culture is supporting the power of authority that our democracy stood against when it went to war with Germany. Hello, this New World Order.

[Athena]

Quote by: tman_ndsu08 Who cares if there is global warming? Sea levels are not rising.

You are right, and there hasn't been a change in other natural phenomenia either. :rolleyes:

[tman_ndsu08]

Quote by: Athena You are right, and there hasn't been a change in other natural phenomenia either. :rolleyes:

Such as?

[Jack]

Rising global temperatures are expected to raise sea level, and change precipitation and other local climate conditions. Changing regional climate could alter forests, crop yields, and water supplies. It could also affect human health, animals, and many types of ecosystems. Deserts may expand into existing rangelands, and features of some of our National Parks may be permanently altered. Most of the United States is expected to warm, although sulfates may limit warming in some areas. Scientists currently are unable to determine which parts of the United States will become wetter or drier, but there is likely to be an overall trend toward increased precipitation and evaporation, more intense rainstorms, and drier soils. Unfortunately, many of the potentially most important impacts depend upon whether rainfall increases or decreases, which can not be reliably projected for specific areas.

Source

[SteveA]

Quote by: Athena It is the public that gives the government this much power to control the media, and it was education that manifested this reality. One of the most important things education for technology does is, promote dependency on authority. This advances technology because it means scientist rely on the findings others and do not have to do every experiment for themselves, once those in "authority" have approved of a scientific finding. However, this same taught and learned dependency on authority is devastating to a democracy, because it also means, the media is trained to rely on authority, and will publish only what those in "authority" say is the truth and newsworthy. What would happen to any reporter who interviewed a scientist without government approval? Nothing except maybe not being chosen by government for reports. However, the journalist taught to rely on authority, and excessive consquences for saying anything not approved that could can be faulted as inaccurate, has given government excessive control, and we have allowed this to happen. When reporters are dismissed we all click our tongues and say the person did wrong and should loose his job. Education did this to our culture and now our culture is supporting the power of authority that our democracy stood against when it went to war with Germany. Hello, this New World Order.

It's not bad having peer review to judge the value of scientific findings but trying to enforce such a model on people has these problems. Even without government oversight people would find sources of information they felt relatively confident with, so there's no need for legal filtering. Of course there will always be oddballs with wild claims but then again, Einstein was probably also seen as an oddball, (there was a very sad story about a kid who independently discovered much of the math we use today for cryptography 100 years before it was later rediscovered). Interestingly enough to each and every person, the specifics of science means something different. Views are shared socially but until enough people share enough of a common framework of understanding, you could have Einsteins come and go and noone would ever learn anything from them. We likely have had a lot of people like this censored as insane, but everyone has to weed out the fluff from the nuggets so I guess this is inevitable to a point, but it's interesting that there isn't an exact view of what "science" is. It's similar to religion in that encompassed a lot of individual beliefs and perceptions.

I remembered an interesting quote by someone saying basically that a free society tolerates borderline insanity, but does that doesn't mean you have to keep a straight face when someone tries to say the oceans are rising and going to flood costal cities.

[oranged]

Quote by: tman_ndsu08 Who cares if there is global warming? Sea levels are not rising.

Yes, they are. They've risen 4 meters on the coast of Newyork City. Antarctica's ice has shrunken by 15% in 100 years. Fresh water levels are rising in northern Europe, causing the slowing of the golf stream. It is getting colder up here, and hotter everywhere else.

On the original topic, that is the defining characteristic of fascism. Privately owned government; ours is owned by oil companies.