SkepticalScience – CC-BY-SA
As they did here in Canada, the federal government in the United States is trying to get science to comply with their preferred view of the world. They seem to think that if they say something loudly enough, then it will be true. It turns out that they might not be able to get away with just making things up after all. A senior judge is calling them on it. Immediately after the climate denier Scott Pruitt was put in charge of the United States’ Environmental Protection Agency, he said he didn’t think carbon dioxide was warming things up. He thinks he’s got scientific proof.
He said, “I would not agree that it’s a primary contributor to the global warming that we see.”
Now he’s being told to produce that proof.
On Friday, the chief judge of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, Beryl Howell, ordered the agency to comply.
This could lead to ways to limit the damage.
Pruitt’s plan to freeze vehicle fuel-efficiency standards put in place by Obama could be weakened if the courts uphold the body of climate science used to craft the standards.
The deniers have tried to accuse environmentalists of using “secret science.” I’m not sure what they mean, but it sounds bad, doesn’t it? Now they might have to reveal their own “secret science.”
“Pruitt has gone on a campaign about secret science,” Gerrard said. “Where is his own secret science that refutes findings anthropogenic greenhouses gas are a major problem? Let’s see your cards, Scott.”
I hope this will lead to a lessening of the growing reliance on deceit and misdirection that we’re seeing lately. The worst thing about it is knowing that a significant percentage of people believe it. At least, this might stop that percentage from increasing.
So, if you’ve got the proof, show it. Put up or shut up.
via Judge Orders EPA to Produce Science Behind Pruitt’s Warming Claims – Scientific American
rjb
Crispian Jago, who maintains a blog called The Reason Stick, which he describes as “A blunt, shit-stained instrument wielded indiscriminately to bludgeon pseudoscience, superstition, blind faith and common or garden irrational bollocks,” and who has been publishing a series of posts chronicling his experience of cancer, has often pointed out the hypocrisy and plain silliness demonstrated by the utterings of believers. In this post he presents a handy chart giving them optional things that would be better to complain about. The theme of the chart seems to be that they can replace selfish, hurtful things with things that have a chance of making life better for others. They can demonstrate their Christianity by thinking about others rather than themselves. It remains to be seen whether any of them will take his advice.
