Re: [asa] ‘Corruption of Science’

On 2/2/07, Rich Blinne <rich.blinne@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> On 2/2/07, Janice Matchett <janmatch@earthlink.net> wrote:
> >
> >
> > *"This is a political document, not a scientific report, and it is a
> > shining example of the corruption of science for political gain. The media
> > has failed to report that the IPCC Summary for Policymakers was not approved
> > by scientists but by UN political delegates and bureaucrats," *S*nator
> > Inhofe said. The IPCC is only releasing the Summary for Policymakers today,
> > not the actual scientific report which is not due out until May 2007.
> >
> >
Some more comments from one of the U.S. delegates:

> Cortlandt,
>
> Thanks for your question. I believe the Summary for Policymakers is
> released today. All of the underlying chapters and Technical Summary were
> also approved, last night, although it may take some time to put them in a
> final, publishable form. As Jerry Mahlman had noted in an interview, the
> entire technical portion of the document is around 1400 oages. Carrying the
> chapters with me has been at least one form of exercise; reading them
> another.
>
> The full document is approved by consensus of all participating nations.
> To the best of my knowledge, the technical chapters were approved without
> further modification. I am certain that this is the case for all materials
> relevant to discussions on tropical cyclones.
>
> As to the role of government scientists: we are career employees, not
> political appointees. As such, we are public servants: first and foremost,
> we serve all of you. You are at the highest of responsibility to which we
> report. It is vital that the information provided ot the American public -
> and the world - be well supported by evidence. This is a fundamental basis
> for sound decision-making at all levels.
>
> Thanks to Sean for sending the link (
> http://www.cnn.com/2007/TECH/science/02/01/climate.talks.ap/index.html ) ,
> as this story does indeed provide useful insights into the process. Clearly,
> obtaining consensus from all participating nations, somewhere around one
> hundred, is not easy, but at least on that basis the consensus document
> should be considered as an authorative report.
>
> Perhaps more later, but I see my computer battery (and perhaps also
> personal) is running low, as at the end of last night I managed to leave my
> European-style plug in adapter at UNESCO. One small contribution from the
> USA delegation, I guess.
>
> All for now. Looking forward to getting back home, as well as getting a
> bit of sleep.
>
> Randy Dole
>
>

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Fri Feb 2 18:11:45 2007