Global warming hysteria–which is not the same thing as the science investigating AGW–has been discredited. And now, a senator wants a criminal investigation. From the story:
The Senate’s top global warming skeptic on Tuesday is calling for a possible criminal investigation into the scientists accused of manipulating the data once used as the centerpiece of international climate change research. Sen. James Inhofe, R-Okla., is considering a request to the Department of Justice for a probe of scientists who he claims deliberately falsified data used by climate change advocates. He is also planning on grilling Environmental Protection Agency administrator Lisa Jackson at a hearing Tuesday morning about her decision to rely on information from the U.N.’s International Panel on Climate Change to institute an endangerment finding that gives the EPA authority to regulate greenhouse gases.
Inhofe is releasing a 40-page report that will be used by Republicans to answer how she can continue to advocate for new global warming regulations even as the findings by the IPCC and the work of the East Anglia Climate Research Unit in Britain create doubt about climate science.”The CRU controversy features e-mails from the world’s leading climate scientists — e-mails that show disturbing practices contrary to the practice of objective science and potentially federal law,” the report reads. “The released CRU e-mails and documents display potentially unethical, and illegal, behavior,” it continues. “Moreover, there are e-mails discussing unjustified changes to data by federal employees and federal grantees. These and other issues raise questions about the lawful use of federal funds and potential ethical misconduct.”
Let’s not take things too far here. By all means, grill away. Indeed, I think an independent investigation with subpoena power and testimony under oath is warranted. But I am noticing an unhealthy tendency to criminalize our political differences. Unless actual fraud to obtain grant money or the like is found–as Hwang wu Suk did in the human cloning research scandal–I think we should leave the criminal lawyers to chase real crooks. Discrediting politics masking as science–if that is what, as I suspect, really happened here–would be quite enough.
February 23rd, 2010 | 11:34 am
No, I completely agree with Inhofe. He’s a very bright guy.
Clearly, a scientist selectively using data, falsifying data, or offering an invalid opinion is morally and criminally equivalent to the following:
[David: This isn't a forum for general rants about Iraq or other matters. I deleted so we don't follow that rabbit trail. Stick to the point of the post please.]
Further, given that the country is in a recession, in which the judicial elements of our government therefore have less tax-revenue to tackle crime & justice, I therefore propose that we continue to spend less to prosecute domestic assault, child abuse, assault and battery, and armed robbery. ( I read a study the other day, not sure how accurate, claiming that in many states their ability to handle such cases is a mess due to $$)
We are so blessed by Jok to have such wise leaders as Inhofe at the forefront. Thank you, Oklahomey!
(see, I’m a foil to Smith; good cop, bad cop)
February 23rd, 2010 | 12:07 pm
Would the same apply to our friends Lomborg and Laureys?
http://www.newsweek.com/id/233942
February 24th, 2010 | 10:27 pm
Inhofe (R-Wingnuttia) is one of the Senate’s most successful publicity hounds. Additionally, he’s dumb as a box of rocks. He wants a criminal investigation of private citizens telling lies?
And you: “(1)Indeed, I think an independent investigation with subpoena power and testimony under oath is warranted. (2) But I am noticing an unhealthy tendency to criminalize our political differences.”
When you typed sentence 2 had you forgotten you’d typed sentence 1? You don’t think calling for subpoena power and testimony under oath is criminalizing political differences?
You (and conservatives) disagree with the scientific results and advocate a media-fueled witch hunt. Do you really want scientists to deliver the results the government wants?
Is there any wonder that civil libertarians abhor conservatives?
February 24th, 2010 | 10:52 pm
Will you please define specifically what you mean by “global warming hysteria” – and how it has been discredited?
Thanks
February 25th, 2010 | 12:10 am
But what if the both global warming and climate change are caused by human activity?
And what if the destructive scenarios posited by the those who affirm that the above is indeed the case, will be the case (sooner or later)
And what if we can do something about it altogether, and everyone all at once, by changing the way we live.
Who then are the criminals?
But of course George Schulz once told us that the business as usual USA way of life is not negotiable or changeable. A blinkered point of view that you obviously endorse.
Links
Blogs
Find Us
Contact