SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
The New York Times and HuffPost and many others report on EPA abruptly blocking three agency scientists from giving talks on climate change - specifically in the context of a Rhode Island event, with the subject of discussing a report on current conditions in Narragansett Bay and future threats that include climate change.
The New York Times (the origin)
WASHINGTON — The Environmental Protection Agency has canceled the speaking appearance of three agency scientists who were scheduled to discuss climate change at a conference on Monday in Rhode Island, according to the agency and several people involved.
John Konkus, an E.P.A. spokesman and a former Trump campaign operative in Florida, confirmed that agency scientists would not speak at the State of the Narragansett Bay and Watershed program in Providence. He provided no further explanation.
Scientists involved in the program said that much of the discussion at the event centers on climate change. Many said they were surprised by the E.P.A.'s last-minute cancellation, particularly since the agency helps to fund the Narragansett Bay Estuary Program, which is hosting the conference. The scientists who have been barred from speaking contributed substantial material to a 400-page report to be issued on Monday.
...
Monday's conference is designed to draw attention to the health of Narragansett Bay, the largest estuary in New England and a key to the region's tourism and fishing industries. Rhode Island's entire congressional delegation, all Democrats, will attend a morning news conference. Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, an outspoken critic of Mr. Pruitt, will be among the speakers.Scientists there will unveil the report on the state of the bay, which E.P.A. scientists helped research and write. Among the findings will be that climate change is affecting air and water temperatures, precipitation, sea level and fish in and around the estuary.
The HuffPost article provides some context:
The researchers were booked to appear Monday in Providence at the State of the Narragansett Bay and Watershed workshop, an event highlighting the health of New England's largest estuary, where temperatures have risen 3 degrees Fahrenheit and water has risen up to seven inches over the past century.
...
The move comes days after the EPA scrubbed dozens of links from its website to materials that helped local governments deal with the effects of climate change. Administrator Scott Pruitt has said he does not believe greenhouse gases from burning fossil fuels cause climate change, and has scrapped or proposed eliminating numerous regulations to reduce emissions. Two weeks ago, he proposed repealing the Clean Power Plan, the federal government's primary policy for slashing utilities' output of planet-warming gases.
...
The sudden cancellations on Sunday inflame concerns that the agency is muzzling scientists to further the White House's political interests.
I have a hunch Rhode Island isn't included in Trump's list of American places to be "made great again".
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday October 26 2017, @10:46PM (4 children)
khallow you're intellectually bankrupt, get a life. I know you're a shill based on your other intelligent posts and how they contrast with the bullshit you shovel at all other times. To address your question I'll respond with another: are you blind deaf and dumb? You need citations for oil companies pushing bad science to minimize public outcry about global warming? Bankrupt is your mind.
(Score: 1, Disagree) by khallow on Thursday October 26 2017, @11:06PM (3 children)
Let's hear a dollar amount of what the oil companies put in while you get those cites? Meanwhile, here's a single example [leftexposed.org] of federally funded, climate change junk science which will outspend (at least $81 million since 1991) the examples you come up with.
(Score: 2, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday October 26 2017, @11:56PM
from an opinion piece in the New York Times [nytimes.com]:
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday October 26 2017, @11:59PM (1 child)
according to Greenpeace [greenpeace.org]:
The Koch brothers are in the oil business, among others.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Friday October 27 2017, @03:11AM
In addition, most of these are advocacy groups who don't do actual research. I was thinking of research like that of Wei-Hock Soon [washingtonpost.com] who actually is documented as receiving over a million dollars to research his peculiar stuff.
Meanwhile the $81+ million I mentioned was explicitly for climate change research that just so happens to propagate a particular alarmist point of view.
And let us note that Greenpeace International gets 240 million Euro [wikipedia.org] a year (as of 2011) to say things like that.