Shrub Muzzles USGS!

GrandMasterTerwynn · Post by **GrandMasterTerwynn** » 2006-12-14 12:48pm

LiveScience.com wrote:White House Tightens Publishing Rules for USGS Scientists
By John Heilprin
Associated Press
posted: 14 December 2006
10:37 am ET

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Bush administration is clamping down on scientists at the U.S. Geological Survey, who study everything from caribou mating to global warming, subjecting them to controls on research that might go against official policy.

New rules require screening of all facts and interpretations by agency scientists. The rules apply to all scientific papers and other public documents, even minor reports or prepared talks, according to documents obtained by The Associated Press.

Top officials at the Interior Department's scientific arm say the rules only standardize what scientists must do to ensure the quality of their work and give a heads-up to the agency's public relations staff.

“This is not about stifling or suppressing our science, or politicizing our science in any way,'' Barbara Wainman, the agency's director of communications, said Wednesday. “I don't have approval authority. What it was designed to do is to improve our product flow.''

Some agency scientists, who until now have felt free from any political interference, worry that the objectivity of their work could be compromised.

“I feel as though we've got someone looking over our shoulder at every damn thing we do. And to me that's a very scary thing. I worry that it borders on censorship,'' said Jim Estes, an internationally recognized marine biologist who works for the geological unit. “The explanation was that this was intended to ensure the highest possible quality research,'' said Estes, a researcher at the agency for more than 30 years. “But to me it feels like they're doing this to keep us under their thumbs. It seems like they're afraid of science. Our findings could be embarrassing to the administration.''

The new requirements state that the USGS's communications office must be “alerted about information products containing high-visibility topics or topics of a policy-sensitive nature.''

The agency's director, Mark Myers, and its communications office also must be told — prior to any submission for publication — “of findings or data that may be especially newsworthy, have an impact on government policy, or contradict previous public understanding to ensure that proper officials are notified and that communication strategies are developed.''

Patrick Leahy, USGS's head of geology and its acting director until September, said Wednesday that the new procedures would improve scientists' accountability and “harmonize'' the review process. He said they are intended to maintain scientists' neutrality.

“Our scientific staff is second to none,'' he said. “This notion of scientific gotcha is something we do not want to participate in. That does not mean to avoid contentious issues.''

The changes amount to an overhaul of commonly accepted procedures for all scientists, not just those in government, based on anonymous peer reviews. In that process, scientists critique each other's findings to determine whether they deserve to be published.

From now on, USGS supervisors will demand to see the comments of outside peer reviewers' as well any exchanges between the scientists who are seeking to publish their findings and the reviewers.

The Bush administration, as well as the Clinton administration before it, has been criticized over scientific integrity issues. In 2002, the USGS was forced to reverse course after warning that oil and gas drilling in Alaska's Arctic National Wildlife Refuge would harm the Porcupine caribou herd. One week later a new report followed, this time saying the caribou would not be affected.

(Any emphasis is mine.) What a complete crock this is. If the science doesn't fit the Administration's view of the world . . . fzzzzt!

Darth Raptor · Post by **Darth Raptor** » 2006-12-14 01:10pm

For fuck's sake, what's next? Mustache twirling?

brianeyci · Post by **brianeyci** » 2006-12-14 02:20pm

What's terrible is these changes are probably irreversable. People with power do not want to give it up, so what kind of Administration would not want to control news coming out of it, scientific or otherwise. The only way this would matter is if the culture of America changed so people gave a fuck about scientists being muzzled, just like the only way balanced budgets would happen is if the culture of America changed so people gave a fuck mortgaging their children's future. America is broken.

“Our scientific staff is second to none,'' he said. “This notion of scientific gotcha is something we do not want to participate in. That does not mean to avoid contentious issues.'

Scientific gotcha is what scientists dream of, not reinforcing the status quo, but being the one who overthrows it. It's a staple of science fiction actually... the scientist the one who is right, everybody is wrong, the scientist is not paid attention to, bad shit happens, then the scientist saves the world. Letting other scientists take a look at it is the check from bad science. There should never be a check against sensationalism, just a check against bad science.

Spyder · Post by **Spyder** » 2006-12-14 08:29pm

Someone misses their geocentric universe.

Patrick Degan · Post by **Patrick Degan** » 2006-12-14 10:43pm

Par for the course for Georgie the Stupider —when reality and the facts say you're wrong, outlaw them.

sketerpot · Post by **sketerpot** » 2006-12-15 02:22am

Patrick Leahy, USGS's head of geology and its acting director until September, said Wednesday that the new procedures would improve scientists' accountability and “harmonize'' the review process. He said they are intended to maintain scientists' neutrality.

Anybody who talks like that is hiding something. Come on, "improve scientists' accountability"? "Harmonize" the fucking review process?

I just hope that the thing he's hiding is his own stupidity and incompetence, rather than something more sinister. Fat chance....

Ariphaos · Post by **Ariphaos** » 2006-12-15 03:25am

brianeyci wrote:What's terrible is these changes are probably irreversable. People with power do not want to give it up, so what kind of Administration would not want to control news coming out of it, scientific or otherwise. The only way this would matter is if the culture of America changed so people gave a fuck about scientists being muzzled, just like the only way balanced budgets would happen is if the culture of America changed so people gave a fuck mortgaging their children's future. America is broken.

Nah, it won't last much past China or someone seriously beating the US someplace in the tech arena.

Post by **K. A. Pital** » 2006-12-15 03:54am

Nah, it won't last much past China or someone seriously beating the US someplace in the tech arena.

Japanese robots. Already starting to look like the Tau.

Ariphaos · Post by **Ariphaos** » 2006-12-15 04:34am

Stas Bush wrote: Japanese robots. Already starting to look like the Tau. :lol:

Neither a big enough lead, nor a comprehensive enough lead, nor visible enough. Heck, I'm not aware of any major AI breakthroughs Japan has instigated on its own, compared to the US, Europe or Israel. I'm sure there are some, but the only one I recall offhand originated in the US (a specific business implementation of fuzzy logic).

Russia launching Sputnik pretty much canned the Creationist movement for thirty years in the US. Politicians are only now, -fifty years later-, returning to their fundamentalist roots as Christianity is in free-fall, ticking away at a percentage point a year.

As that trend continues I imagine we'll see more and more frothing at the mouth, of course.

Post by **K. A. Pital** » 2006-12-15 04:58am

Russia launching Sputnik pretty much canned the Creationist movement for thirty years in the US.

Really? I was unaware. Good for all, don't forget to say thank you

Neither a big enough lead, nor a comprehensive enough lead, nor visible enough.

I mean more robototechnics than AI progress. Japan has really good technicians working on their robotics, ASIMO immediately springs to mind, that thing can walk as a human and correct it's own path. Given that there's a shitload of biological subconcious functions for mere walking that this machine needs to copy, that's a huge achievement.

Anguirus · Post by **Anguirus** » 2006-12-15 06:19pm

Really? I was unaware. Good for all, don't forget to say thank you

Thank you! Nothing like a Cold War to show politicians how the world really works.

Straha · Post by **Straha** » 2006-12-15 07:28pm

Eh, this is run of the mill stuff in politics. I remember Jimmy Carter canned an Assistant Secretary of the Interior (I think) who was widely regarded as being the obvious successor when he came out publicly against some things that Jimmy had said about Natural Gas reserves in the Gulf of Mexico.

General Zod · Post by **General Zod** » 2006-12-15 09:20pm

“This is not about stifling or suppressing our science, or politicizing our science in any way,'' Barbara Wainman, the agency's director of communications, said Wednesday. “I don't have approval authority. What it was designed to do is to improve our product flow.''

The new requirements state that the USGS's communications office must be “alerted about information products containing high-visibility topics or topics of a policy-sensitive nature.''

Yeah . . . .no politicizing science my ass. WONDERFUL hypocrisy there.

darthdavid · Post by **darthdavid** » 2006-12-17 09:42pm

It says something about a person that can't keep a story straight through one fucking speech.

Lost Soal · Post by **Lost Soal** » 2006-12-19 03:34am

General Zod wrote:
“This is not about stifling or suppressing our science, or politicizing our science in any way,'' Barbara Wainman, the agency's director of communications, said Wednesday. “I don't have approval authority. What it was designed to do is to improve our product flow.''

The new requirements state that the USGS's communications office must be “alerted about information products containing high-visibility topics or topics of a policy-sensitive nature.''
Yeah . . . .no politicizing science my ass. WONDERFUL hypocrisy there.

While it is very easy to shout about scientists being censored, just TRY and look at other reasons for this. The Admin may simply want to know when a paper is going to come out which they'll have to answer questions on, so rather than saying "we haven't read or heard about this before, I'll have to answer you later", because they've had the notice they can answer any questions put to them.

So while there is some politics attached it doesn't immediately equal, "We don't like this, its not getting published."

Post by **Edi** » 2006-12-19 04:15am

Sorry, but the Bush administration does not get ANY benefit of the doubt whatsoever on this issue. Their atempts to supprress everything that doesn't fit the ideology are well documented, constant and systematic, so the only logical and reasonable assumption about this shit is that it is more of the same with precisely the aim to silence the scientific comunity through red tape.

Edi