Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
They dismissed 5 of the 18 members serving on the Board of Scientific Counselors most of them Chemists, Economists and other academic degrees. Pruitt wants to bring in more people from underrepresented universities and businesses. This was a change from what they were told
in January.
Quote:
WASHINGTON — The Environmental Protection Agency has dismissed at least five members of a major scientific review board, the latest signal of what critics call a campaign by the Trump administration to shrink the agency’s regulatory reach by reducing the role of academic research.
A spokesman for the E.P.A. administrator, Scott Pruitt, said he would consider replacing the academic scientists with representatives from industries whose pollution the agency is supposed to regulate, as part of the wide net it plans to cast. “The administrator believes we should have people on this board who understand the impact of regulations on the regulated community,” said the spokesman, J. P. Freire.
As for the rest, I'm sure they're favorites of the environmental groups.
Environmental Economists to judge the financial impact of regulations.
Shouldn't a scientist be interested in the environment, Pruitt has already thrown out the ban on one insecticide (chlorpyrifos) is being used on crops so I guess science doesn't matter anymore
We will see who he bring in, he is leaning towards some lobbyists that have been suing the EPA.
Environmental Economists to judge the financial impact of regulations.
Shouldn't a scientist be interested in the environment, Pruitt has already thrown out the ban on one insecticide (chlorpyrifos) is being used on crops so I guess science doesn't matter anymore
We will see who he bring in, he is leaning towards some lobbyists that have been suing the EPA.
A scientist should be interested in science, period. The ideal scientist has no attachment to a result, they are only concerned about the process of science.
The problem with the scientists today is they are activists first, scientists second. This is clearly shown by the comments in the Climategate emails where Trenberth claimed it was a travesty the observed data wasn't matching their suppositions and where they referred to how "The Cause" was more important than the results. Also, the numerous political actions of scientists colluding with activist agencies and governments to promote policies for "The Cause", the activism by people like Hansen, and those in NASA.
You aren't talking about science, you are talking about politics and activism.
As for the rest, I'm sure they're favorites of the environmental groups.
All disciples are related, a fact long forgotten and being rediscovered.
humans teased out pieces of the whole to better understand the world around us and over time settled into what was considered distinct disciples.
Overtime, perspective has been lost and disciples have been treated as orphan streams of information struggling to figure out how they relate to the universe.
Statistics, economics, math etc are critical to partner with other disciplines to better address the world around us, end myopic, territorial blindness and restore perspective.
If the economists simply express an isolated view then that is a big fail. If Pruitt doesn't manage the orchestra of informnation on the science board then that's a big fail.
Science is used to come to a conclusion that must be challenged in order to survive and progress. The conclusions are artistic interpretations and must be challenged or else the science is simply weaponized political propaganda!
Scientific interpretations are true only for a moment.
the food pyramid endorsed by the government is still not settled.
A scientist should be interested in science, period. The ideal scientist has no attachment to a result, they are only concerned about the process of science.
The problem with the scientists today is they are activists first, scientists second. This is clearly shown by the comments in the Climategate emails where Trenberth claimed it was a travesty the observed data wasn't matching their suppositions and where they referred to how "The Cause" was more important than the results. Also, the numerous political actions of scientists colluding with activist agencies and governments to promote policies for "The Cause", the activism by people like Hansen, and those in NASA.
You aren't talking about science, you are talking about politics and activism.
I agree with your first paragraph, so why were these scientists and academics removed.
So why was a previously banned chemical allowed back in the market.
All disciples are related, a fact long forgotten and being rediscovered.
humans teased out pieces of the whole to better understand the world around us and over time settled into what was considered distinct disciples.
Overtime, perspective has been lost and disciples have been treated as orphan streams of information struggling to figure out how they relate to the universe.
Statistics, economics, math etc are critical to partner with other disciplines to better address the world around us, end myopic, territorial blindness and restore perspective.
If the economists simply express an isolated view then that is a big fail. If Pruitt doesn't manage the orchestra of informnation on the science board then that's a big fail.
Science is used to come to a conclusion that must be challenged in order to survive and progress. The conclusions are artistic interpretations and must be challenged or else the science is simply weaponized political propaganda!
Scientific interpretations are true only for a moment.
the food pyramid endorsed by the government is still not settled.
Economists would be doing the world a great favor if they would keep their opinions to themselves. They've never teased anything out of nature. Although they may have tortured it until it confessed to what they wanted. It is great at assuming things but terrible at proving them.
Their perspective has not helped the unity of knowledge at all. It has attempted to replace it with theirs.
Science is not what it used to be. It has become an interest like any other. The true scientific calling is rare, far too rare to populate marches for for its important with real scientists. Whenever someone says, "Scientists say.." change the channel.
What we really need is a way to tax ice that insists on going back to liquid form (water).
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
