Paradigms and Demographics: Putting an end to the EPA’s ‘secret science’ 2014-03-05


"American taxpayers foot the bill for the Environmental Protection Agency’s costly regulations, and they have a right to see the underlying science. EPA bureaucrats routinely hide this public information, insolently foreshadowing President Obama’s recently outed code of ethics, 'I can do anything I want.' As Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Texas) bluntly forced the issue, 'Virtually every regulation proposed by the Obama Administration has been justified by nontransparent data and unverifiable claims.' 'Nontransparent data and unverifiable claims?' Translated from scientese, it’s like this: If you’re a good scientist, you make an exact, detailed description of how you did your study or research so anybody else can follow your description and get the same result. If you won’t tell anybody how you did it, your work is not 'transparent.' If you do tell and nobody else can get the same result you got, your science is junk, or not 'reproducible' – not verifiable. Face it, EPA science is junk and they’re hiding that fact. Smith is in a position to do something about Obama’s scofflaws: he’s chairman of the House Science, Space and Technology Committee, where his panel on February 11 held a hearing on “Ensuring Open Science at EPA.” It was the launching pad for the Secret Science Reform Act of 2014, a bill to bar the EPA from proposing regulations based upon science that is not transparent or not reproducible. That sent shockwaves through Big Green, which has a vested interest in hiding outdated, biased, falsified, sweetheart-reviewed, and even non-existent 'science' that has destroyed the lives of thousands in the death-grip of agenda-driven EPA rules ..."


From feeds:

Open Access Tracking Project (OATP) »

Tags: oa.comment oa.epa oa.usa oa.psi oa.government oa.reproducibility oa.legislation oa.openwashing

Date tagged:

03/05/2014, 07:41

Date published:

03/05/2014, 02:41