- #1
alexandra
The insatiable greed for profit is leading to who knows what disasters. While everyone focuses on the latest bout of terrorism (which is a reaction to a cycle of acts of terrorism that are bound to increase), this is what the scientists are saying:
The following statement calling for the restoration of scientific integrity in policy-making in the US has been signed by over 6000 scientists:Urgency 'vital' in climate talks
Climate campaigners have urged G8 leaders not to lose sight of the urgent need to tackle greenhouse emissions as well as develop clean technologies.
At the G8 summit in Gleneagles, the US and UK leaders called for a new consensus on climate change.
They said it was time to replace a focus on Kyoto-style curbs on emissions with research into clean technology.
But others warn new technology will come too late and emissions targets are needed to tackle the problem... More: At the G8 summit in Gleneagles, the US and UK leaders called for a new consensus on climate change.
They said it was time to replace a focus on Kyoto-style curbs on emissions with research into clean technology.
But others warn new technology will come too late and emissions targets are needed to tackle the problem.
More: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/4660079.stm
Many of the signatories are highly respected in their fields:statement
Restoring Scientific Integrity in Policymaking
Successful application of science has played a large part in the policies that have made the United States of America the world’s most powerful nation and its citizens increasingly prosperous and healthy. Although scientific input to the government is rarely the only factor in public policy decisions, this input should always be weighed from an objective and impartial perspective to avoid perilous consequences. Indeed, this principle has long been adhered to by presidents and administrations of both parties in forming and implementing policies. The administration of George W. Bush has, however, disregarded this principle.
When scientific knowledge has been found to be in conflict with its political goals, the administration has often manipulated the process through which science enters into its decisions...
For example, in support of the president’s decision to avoid regulating emissions that cause climate change, the administration has consistently misrepresented the findings of the National Academy of Sciences, government scientists, and the expert community at large. Thus in June 2003, the White House demanded extensive changes in the treatment of climate change in a major report by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). To avoid issuing a scientifically indefensible report, EPA officials eviscerated the discussion of climate change and its consequences.
More: http://www.ucsusa.org/global_environment/rsi/page.cfm?pageID=1320
Signers of the scientists' statement on scientific integrity include 49 Nobel laureates, 63 National Medal of Science recipients, and 154 members of the National Academies. Reference: http://www.ucsusa.org/global_environment/rsi/page.cfm?pageID=1335
Last edited by a moderator: