Send in the Clowns – NAS Presents Hacks to Challenge Trump Climate Policy – RedState
By James Taylor
Sixteen installers enter a single bar and pretend to be first -rate climatologists. When their potential parameters discover their false claims, the potential parameters are raised and leave. This should be the response of political decision-makers and the public to an unsolicited attempt at the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine (NAS) to be part of the Resistance and sabotage the Trump Administration on an Obama administration noting that carbon dioxide emissions endanger public health and well-being.
When the Trump administration announced that it proposed to cancel an OBAMA EPA noting that carbon dioxide emissions endanger public health and well-being, the NAS has entered action despite no official request to do so. On September 17, only six weeks after the Trump administration announced, Nas presented a “study” which she claims to have conducted in such a short time. The study, not surprisingly, says that Obama was right and that Trump is wrong.
Related: CO2 and climate: this is how science works
Trump Obama’s Axes Starmement Restrouveral
There are many ways in which the NAS study lacks credibility and seriousness. There is no precedent for the NAS not to be a particular determination of public policy. There is no precedent for the NAS to end a complete scientific study in just six weeks. Nas bureaucracy also did not try to reach out and include the participation of people from all sides of the debate on climate change.
More importantly, however, the authors of the study lack integrity and scientific objectivity.
The president of the group of 16 people in charge of the study has no apparent expertise on climate science. She is a college administrator and biologist who writes mainly on obesity and vaccines.
Of the other 15 authors, only three have experience with important expertise in climate science. Each of these three has already marked positions claiming that climate change is an existential crisis.
Most people named non -climatic also marked positions saying that climate change is a serious problem.
How do you produce an objective scientific study when you only select the authors who have already chosen a particular dog in the fight?
Two of the authors received appointments in the Obama administration. None seem to have received appointments from republican administrations.
A solid scientific analysis requires scientific expertise and objective scientists. By any objective measure, the NAS panel is seriously lacking in knowledge in climate science and is incredibly biased.
This is what happens when the bureaucracy nas considers itself as part of the resistance.
James Taylor ([email protected]) is president of the Heartland Institute.
Publisher’s note: Do you like the conservative reports of Redstate that take the radical media on the left and at alarm? Support our work so that we can continue to bring you the truth.
Join Redstate VIP and use the promotional code STRUGGLE To obtain 60% reduction on your VIP subscription!
