Trump Orders all Scientific Studies to Undergo Political Review

January 26, 2017

Chicago Tribune:

The Trump administration is scrutinizing studies and data published by scientists at the Environmental Protection Agency, while new work is under a “temporary hold” before it can be released.

The communications director for President Donald Trump’s transition team at EPA, Doug Ericksen, said Wednesday the review extends to all existing content on the federal agency’s website, including details of scientific evidence showing that the Earth’s climate is warming and man-made carbon emissions are to blame.

Ericksen clarified his earlier statements he made to The Associated Press, which reported that the Trump administration was mandating that any studies or data from EPA scientists undergo review by political appointees before they can be released to the public. He said he was speaking about existing scientific information on the EPA website that is under review by members of the Trump administration’s transition team.

As GOP Rep. Lamar Smith recently stated on the House floor, “..better to get your news directly from the President, in fact, it might be the only way to get the unvarnished truth.”

Ericksen said no decisions have yet been made about whether to strip mentions of climate change from

“We’re taking a look at everything on a case-by-case basis, including the web page and whether climate stuff will be taken down,” Erickson said in an earlier interview with the AP. “Obviously with a new administration coming in, the transition time, we’ll be taking a look at the web pages and the Facebook pages and everything else involved here at EPA.”

Asked specifically about scientific data being collected by agency scientists, such as routine monitoring of air and water pollution, Ericksen responded, “Everything is subject to review.”


15 Responses to “Trump Orders all Scientific Studies to Undergo Political Review”

  1. […] via Trump Orders all Scientific Studies to Undergo Political Review — Climate Denial Crock of the Week […]

  2. dumboldguy Says:

    Yep, Trump is going to establish a new department and cabinet post—the Department of Truth. It will have its representatives placed in every other government department and agency. and one of the infrastructure projects that Trump will push is the construction of many thousands of Room 101’s .

    There’s a reason that 1984 is moving up the best-seller lists.

  3. Lionel Smith Says:

    From Wiki:

    The tyranny is ostensibly overseen by Big Brother, the Party leader who enjoys an intense cult of personality, but who may not even exist.

    Close except we know ‘the cult of personality exists’, well at least his hair piece does which I think serves as ‘the brain’.

    The protagonist of the novel, Lamar [Winston] Smith, is a member of the Outer Party, who works for the Ministry of Truth (or Minitrue in Newspeak), which is responsible for propaganda and historical revisionism. His job is to rewrite past newspaper articles, so that the historical record always supports the party line.

    But will Lamar rebel?

    More recently, in January 2017, the novel has again become a best seller book, seemingly in response to apparent attempts by members of the White House staff to present possible misinformation, according to news articles.

    ‘possible misinformation’ — nothing possible about this.

    • vierotchka Says:

      1984 & Fahrenheit 451

    • andrewfez Says:

      Last year I started to write a book called 2084 where wealth inequality and government corruption got so bad in the 2010’s that all factions of government were taken over by authoritarian leftists and cultural Marxists in the 2020’s in response to such. It also deals with the impoverishment of the US secondary to climate change, resource depletion, and severe overpopulation (in the book the authoritarian leftists pay women a middle class salary to be stay-at-home moms and this creates another baby-boom during the 2020’s to 2050’s; but as the second half of the century arrives most people are credibly poor, and generally when you’re poor and uneducated, you tend to have large families).

      There’s some guy on Youtube – forgot his name – that professes that population growth with stabilize sometime this century at around 10B people. This is dependent on the notion that more and more people will rise into the middle class, have formal educations and large families will be a thing of the past. I disagree with this guy: I say we’re setting the stage for long term economic decline in the face of climate change and resource depletion and that there will be less upward mobility than he’s predicted, creating significant room for continued population growth by the lower rungs of society who never get to graduate up in emerging markets.

      • J4Zonian Says:

        Maybe this is the one you’re thinking of:

        Hans Rosling, ‘Don’t Panic’ video

        He seems grossly overoptimistic to me, too; but population growth is slowing (it’s half what it was in the 1960s) and is widely expected to peak around 2050 at 9.something billion. Since death rates are already rising because of climate cataclysm and that’s extremely likely to accelerate very soon, and that is not accounted for in any population projection I know of, it will probably peak sooner and lower than that. Population is already at or below replacement rate in the rich world; only the poor are still growing in numbers because of births v. deaths, and they have almost no effect on climate and cause very little of our ecological problems or resource use.

        Increasing middle class in China, etc.? Yes, but that’s not population growth, that’s consumption growth. The answer to it is renewables and a balancing of our inequality. The rich have to convinced to sacrifice their extravagance for all our survival.

  4. otter17 Says:

    Erik the Viking strikes again. I ought to get around to seeing the whole thing sometime.

    But… more depressing is the “everything is subject to review” concerning the scientific data. Of all the accusations about scientists allegedly altering the data, who knew it was possibly acceptable for the right people to just cut off the data?

  5. Sir Charles Says:

    It’s called “altenative facts”, folx.

  6. What I’d like to know is WTF are we going to do about it?!

  7. patricklinsley Says:

    The 1984 comparison doesn’t end there. He now has his own news media paid for by taxpayers (to the tune of $800 million per year) and headed by two 25 year old right wing campaign staffers.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: