Politicizing Science at the US Dept. of Energy

Posted: January 28, 2017 by oldbrew in Critique, government, opinion, Politics

Changing rules just before leaving office does seem a bit – let’s say – strange.

Big Picture News, Informed Analysis

Liberating scientists to talk about their research is sensible. Inciting them to criticize government policy does nothing to enhance scientific integrity.


The US Department of Energy (DOE) describes itself as the “largest federal sponsor of basic research in physical sciences.” It consumes $32 billion in federal spending annually, funding numerous projects connected to climate change and renewable energy.

Earlier this month,the DOE decided itsscientific integrity policy, last updated in 2014, was wholly inadequate. With nine days remaining inthe Obama administration, energy Secretary Ernest Moniz unveiled a brand new policy at the National Press Club.

The old policywas three pages long. The new one runs to seven pages, and represents a dramatic departure from what had been the status quo.

Under the old policy, DOE-affiliated scientists were only permitted to speak about scientific matters to the media or at public events after they’d received permission from “their immediate supervisor and…

View original post 1,074 more words

  1. hunter says:

    The extent of corruption that Mr. Obama engaged in is astounding.

  2. The extent of Democrat mental dissociation (a derangement, or insanity) and cover-up for that corruption, even more astounding.

  3. oldbrew says:

    Climate Scientist Judith Curry Files Legal Brief Supporting CEI’s Free Speech Rights

    In Curry’s view, “Mann does not seem to understand the difference between criticizing a scientific argument versus smearing a scientist.” Moreover, he takes a selective view of which smears are permissible and which are not. As one commentator cited by Curry put it, “Mann wants a legal guarantee that he can dish it out, but he doesn’t have to take it.”


  4. oldbrew says:

    Donna L has a follow-up report: US Scientific Integrity Rules Repudiate the UN Climate Process

    The US government says it’s a violation of scientific integrity for political officials to alter scientific findings. But political revision is central to how IPCC reports get produced.


    The IPCC website says:
    The IPCC is a scientific body. It reviews and assesses, at regular intervals, the most recent scientific, technical and socioeconomic information produced worldwide, relevant to the understanding of climate change. It does not conduct any research nor does it monitor climate-related data or parameters. [bold added]