Group Blasts Political Quizzing of U.S. Science-Panel

[G_j]

http://www.cleveland.com/news/plaindealer/index.ssf?/base/news/1101033177268140.xml

Group Blasts Political Quizzing of U.S. Science-Panel Nominees

by John Mangels

The Bush administration's practice of screening some potential government science advisers about their political views is improper, the nation's top science organization says.

In a strongly worded report and public comments last week, members of a National Academies of Science and Engineering panel said quizzing candidates for federal science advisory committees about their voting record or party affiliation or whether they agree with the president's policies is "not relevant" and in some cases may be illegal.

Asking such questions is "no more appropriate . . . than to ask them other personal information that is immaterial, such as hair color or height," the nonpartisan panel's chairman, former U.S. Rep. John Porter, an Illinois Republican, said at a news briefing.

"We believe it is important at this critical time that science and technology advice to the federal government be - and be seen as - impartial and independent," Porter said.

During the past year, scientists, professional organizations and government watchdog groups have vigorously complained about the political vetting of advisory committee nominees. They contend it is part of a pattern by the administration to suppress, distort or manipulate scientific analyses that conflict with President Bush's policies, especially in controversial areas such as climate change and reproductive medicine.


..more..

[teach1st]

1. It saddens me that our nation's leadership..

...sees fit to insulate itself so much.

Other words fail me right now.

[donhakman]

2. They want advisors

who will support all deregulation of safety guidelines.

For example they want someone who will say lead and mercury is acceptable in your food, water and air so certain corporations can maximize profits.

[donhakman]

4. This screening process is ongoing

not just for advisors but also for research scientists in the NIH and elsewhere.

The strong arm tactics are now actually being carried out by the Office of Management and Budget.

[lil-petunia]

3. The next step is to question them on their knowledge of the bible

the only true source of all scientific data.

Inerrancy rocks!

(for those who don't know, or can't guess, some yahoos got together in Chicago about 25 years ago, and debated the bible. They decided that King James Version, Rev.II was "inerrant" that is, absolutely true from cover to cover. It means that there are no contradictions, errors, or mistakes of any sort.

So, if you didn't know (I can see this on the gov't test for future scientists) , bats are birds, dolphins are fish, and whales swallow seamen whole. If you disagree, you go to hell.

Science in AmeriKKKa. The next victim, after our constitution.