Wednesday, December 27, 2006
Science Meets Ignorance
Liberty cannot be preserved without a general knowledge among the people, who have a right. . . and a desire to know. . . .”
— John Adams, A Dissertation on the Canon and Feudal Law
Science is not as intimidating as it first appears. Anyone can do it. It is important, however, that when done by scientists it be properly vetted by amateurs. And it is important that ordinary people don’t have too much information since it will simply confuse them. Thanks to the actions of George Bush we will no longer have to fear an excessively informed public that may fall prey to the importunings of scientists who believe themselves able to educate the rest of us and, more daunting still, George Bush. That is because in a moment of unexpected enlightenment Mr. Bush has realized that one of the best ways to control what people think is to control the kinds of information to which people have access. Here is what Mr. Bush has done to restrict the scientific information available to would-be students towards the end of 2006.
He is closing all the libraries run by the Environmental Protection Agency and getting rid of pesky and superfluous scientific documents found in those libraries. The EPA has maintained 29 libraries around the United States for many years that contain information about human health, environmental issues, hazardous waste, pollution control, air quality and all manner of other things with which the EPA concerns itself.
In the 2007 library services budget request by the EPA, Mr. Bush cut $2 million out of the $2.5 million requested. In anticipation of Congressional approval the EPA has already closed its library in Washington D.C. to the public and has completely closed libraries in Chicago, Dallas and Kansas City, Mo. In a letter to Congress protesting the cuts, EPA scientists observe that the $2 million cut is a small part of an $8 billion budget. That will not change Mr. Bush’s mind. Having little, if any knowledge himself and not having found that an impediment to becoming president, he sees no harm in making it harder for others to acquire that which he is lacking. Closing libraries is not the only way Mr. Bush hopes to keep citizens from being infected by knowledge. Scientists at the EPA, like its libraries, have been muzzled.
New regulations have been promulgated at the EPA that provide that when it comes to setting national air-quality standards, political appointees will have a greater role. Formerly independent outside scientists and professional scientists inside the EPA were responsible for setting safety standards for various pollutants. They made recommendations that were then sent to the political appointees who were the agency’s administrators. The recommendations were then forwarded to the White House. This was scientifically sound but it proved embarrassing to the administration when science ran up against the beliefs of George Bush and his political contributors. Under the new procedure this is less likely to happen since independent scientists will only be called on after political hacks and staff scientists have come up with what is now called “policy-relevant” science. The name suggests that policy and science should be given equal weight. The EPA is not alone in this most recent assault on knowledge-based decision-making.
New rules have been promulgated by the U.S. Geological Survey that will avoid having scientists making scientific pronouncements that go against Bush policy and beliefs. Under the new rules agency scientists at the USGS must submit all scientific papers and even minor reports or prepared talks to the USGS’s communications office. The new policy says that the USGS communications office and Mark Myers, the agency’s director, must be “alerted about information products containing high-visibility topics or topics of a policy-sensitive nature.” Mr. Myers and the office must be told prior to any submission for publication “of findings or data that may be especially newsworthy, have an impact on government policy, or contradict previous public understanding to ensure that proper officials are notified and that communication strategies are developed.”
According to Patrick Leahy, the agency’s head of geology and its acting director until September, the new procedure will “harmonize” the review process. It will avoid such unfortunate occurrences as the time in 2002 when the USGS warned that oil drilling in Alaska’s Arctic National Wildlife Refuge would harm the Porcupine Caribou herd. Mr. Bush didn’t believe that. One week later the USGS had a new report saying the herd would be unaffected by the drilling.
Commenting on the new USGS rules, Jim Estes, an internationally recognized marine biologist in the USGS said: “I feel as though we’ve got someone looking over our shoulder at every damn thing we do. And to me that’s a very scary thing. I worry that it borders on censorship.” Mr. Estes is right. We all have someone looking over our shoulders. He’s called George Bush.
Discuss this column
-
You began,
”...Science is not as intimidating as it first appears. Anyone can do it. It is important, however, that when done by scientists it be properly vetted by amateurs. And it is important that ordinary people don’t have too much information since it will simply confuse them. Thanks to the actions of George Bush we will no longer have to fear an excessively informed public that may fall prey to the importunings of scientists who believe themselves able to educate the rest of us and, more daunting still, George Bush. That is because in a moment of unexpected enlightenment Mr. Bush has realized that one of the best ways to control what people think is to control the kinds of information to which people have access.”
What was Mr. Bush’s reason for closing these libraries, and the other changes you documented here? Did he say it was to save tax money? To cut down on frivolous government spending?
I would have the government pay for more libraries, but I don’t have the same perspective on government as Mr. Bush might. I imagine that he would like to cut out a lot of government that some of the rest of us would complain about because we would see his cuts as harming our right to know about the mess he’s getting us into. But, doesn’t the President reject the idea he’s in the business of nation building? That was his platform, I thought.
I’ve heard the environmental scientists complain about their work being muzzled. But, shouldn’t we expect this kind of interference? I mean in the best of times when scientists get lotsa bucks for their research, aren’t they willfully ignoring the deal they’ve made with the devil?
My university put up maybe ten big buildings to house science departments, all from major grants from the defense department. I imagine the support given has strings.
You would think that the government would support basic science research in order to create an environment where good citizens and creative economic discoveries can grow. You’d think. But, as the world gets more at each other’s throats, I can only see the government telling its scientists on staff to get with the program.
— steven andresen Wednesday, December 27, 2006 # -
This administration uses science as a means to achieve political goals. They ban stem cell research and censor any conversation regarding reproductive rights. That is typical. After all, censorship is becoming America’s favorite past-time. The US gov’t (and their corporate friends), already detain protesters, ban books like “America Deceived” from Amazon and Wikipedia, and fire 21-year tenured, BYU physics professor Steven Jones because he proved explosives, thermite in particular, took down the WTC buildings.
Last link (before Google Books caves to pressure and drops the title):
http://www.iuniverse.com/bookstore/book_detail.asp?&isbn=0-595-38523-0
— 5th of November Thursday, December 28, 2006 # -
It would appear that GWB only fears people who know more than himself.
Next will be the Library at the corner ,’would you like to reed a book? show proper id,sorry you do not have clearance for The Cat In The Hat.’
— ken walsh Thursday, December 28, 2006 # -
I urge all to contact their reps and sens to encourage the reinstatement of the EPA library funds and pressure them to free our scientific community.
The restrictions placed on these people are ridiculous and should be headline news.
WHY must I learn all the important stuff from alternative media’s sources?
— KARLA LINDQUIST Thursday, December 28, 2006 # -
If this illustrates the fate of agencies which were, on the whole, compliant with bush policies anyway, then imagine what will happen to subversive institutions like the ordinary public library. I wonder if bush will go the whole hog and burn the contents of the EPA libraries.
— Andrew Saturday, December 30, 2006 # -
Both the free market and representative democracy, in order to be successful, must have free flow and access to information. Shutting down information, or making it only available to those with the money to gather/disseminate it, condemns both the market and our democracy to self-destuction. READ THOM HARTMANN’S BOOKS ON CORPORATE TAKE-OVER OF EVERYTHING—- HUGE EYE OPENER! TALK TO PEOPLE AND SPREAD THE WORD WHILE YOU STILL CAN.
GOOD LUCK. SEE GORE’S MOVIE. QUIETLY SELL THAT BEACH HOUSE…
— snyder Saturday, December 30, 2006 # -
There is also something phoney about the whole money saving excuse for this destruction of public information. One of the things the EPA is doing is closing down its websites where these library resources were available. Why would you do that? To maintain a website would cost you a few dollars a year. I maintain dozens per year for my clients for less than a thousand dollars, and I don’t have access to all the government webhhosting servers that the EPA does. No – this is purely the destruction of public access of information for that purpose alone.
— Andrew Sunday, December 31, 2006 #
commenting closed for this article