Silencing the Climate Warming Critics

Stunning article in the Wall Street Journal today about the two-faced "scientists" in our government. The WSJ rightly points out that Jim Hansen, the biggest loudmouth in government has given over 1,400 speeches touting his version of anthropogenic global warming, many of them during the Bush administration, and had the audacity to claim that "the Bush administration" was "censoring" his work and fiddling with the science. The Obama administration has grabbed onto that claim and issued very public memos demanding transparency in government and science. Lisa Jackson, the nominee to head the EPA, joined in with "I will ensure EPA's efforts to address the environmental crises of today are rooted in three fundamental values: science-based policies and program, adherence to the rule of law, and overwhelming transparency."

So what about Alan Carlin, a senior analyst (B.S. in Physics from CalTech, PhD in Economics from MIT) who has 35 years in the EPA's National Center for Environmental Science? Last March, the Obama administration decided to declare carbon a "pollutant," and gave the EPA the authority to regulate it. And this was completely without any action by Congress. "Mr. Carlin and a colleague presented a 98-page analysis arguing the agency should take another look, as the science behind man-made global warming is inconclusive at best. The analysis noted that global temperatures were on a downward trend. It pointed out problems with climate models. It highlighted new research that contradicts apocalyptic scenarios. 'We believe our concerns and reservations are sufficiently important to warrant a serious review of the science by EPA,' the report read."

Can you guess what happened? Well, his boss forbade him to do any more work on climate change because his effort was getting in the way of EPA policy! Subsequently, anonymous people in the EPA have been bad-mouthing Mr. Carlin's work.

The WSJ concludes "Mr. Carlin is instead an explanation for why the science debate is little reported in this country. The professional penalty for offering a contrary view to elites like Al Gore is a smear campaign. The global-warming crowd likes to deride skeptics as the equivalent of the Catholic Church refusing to accept the Copernican theory. The irony is that, today, it is those who dare critique the new religion of human-induced climate change who face the Inquisition."

Obama's claims of "transparency" are basically lies. And what happened to the promise that no new legislation would be voted on without being available for debate for five days? Apparently that doesn't apply to anything in Washington these days.

Please read the whole article in the WSJ.