Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

U.S. Scientists Say They Are Told to Alter Finding

CowboyNeal posted more than 9 years ago | from the patriotic-conclusions dept.

Censorship 1171

tree3075 writes "The LA Times is reporting that a survey by the Union of Concerned Scientists and Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility has found hundreds of U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service scientists have been instructed to change findings to favor business interests. I'm not surprised anymore when I read these things."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Oh No!! (5, Funny)

MrP- (45616) | more than 9 years ago | (#11638342)

"Nothing for you to see here. Please move along."

Oh no! They got to Slashdot too!

Re:Oh No!! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11638406)

censership is bad, accept there are some times the media says too much. (sorry i am at work and forced to watch fox news and cnn, it gets sickning)

Nchsd Tshhsh (0, Offtopic)

Ads are broken (718513) | more than 9 years ago | (#11638344)

Soup
fruit
what i just 8

fp (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11638345)

fp

Let the Bush bashing begin! (0, Troll)

daveschroeder (516195) | more than 9 years ago | (#11638346)

...even though:

1. In the last 15 years, the majority of most of these scientist's time has been spend under a Democratic president;

2. The "Union of Concerned Scientists" has been a liberal activist organization throughout its history, originally organized to protest the Vietnam war, and with less than 10% of its membership actually from the scientific community[1];

3. Most scientists in FWS reported no such pressure;

To quote the submitter: "I'm not surprised anymore when I read these things."

But since it's an organization with a decidedly and unabashedly liberal political agenda, I guess they must be telling the truth 100%, whereas anyone on the conservative or Republican side of the spectrum is a greedy, money grubbing liar who would just LOVE to see an end to all environmental concerns. Because, you know, there's no balance or anything in environmentalism. I mean, economic development is always bad, and any edict on "endangered species", no matter how shaky, is always good, right?

[1 [aol.com] ], more [activistcash.com] : In 1969, forty-eight professors at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology formed the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) to protest America's involvement in the Vietnam War. The group conducted a highly publicized strike in March 1969, that included such speakers as leftist MIT professor Noam Chomsky, and Eric Mann of the Weatherman faction of the Students for a Democratic Society. (SDS was the terrorist organization responsible for bombing the U.S. Capitol Building in 1971.) The Union used the strike as a forum to declare that "misuse of scientific and technical knowledge presents a major threat to the existence of mankind." This philosophy was starkly articulated by key organizer, Jonathan Kabat: ""You've got to say, 'No, we want capitalism to come to an end."

The Union's trendy radicalism launched it into money, power and influence. A permanent office was opened in Cambridge, and UCS grew into a multimillion dollar activist organization. Three of its original founders still sit on the board: James A. Fay, Professor Emeritus of Mechanical Engineering (MIT); Kurt Gottfried, Chairman of the Physics Department at Cornell University; and Victor Weisskopf, Professor Emeritus of Physics (MIT). The Board of Directors of this organization also includes the standard litany of corporate America special interests, liberal nonprofit foundations, and former government agency employees.

Political activism in UCS's early years was confined primarily to opposing nuclear power and the military defense establishment. Emphasis later shifted to include all energy policy issues and global warming. In 1989, the Union commissioned Republican pollster Vince Breglio of Research/Strategy/Management to conduct a survey on global warming and environmental protection. Breglio found that "the environment is becoming a political issue with some bite." This poll convinced the group to change its focus. In 1990, UCS brought together forty-nine Nobel laureates, and 700 members of the U.S. Academy of Scientists to sign an appeal for action against global warming. The event was highly publicized and called for tougher fuel efficiency standards for U.S. automobiles, centralized government control of energy issues and the continued deactivation of America's nuclear power generating industry. That same year, however, 425 scientists and intellectual leaders presented another document to the world at the Earth Summit in Rio de Janerio. Entitled The Heidelberg Appeal, it condemned UCS's document as "an irrational ideology which is opposed to scientific and industrial progress and impedes economic and social development." Today, more than 2,700 signatories, including dozens of Nobel Prize winners, from 102 countries have signed The Heidelberg Appeal.

Re:Let the Bush bashing begin! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11638375)

PLEASE MOD PARENT DOWN! He must be silenced. Show him that opposing viewpoints must not be tolerated! Mother Earth is crying out for you to do so!

Re:Let the Bush bashing begin! (3, Insightful)

synthparadox (770735) | more than 9 years ago | (#11638380)

1. In the last 15 years, the majority of most of these scientist's time has been spend under a Democratic president
Thats because in the last 15 years, 8 years were spent under a Democratic president...

Re:Let the Bush bashing begin! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11638398)

I think his point was that enviro-interest groups get more money when their sugar-daddies are in power...

Re:Let the Bush bashing begin! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11638402)

That's the point:

In the last decade and a half, i.e., a pretty good chunk of time, more time was spent under a Democratic administration...i.e., other arguments aside, if there are any "problems", they're not only due to Bush.

Re:Let the Bush bashing begin! (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11638485)

"In the last decade and a half, i.e., a pretty good chunk of time, more time was spent under a Democratic administration...i.e., other arguments aside, if there are any "problems", they're not only due to Bush."

Are you a professional idiot?

Hrm... 15 is the magic number eh? (1, Insightful)

skids (119237) | more than 9 years ago | (#11638510)

root@sabbath:~# GET 'http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la -na-scientists10feb10,0,4954654.story?coll=la-home -nation' | grep -c -e "15|fifteen"
0 ...now where did that number come from?

Nice "talking point" you have their chum. It should even last another 3 years. Don't wear it out.... OOOPS. Too late.

Re:Let the Bush bashing begin! (4, Funny)

Master Bait (115103) | more than 9 years ago | (#11638543)

It's a vast left-wing conspiracy. Decent people know that God put the environment here and God will fix any pollution problems, assuming the rapture doesn't happen first!

Just FYI... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11638382)

that not all Bush haters are tree-hugging liberals.

Re:Let the Bush bashing begin! (5, Insightful)

sahrss (565657) | more than 9 years ago | (#11638393)

Um, why did you already divide this into a Republican/Democrat debate? No one else has done any bashing yet, even the article submitter didn't (amazingly.)

What really bothered me about your post, though, was this:
"1. In the last 15 years, the majority of most of these scientist's time has been spend under a Democratic president;"

What, can we all just pick an arbitrary number of past years, whichever happens to overlap the point we want to push? Try 4 years? 20? :-P

Thanks for the interesting tidbit though.

Re:Let the Bush bashing begin! (5, Insightful)

TheFlyingGoat (161967) | more than 9 years ago | (#11638469)

why did you already divide this into a Republican/Democrat debate?

He was planning ahead. See:
Example 1 [slashdot.org]
Example 2 [slashdot.org]
I'm sure there will be many more to follow.

He also brought it up because the group of scientists in the article (and always has been) are extremely leftist and always have been. It's the same as when Fox News gets mentioned, just in the opposite direction this time.

Re:Let the Bush bashing begin! (0, Flamebait)

stevew (4845) | more than 9 years ago | (#11638553)

Let's just consider the source, i.e. the LA times which has a 10/1 ratio of liberal versus conservative responses in the letter's to the editors section.

The LA times hasn't been worth reading for 15plus years...this from a native Angelino that grew up on the times!

Re:Let the Bush bashing begin! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11638401)

Your the one talking about bashing.

This is really further proof that the USA is NOT a democracy it is a plutocracy where the corporations rule and 1% of the populations owns the majority of the wealth, regardless of which president you invoke.

Re:Let the Bush bashing begin! (5, Funny)

Meetch (756616) | more than 9 years ago | (#11638415)

In Australia, some call it bush bashing. Others call it four wheel driving!

Re:Let the Bush bashing begin! (4, Insightful)

node 3 (115640) | more than 9 years ago | (#11638417)

So, uh... This contradicts their findings how again?

Since we're exposing sources... (5, Informative)

aendeuryu (844048) | more than 9 years ago | (#11638419)

Who is behind "Activist Cash"? [sourcewatch.org]

Don't get me wrong, it does look like the UCS is partisan. But it's not like the rebuttal is coming from a totally neutral voice, either.

Heh. (2, Insightful)

daveschroeder (516195) | more than 9 years ago | (#11638456)

Who is behind "The Center for Media & Democracy"? [activistcash.com]

Don't get me wrong, it does look like Activist Cash is partisan. But it's not like the rebuttal is coming from a totally neutral voice, either. :P

Re:Heh. (1)

sharp-bang (311928) | more than 9 years ago | (#11638537)

I'm still waiting to hear why their findings are suspect, other than that you don't like their politics. Post a relevant fact if you want anyone intelligent to pay attention to you.

Re:Heh. (1)

daveschroeder (516195) | more than 9 years ago | (#11638578)

Kind of like people don't gratuitously bash, say FOX News on slashdot?

This is exactly the same, just going the other direction now. Something you're not, you know, used to, I'm sure.

(And for the record, I'm sure their findings are just fine. Ideally, scientific results shouldn't be "fudged" to support any interests. But this is the federal government, and politics are involved, no matter who's president. If Howard Dean was president, UCS wouldn't even be doing these "surveys"...because you know what? They'd find the SAME FUCKING THING, assuming they asked the questions in the same way. That's the point I'm making. Good that some scientists feel pressured to alter findings? No. A liberal activist organization that continually tries to vilify Bush as part of its political agenda behind the survey? Yes.)

Re:Let the Bush bashing begin! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11638433)

A wee bit defensive aren't we?

Heck yeah I'll bash Bush on his environmental record. But I bash Slick Willy too. One has only to research the situation in his own backyard of Arkansas when he was governor to see how pro-business centrist politicians behave. They wouldn't be elected if they weren't whores.

Still don't get it? (3, Insightful)

BriniestMark (850918) | more than 9 years ago | (#11638441)

You still don't get it, do you? All you see is your retarded red-vs-blue idiocy.

Bush sucks -- he sucks really hard. Just because Clinton was every bit as big an asshole, doesn't make Bush any less an asshole.

Face it -- America has become a fascist state, where science is censored in favour of business interests. All that matters anymore is that the trains run on time. The Democrats and the Republicans are both equally culpable, because they are exactly the same party. There's no difference between them anymore, nor has there been any difference for several decades. Clinton may have talked the liberal talk, and Bush may talk the conservative talk, but their policies are virtually indistinguishable.

Re:Still don't get it? (3, Funny)

JessLeah (625838) | more than 9 years ago | (#11638465)

Trains? BWAHAHAHAHhaah. The trains are a shadow of their former self. No, all that matters is that the airline CEOs make money. Not that the planes take off or land on time (or that they take off or land at all). Trains? No one cares about trains any more since they don't make too much money for anyone any more.

America has become a land ruled by the sole commandment "thou shalt make money for thy CEO". Anything else goes out the window. Scientific truth is just the latest victim of many.

Bow (1)

BriniestMark (850918) | more than 9 years ago | (#11638488)

I bow down before your masterful cynicism.

Re:Still don't get it? (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11638533)

All that matters anymore is that the trains run on time.

If there's anything that history has taught me, it's that it doesn't matter if the trains actually run on time. All that matters is that you say that the trains run on time, and keep repeating this over and over again until people actually believe it.

Re:Let the Bush bashing begin! (0, Troll)

michaelggreer (612022) | more than 9 years ago | (#11638444)

Wow. Did you get paid to post that?

Re:Let the Bush bashing begin! (-1, Flamebait)

daveschroeder (516195) | more than 9 years ago | (#11638486)

No. Do you get paid to be an insufferable asshole?

(Yes?)

Really, what was the point of your post? At least mine had one. Which is, in case you missed it, that UCS has a *huge* political agenda. Which, in and of itself, isn't bad, but let's call a spade a spade. Is it any surprise that a group founded to protest the Vietnam war and oppose any capitalist/pro-business policy has a decidedly anti-Bush agenda (implied or explicitly stated in pretty much all of their "findings" since Bush was elected), but tries to cleverly present itself as innocently impartial?

Re:Let the Bush bashing begin! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11638517)

SO JUST HOW SALTY IS DUBYA'S JIZZ? YOU GOT SOME ON YOUR CHIN THERE, SPORT!!!

*_g_o_a_t_s_e_x_*_g_o_a_t_s_e_x_*_g_o_a_t_s_e_x_*
g_______________________________________________g
o_/_____\_____________\____________/____\_______o
a|_______|_____________\__________|______|______a
t|_______`._____________|_________|_______:_____t
s`________|_____________|________\|_______|_____s
e_\_______|_/_______/__\\\___--___\\_______:____e
x__\______\/____--~~__________~--__|_\_____|____x
*___\______\_-~____________________~-_\____|____*
g____\______\_________.--------.______\|___|____g
o______\_____\______//_________(_(__>__\___|____o
a_______\___.__C____)_________(_(____>__|__/____a
t_______/\_|___C_____)/______\_(_____>__|_/_____t
s______/_/\|___C_____)_______|__(___>___/__\____s
e_____|___(____C_____)\______/__//__/_/_____\___e
x_____|____\__|_____\\_________//_(__/_______|__x
*____|_\____\____)___`----___--'_____________|__*
g____|__\______________\_______/____________/_|_g
o___|______________/____|_____|__\____________|_o
a___|_____________|____/_______\__\___________|_a
t___|__________/_/____|_________|__\___________|t
s___|_________/_/______\__/\___/____|__________|s
e__|_________/_/________|____|_______|_________|e
x__|__________|_________|____|_______|_________|x
*_g_o_a_t_s_e_x_*_g_o_a_t_s_e_x_*_g_o_a_t_s_e_x_*
# Please try to keep posts on topic. # Try to reply to other people's comments instead of starting new threads. # Read other people's messages before posting your own to avoid simply duplicating what has already been said. # Use a clear subject that describes what your message is about. # Offtopic, Inflammatory, Inappropriate, Illegal, or Offensive comments might be moderated. (You can read everything, even moderated posts, by adjusting your threshold on the User Preferences Page)# Please try to keep posts on topic. # Try to reply to other people's comments instead of starting new threads. # Read other people's messages before posting your own to avoid simply duplicating what has already been said. # Use a clear subject that describes what your message is about. # Offtopic, Inflammatory, Inappropriate, Illegal, or Offensive comments might be moderated. (You can read everything, even moderated posts, by adjusting your threshold on the User Preferences Page)# Please try to keep posts on topic. # Try to reply to other people's comments instead of starting new threads. # Read other people's messages before posting your own to avoid simply duplicating what has already been said. # Use a clear subject that describes what your message is about. # Offtopic, Inflammatory, Inappropriate, Illegal, or Offensive comments might be moderated. (You can read everything, even moderated posts, by adjusting your threshold on the User Preferences Page)

Re:Let the Bush bashing begin! (4, Insightful)

michaelggreer (612022) | more than 9 years ago | (#11638536)

Look, there are all sorts of groups that have agendas. That does not mean, a priori, that everything they say is bullshit. UCS is pretty well respected, and you just blow them off 'cause you disagree with their political perspective. That's why I posted that reference to the pundits Bush has been paying off: they too just pile on anyone who disagrees with Bush. Relax, man, and have a real political discussion, instead of just assuming liberals are such monsters. Discuss the issue.

Re:Let the Bush bashing begin! (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11638476)

Who cares about either party? Tampering with the scientific process AT ALL must be condemned.

If political pressure was allowed to alter "scientific fact" then:
1: The sun would orbit the earth, the center of our solar system.
2: It would be the nature of things to move, then stop.
3: People could breath in space.
4: The earth would have suddenly come into existance a tad over five millenia ago.
5: Humans would have suddenly formed a few days after the earth.
6: Evolution would NOT have been proven to occur in a laboratory.

In all honesty, posts like the parent show growth in a disturbing trend. To wit, very well-spoken idiots who can completely miss the obvious in attempting to bash rivals at every irrelevent turn.

By the way, you know how the neoconservatives always claim that they never went to college because it's "just liberal brainwashing"? To me, that just screams "Sour grapes".

Re:Let the Bush bashing begin! (4, Insightful)

lezerno (775940) | more than 9 years ago | (#11638478)

And your point is...
Looking back, it seems the UCS was correct. There is global warming, that is a fact. Almost no scientist will deny that fact.

www.archiphysics.com

das@doit.wisc.edu is a jackass! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11638504)

Why, Dave, are ANY scientists reporting being pressured into changing the findings of their scientific studies to suit political goals?

And furthermore, why do wingnut assholes like yourself only give a shit about making money? Maybe you guys come off as money grubbing liars cause so often, that's what you really are.

Re:das@doit.wisc.edu is a jackass! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11638571)

Yes! Any assslurp that slurps asses and obfuscates their email deserves to have their email unobfuscated on teh slashtard!

Re:Let the Bush bashing begin! (4, Insightful)

tempest303 (259600) | more than 9 years ago | (#11638516)

Yes, indeed, let the Bush bashing begin.

anyone on the conservative or Republican side of the spectrum is a greedy, money grubbing liar who would just LOVE to see an end to all environmental concerns

Anyone is free to make up their own minds about this, but allow me to illustrate a point:

Republicans are pushing for voluntary environmental controls [cbsnews.com] . However, in publicly owned companies, the primary objective is to increase shareholder value. While it is an extreme example, a publicly held company could, in theory, be sued for complying with such regulations, as it would pull away capital but does not increase shareholder value in any way.

So how is it that the "voluntary controls" Republicans are doing something for the environment? I'm not calling the Democrats saints, either, but let's not disingenuously pretend that Bush or his friends give a rat's ass about the planet, eh?

Re:Let the Bush bashing begin! (3, Insightful)

TheFlyingGoat (161967) | more than 9 years ago | (#11638575)

If you're going to bash the bad stuff, at least praise the good along with it. Slashdot posters love to tout clean nuclear power, but ignore it when it's brought up by the President they love to hate:

"To keep our economy growing, we also need reliable supplies of affordable, environmentally responsible energy. Nearly four years ago, I submitted a comprehensive energy strategy that encourages conservation, alternative sources, a modernized electricity grid, and more production here at home--including safe, clean nuclear energy."

Re:Let the Bush bashing begin! (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11638518)

The "Union of Concerned Scientists" has been a liberal activist organization throughout its history,

I know what you mean. All those Nobelists in the Union of Concerned Scientsts are just hacks. Heck, you can't even get a Nobel prize in the physical sciences without being a liberal, everyone knows that.

Sheesh.

If you'd like to criticize the substance of their report, indicating what they did wrong and why their conclusions are flawed, that'd be a worthwhile contribution to the discussion. Until then, though, all you've contributed is ad hominem.

Put another way, your response is the equivalent of suggesting that General Relativity must be wrong because Einstein abused his wife.

Re:Let the Bush bashing begin! (1)

His Shadow (689816) | more than 9 years ago | (#11638545)

Keeeee Riest.

Slashdot HAS been invaded by rightdroids.

Re:Let the Bush bashing begin! (5, Insightful)

Jerk City Troll (661616) | more than 9 years ago | (#11638565)

I never ceases to amaze me how so many people frown upon protecting the world we live in, the air we breath, the water we drink, and the food we eat. "Liberal agenda" my ass. This is about our survival as a species. You would hope that the people expressing deep concern over matters of the environment would receive thanks and praise for the efforts. Nevertheless, there is no shortage of greedy, wholeheartedly selfish people out there out to ensure their own personal and short-term gain, the consequences be damned. but then, I suppose I'm just some unamerican hippie...

G.W. Bush (0, Flamebait)

Bs15 (762456) | more than 9 years ago | (#11638347)

Sounds like what Bush did after the 9/11 attacks.

Re:G.W. Bush (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11638428)

There is one "Bush Basher" so far. Scored a +2 Insightful too! What a site!

The Mandate in action (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11638348)

Hail to the Thief!

I wonder if there will be any Bush bashing? (-1, Offtopic)

glrotate (300695) | more than 9 years ago | (#11638349)

I guess we'll see.

Censorship (0, Troll)

synthparadox (770735) | more than 9 years ago | (#11638350)

More censorship in the United States? Meh.

I thought the United States would at least set an example after critisizing China of censorship...

Re:Censorship (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11638491)

We did. We showed them how to do it more effectively and efficiently, to the point that many people don't even realize it's happening.

It's one thing to censor information. It's quite another, and a greater feat at that, to do it so well that it isn't obvious that censorship has occurred. That's the most effective kind of censorship. You allow people to think they're agreeing with you after seeing all the available information. If they thought they were being lied to, they might distrust you. On the other hand, if they don't realize information is being altered or left out, they will not only agree with you but even defend you from criticism.

Not really news... (4, Informative)

aendeuryu (844048) | more than 9 years ago | (#11638355)

Scientists were saying the same thing just under a year ago... [ucsusa.org]

Easy to point the finger. (0, Offtopic)

yotto (590067) | more than 9 years ago | (#11638359)

I'm writing this from a house that is made from a lot of wood, sitting on land that used to be the home of some animals who now get hit crossing the street. It would be easy for me to point my finger at "industry" and say they're wrong, but would I be willing to give up my house, land, and paved roads to my job? I don't think so.

Re:Easy to point the finger. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11638453)

Thanks for that insight .. and i honestly think you hit the nail on the head. Until society decides that it is unacceptable, this sort of thing will continue to happen.

Re:Easy to point the finger. (4, Insightful)

oldmanmtn (33675) | more than 9 years ago | (#11638501)

Jeebus, you're an idiot. Nobody said anything about stopping all construction or all use of wood.

There are some trees that probably shouldn't be cut down and some places where we shouldn't be building new houses. That doesn't mean we have to revert to the stone age.

But hell, I guess that's what passes for rational argument among right wingers these days. Bush has people lie about inconvenient facts. Since his mindless followers don't have that kind of power, they resort to building strawmen to tear down.

Re:Easy to point the finger. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11638547)

Strawmen? Then name a place where it will be ok with the 'enviromentalists' to drill for oil?

Re:Easy to point the finger. (1)

mrighi (855168) | more than 9 years ago | (#11638507)

Don't confuse the issues here. The issue at hand is scientists being told to lie.

Of course most of us would not be willing to give up our home or modern amenities. This, however, does not make it right to alter scientific findings to make development possible.

It would be better for politicians and society to come to a consensus that it's okay to kill natural habitats to make room for human homes. Brutal honesty is better than ignorance by deceit.

Re:Easy to point the finger. (2, Insightful)

freemacmini (852263) | more than 9 years ago | (#11638523)

Since the trees are being cut down faster then they grow back your unwillingness to give up your comforts will effect your children and grandchildren.

Re:Easy to point the finger. (1)

whovian (107062) | more than 9 years ago | (#11638535)

I'm writing this from a house that is made from a lot of wood, sitting on land that used to be the home of some animals who now get hit crossing the street. It would be easy for me to point my finger at "industry" and say they're wrong, but would I be willing to give up my house, land, and paved roads to my job? I don't think so.

Shelter is one thing, eggregious "shelter" (eg. 20k+ square foot mansions) is another. I'm not trying to accuse you.

I wonder whether people would be willing to relinquish a personal convenience or luxury in order to HIRE independent nonprofit watchdog organizations to monitor for abuses by government, industry, scientific, and personal special interest groups. It's feasible -- just look at the contributions that went to vote recounts last year.

Not surprising (3, Insightful)

thedogcow (694111) | more than 9 years ago | (#11638365)

It is unfortunate that this happens in the scientific community... a community that should have an objective and unbiased interest/perspective.

Same story about "Global Warming". You have scientists that are paid by the oil companies to deny that global temperatures are increasing, when you have other "no biased' scientists that are giving direct proof of anthropogenic interference to the global climate system.

Another nail in the coffin of journalism. (4, Insightful)

TellarHK (159748) | more than 9 years ago | (#11638374)

Well, let's see. We've had two columnists paid off, party plants in the Presidential press pool, and 200 scientists now reporting they've been pressured to alter results. Yeah, those red staters really are so much smarter than those of us in the blue states. They memorize the propaganda more easily.

Every year I fear more and more for our country, and every year the average American just seems to be that much more baffled by bullshit. We're never going to see anything resembling what we -thought- was a "clean" electoral process again, I'm afraid.

Re:Another nail in the coffin of journalism. (1)

useosx (693652) | more than 9 years ago | (#11638390)

Slashdot byline: patriotic-conclusions dept.

That is the greatest victory of the elite in this country. Making pro-business = triumph of capitalism = patriotism.

Re:Another nail in the coffin of journalism. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11638454)

There is "Bush Basher" #2! He needs to be modded up though. Cmon mods...you know you want to do it. Disregard the fact that the "report" also said this activity occured under Clinton/Gore. The truth doesn't matter.

You Lose (1)

BriniestMark (850918) | more than 9 years ago | (#11638471)

You lose. Your post automatically receives zero points, because you stupidly assumed that this has something to do with Democrats and Republicans. You think Clinton didn't pull this same shit? The man who consistently vetoed reducing the amount of mercury in American drinking water? Grow up.

The Republicans and the Democrats are exactly the same. They are both corrupt corporate puppets. They just present different lies about what they stand for.

Re:Another nail in the coffin of journalism. (1, Flamebait)

Mazem (789015) | more than 9 years ago | (#11638534)

Fuck you and your anti-republican group-think. I'm a moderate liberal, but this knee-jerk republican bashing over anything and everything is getting ridiculous. Did it ever occur to you that "those red staters" might have honest and well thought-out reasons for being republican? Did it ever occur to you that two intelligent enlightened people can have an honest disagreement over politics?

Mod me flaimbait for saying "Fuck", but at least mod the parent post flamebait for grossly generalizing and insulting a large class of people.

Re:Another nail in the coffin of journalism. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11638564)

Every year I fear more and more for our country, and every year the average American just seems to be that much more baffled by bullshit.

As the maxim states:
If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bullsh*t.

Scientific honesty. (5, Insightful)

lifejunkie (785838) | more than 9 years ago | (#11638385)

Scientific honesty is the core and foundation of all of our discoverys. If kepler modified his measurements to fit into the then current view of things, astronomy would have been set back 100 years.

Surprised? No. (3, Insightful)

burgburgburg (574866) | more than 9 years ago | (#11638387)

Annoyed, appalled, infuriated, sickened? Yes.

It's so encouraging to know that this administration so thoroughly distorts and perverts "facts" that would potentially interfere with business interests.

Intelligence, economics, science ...yep, they've got all the bases covered. Covered in fantasy, but covered nonetheless.

Re:Surprised? No. (4, Insightful)

Nefarious Wheel (628136) | more than 9 years ago | (#11638421)

The Lysenko story all over again? Anyone remember how we crowed over the fact that the USSR had it's own "science of the state"?

How to let your enemy win, in one easy lesson -- become them.

Re:Surprised? No. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11638470)

Cool! "Bush Basher" #3 makes his appearance already. Is it just me, or are the ones with the "Karma Bonuses" the worst of them all?

Re:Surprised? No. (3, Insightful)

damiangerous (218679) | more than 9 years ago | (#11638505)

"this administration"?

First, the question posed had no time period specified. It was simply "have you ever experienced this", not have you experienced it under the current administration. Anyone who's been employed for 8 years or longer has spent more time under another (Democratic) administration than the current one.

And, of course the Clinton administration would never [commondreams.org] , ever [mindfully.org] put politics before policy. I love how these debates always degenerate into "your side is evil, my side is pure."

Re:Surprised? No. (0, Troll)

BriniestMark (850918) | more than 9 years ago | (#11638573)

You are hereby penalized 4 points for assuming that any criticism directed towards the current administration is automatically a condemnation of the Republican party and its values.

This administration is completely and totally shitty. Deal with it. Acknowledging the utter and absolute shittiness of the previous administration doesn't detract from the current administration's shittiness one iota.

The Democrats and the Republicans are indistinguishable as far as their actual policies are concerned. They're both corporate puppets who only follow the money.

This is not about "your side is evil, my side is pure" -- unless you actually consider yourself to be on the side of falsifying science. We're on the same side, the side that believes in freedom, science, privacy rights, and all that. The government is on the opposite side, the side of tyranny, ignorance, and the police state.

who cares... (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11638389)

lokitorrent has just been closed down, and the MPAA has it's log files. =P

Don't believe... (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11638392)

The LA Times?!?! Don't believe everything you read ... especially from this mouthpiece of the DemocRat party...

Re:Don't believe... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11638493)

Tip: Emphasizing the R, as in DemocRat, makes you look just about as stupid as the people who spell Microsoft as M$.

Try not to embarrass us anymore, please.

Unlike liberal scientists... (0, Flamebait)

professorfalcon (713985) | more than 9 years ago | (#11638395)

...who don't need direction to skew their results.

Welcome to the future of capitalism (3, Insightful)

focitrixilous P (690813) | more than 9 years ago | (#11638397)

Alright, it seems we are headed towards a future where a lie said often enough is the truth. The WMDs in Iraq is proof that the Bush administration is more than willing to bend the truth to unresonable extremes to support their holy causes.

A biologist in Alaska wrote in response to the survey: "It is one thing for the department to dismiss our recommendations, it is quite another to be forced (under veiled threat of removal) to say something that is counter to our best professional judgment."

What's worse is that the American people didn't care to open their eyes to this and get rid of W when they had the chance. The scientists can only fight for so long before the next, brain washed generation is far more willing to churn out whatever studies are requested for the right price. Science is becoming another consumable, to be bought and sold like oil and food.

I guess there might be some hope left, but I'd look for a lot more of this in the next 4 years. I don't forsee a Worker's Revolution either, but I think we can do better and leave some things as unbuyable. Maybe I'm just a member of a dying breed that holds onto a bit of dignity. I mean, liars are going to have more money, and morals no longer seem to matter in our reltavistic society. I guess relativistic science is next, and I don't mean Special Relativity.

Re:Welcome to the future of capitalism (1)

FleaPlus (6935) | more than 9 years ago | (#11638560)

I'm sorry, but what on earth does this have to do with capitalism specifically?

Property rights are NOT a "business interest" (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11638399)

There ARE egregious examples of corporations overrunning the natural habitat of endangered wildlife to squeeze a quick buck out of the land. This is NOT one of those stories.

This story is about common people: folks like you and I who might happen to buy a nice slab of land on which to start a homestead and raise our families. The federal government has been VERY aggressive in recent decades in condemning the lands owned by private citizens due to the concerns of busybody environmentalists. This means that the land that YOU paid good money for and developed yourself has been TAKEN from you by the state, with no compensation, because they "suspect" that some endangered species might benefit from it.

Enough is enough - the pendulum has swung the other way. It is time for the government to RESPECT the property rights and the 4th Amendment rights of Americans. The federal government must STOP condemning privately owned land under "conservation" statutes. I for one am happy to see this new shift in strategy from the Department of Fish and Wildlife.

In Southern California, if I recall (1)

Travoltus (110240) | more than 9 years ago | (#11638424)

there was a huge fire spreading, and in some places people weren't allowed to clear the fire hazard twigs and stuff from the ground because it endangered some animal's habitat.

I suppose the fire came and destroyed their habitat anyway, and the people lost their homes too.

I'm normally disgusted by anything the Republicans say about environmental issues but that one incident really was a black mark on liberalism.

Re:Property rights are NOT a "business interest" (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11638574)

Ok. So why can't we just take that argument on its own merit instead of pressuring scientists to alter their findings?

Sad reality (5, Interesting)

FiReaNGeL (312636) | more than 9 years ago | (#11638409)

Slightly related to the post, but here's my 2 cents. Science is expensive. Very expensive. And when a scientist has the choice between getting his career ruined because of bad results / wrong hypothesis or lie in order to get a second chance, some do chose the second option. Of course, the 'lie' isn't always intentional, even conscious; some tend to alter to reality in order to see what they want to see. You can't be always right, but when you're wrong, funding (private or public) gets a lot tougher to get. It can be fatal to a scientific career... when you put your life behind an idea, you tend to want to be right. No matter what. The funding system is just bad; failure is punished too harshly.

Now back on topic, political ingerence in science is even worse. Especially when motivated by a $$ agenda. Your career versus a should-be-protected plant? Not everyone has the courage to say 'no'... I admire this group of scientist, they had the courage to stand up. Sadly, some don't, and we'll never know it.

and the Canadian Mad Cows are extremely Virulent.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11638414)

.. while the US mad cows only need to be sampled at a rate of 1/10,000 cows. May as wll rename USDA to U S Dept of Protectionism while you're at it.

Re:and the Canadian Mad Cows are extremely Virulen (5, Informative)

saskboy (600063) | more than 9 years ago | (#11638464)

There were under 800 cattle from mad cow affected countries imported into Canada before the importations were stopped. And the US imported over 1600 cattle from affected countries.

Yet Canada has found 3, before they entered the human or animal food chains, and the US found one after it was partly processed. Tell us who is doing a better job of detecting mad cow in North America?

Why is this news? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11638418)

Whether the illegal pressure is applied by left-wingers or right-wingers doesn't matter.

This country needs to start placing truth, justice, and liberty above partisan politics.

People behave in ways they are incented to behave. So we need to either remove the incentives or apply some decentives:

1. Make it a federal crime to pressure scientists to provide incorrect findings.

2. Provide a bi-partisan watchdog that scientists can contact when they are pressured to lie about their findings.

3. Protect both the whistle-blowers and the people they accuse until the facts can be investigated openly.

typical republican response (4, Insightful)

jonpublic (676412) | more than 9 years ago | (#11638427)

science should be held above political agendas.

typical republican response:

its not happening.

it is happening, but clinton did it first.

left wing media conspiracy to slam bush. (which is pretty funny considering the whole talon news thing.)

cite another left wing conspiracy. BOOGIE MEN EVERYWHERE!

cite michael crichton.

cite a volcano! think of how many spotted owls have been killed by volcanos! think of how much C02 volcanos release.

like humans can actually damage nature, its so big!

but economic growth is important.

when the real response should be: really? lets fix this. remove politics from the system.

Re:typical republican response (0)

TheFlyingGoat (161967) | more than 9 years ago | (#11638513)

I'm a typical Republican and I would give the following response:

It's a shame if this is really going on, but I'm hesitant to believe anything that comes out of this group. I believe it'd be similar to how you view stories from Fox News. That's not to say it's not true... it'd just be nice to get a version of the story that wasn't spun by either side.

I agree that it would be nice if politics were removed from the system, but that would require privatizing the system, which those same scientists would complain about. They LOVE their federal research grants.

Bush bashing? no0o0o0o (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11638432)

Hey Dave, this message may be considered a troll, but i am sick of overly confident conservative cocks like you, who think all liberals are going to bash your make believe cowboy of a president. Are you such a smartass that you can not even read a post and think of it as neutral, or are you the troll, the type who like to start political arguments, I do not care if you deny my claims of you being conservative, you obviously are and your a disgusting one at that. It is WELL known that corporations (which 90% of all conservatives back up) are almost always evil and could care less about those in a lower "class," and therefore makes you an evil fuck, I have republican friends, and family members, they are a hella lot smarter and a fuckload less radical (but open to a debate) than you avid FoX news watchers, who believe every bullshit story you see...

I am an independent
but i lean a tad more to the left.

Your Rights Online? (-1, Offtopic)

CharonIDRONES (656891) | more than 9 years ago | (#11638442)

Okay - Sometimes its okay when it actually has to do with our rights and what not. (And yeah, this could be 'Freedom of Information')

But come on. When the Fish and Wildlife Service's scientist lying something that is News for Nerds! Hell, we don't even go outside other than for . . . Well, we don't even go outside let alone hunt! Sheesh, news for nerds my ass . . .

let us make one think perfectly clear... (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11638448)

once you pull something like this, you do not deserve to be called a "scientist" any longer

Re:let us make one think perfectly clear... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11638463)

What do you suggest instead?

Re:let us make one think perfectly clear... (1)

Jerk City Troll (661616) | more than 9 years ago | (#11638495)

What do you suggest instead?

"Whore" sounds like a pretty good option to me.

zerg (2, Interesting)

Lord Omlette (124579) | more than 9 years ago | (#11638477)

In the Soviet Union, when a biologist's findings did not match the ideals of Histoical Materialism, Lysenko would have the offending scientist sent to the gulag. Or worse...

How much longer before we find out the "Union of Concerned Scientists" is actually an Al-Qaida front organization?

Re:zerg (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11638494)

Histoical Materialism Because historically, Materialists have been quite Stoic.

Lysenko You mean Trofim Denisovich Lysenko [wikipedia.org] , ja?

A few issues (5, Insightful)

Tethys_was_taken (813654) | more than 9 years ago | (#11638483)

First off, from TFA:
The survey of the agency's scientific staff of 1,400 had a 30% response rate and was conducted jointly by the Union of Concerned Scientists and Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility.
and
More than half of the biologists and other researchers who responded to the survey said they knew of cases in which
[Emphasis added]

Okay, so "more than half" of 30% makes it a little over 15%. So thats around 210+ scientists. Technically, the summary is right in saying "hundreds", but it sounds a whole lot more sensational than it really is.

Secondly, also from TFA

Mitch Snow, a spokesman for the Fish and Wildlife Service, said the agency had no comment on the survey, except to say "some of the basic premises just aren't so."
If that's not dodging the issue, I don't know what is. I would seriously like a spokesman for a scientific agency to give a better defense to his stand than that very vague statement that says nothing.

False sensationalism and dodging aside, I believe this is a very serious issue. If the scientific integrity of this office has been reduced because of corporate pressures, there's very little faith left in me for any scientific agency. People generally assume that science works in the best interests of man, even though the results may go against him.

this should surprise no one... (0, Redundant)

sharp-bang (311928) | more than 9 years ago | (#11638497)

News flash: government agencies are political.

A bunch of scientific hacks (2, Interesting)

Badanov (518690) | more than 9 years ago | (#11638508)

See here. [activistcash.com]

A citizens response... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11638519)

Because the real world is a cesspool of lust for power combined with incompetence mostly caused by the inbred no-talent ol' boy networks within business and government, I suggest all citizens take a leaf of the business-government playbook and lie, cheat, steal and do ANYTHING you need to do to get what you want especially when your adversary is government and big business (and they are our adversaries). A machiavellian no-holds barred journey to your personal ends is what we should all aspire to.

GOVERNMENT ANNOUNCMENT: Attention citizens please be good and follow our ethical template which we have given you in the form of religion and law. Do as we say not as we do or you will suffer the consequences in the form of misdirected media propaganda, police action and the social engineering of citizens against you.

Only one thing to say about that (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11638522)

George W. Bush

With friends like George Bush (1)

Demona (7994) | more than 9 years ago | (#11638539)

The free market has no friends.

Everyone has a price... (1, Funny)

bildungsroman_yorick (825714) | more than 9 years ago | (#11638544)

The Million Dollarman Ted Debiase would approve of this.

BUSHZ GONNA GITCHA!!!!!! BOO (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11638550)

lol... mostliberal.story.ever.

News Flash! (4, Funny)

ErikZ (55491) | more than 9 years ago | (#11638570)

In the news today, scientists working on politically sensitive issues are pressured by politicans.

Slashdot readers are shocked and amazed.

"I blame the Bush administration" says one.

"Who would of thought there would be a connection between the Federal government and Federally mandated enviromental issues?" Crys another.

"Wait, it doesn't say if enviromental groups were pressuring the Scientists." Commented one before he was quicken beaten down.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?