The Sound of a Swamp Draining

Weatherman2020

Diamond Member
Mar 3, 2013
91,104
61,755
2,605
Right coast, classified
I'm sure somehow science using full disclosure is a bad thing somehow.


Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Scott Pruitt will soon end his agency's use of "secret science" to craft regulations.

"We need to make sure their data and methodology are published as part of the record," Pruitt said in an exclusive interview with The Daily Caller News Foundation. "Otherwise, it's not transparent. It's not objectively measured, and that's important."

Pruitt will reverse long-standing EPA policy allowing regulators to rely on non-public scientific data in crafting rules. Such studies have been used to justify tens of billions of dollars worth of regulations.

"EPA regulators would only be allowed to consider scientific studies that make their data available for public scrutiny under Pruitt’s new policy. Also, EPA-funded studies would need to make all their data public."

EXCLUSIVE: Scott Pruitt Will End EPA’s Use Of ‘Secret Science’ To Justify Regulations
 
I'm sure somehow science using full disclosure is a bad thing somehow.


Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Scott Pruitt will soon end his agency's use of "secret science" to craft regulations.

"We need to make sure their data and methodology are published as part of the record," Pruitt said in an exclusive interview with The Daily Caller News Foundation. "Otherwise, it's not transparent. It's not objectively measured, and that's important."

Pruitt will reverse long-standing EPA policy allowing regulators to rely on non-public scientific data in crafting rules. Such studies have been used to justify tens of billions of dollars worth of regulations.

"EPA regulators would only be allowed to consider scientific studies that make their data available for public scrutiny under Pruitt’s new policy. Also, EPA-funded studies would need to make all their data public."

EXCLUSIVE: Scott Pruitt Will End EPA’s Use Of ‘Secret Science’ To Justify Regulations
Scientific American certainly believes it is a bad thing: "This is a move that serves no purpose other than to prevent the EPA from carrying out its mission of protecting public health and the environment."
 
I'm sure somehow science using full disclosure is a bad thing somehow.


Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Scott Pruitt will soon end his agency's use of "secret science" to craft regulations.

"We need to make sure their data and methodology are published as part of the record," Pruitt said in an exclusive interview with The Daily Caller News Foundation. "Otherwise, it's not transparent. It's not objectively measured, and that's important."

Pruitt will reverse long-standing EPA policy allowing regulators to rely on non-public scientific data in crafting rules. Such studies have been used to justify tens of billions of dollars worth of regulations.

"EPA regulators would only be allowed to consider scientific studies that make their data available for public scrutiny under Pruitt’s new policy. Also, EPA-funded studies would need to make all their data public."

EXCLUSIVE: Scott Pruitt Will End EPA’s Use Of ‘Secret Science’ To Justify Regulations
Scientific American certainly believes it is a bad thing: "This is a move that serves no purpose other than to prevent the EPA from carrying out its mission of protecting public health and the environment."
Ends the Carbon Credit Exchange where global warming was a tool of liberals to rob from those that work and take so people like Al Jazeera Gore can make millions.
 
This is what happens when you put a career politician with less of a science background than my 15 year old in charge of science based agency.

This is filling the swamp, not emptying it


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com
 
I'm sure somehow science using full disclosure is a bad thing somehow.


Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Scott Pruitt will soon end his agency's use of "secret science" to craft regulations.

"We need to make sure their data and methodology are published as part of the record," Pruitt said in an exclusive interview with The Daily Caller News Foundation. "Otherwise, it's not transparent. It's not objectively measured, and that's important."

Pruitt will reverse long-standing EPA policy allowing regulators to rely on non-public scientific data in crafting rules. Such studies have been used to justify tens of billions of dollars worth of regulations.

"EPA regulators would only be allowed to consider scientific studies that make their data available for public scrutiny under Pruitt’s new policy. Also, EPA-funded studies would need to make all their data public."

EXCLUSIVE: Scott Pruitt Will End EPA’s Use Of ‘Secret Science’ To Justify Regulations


There goes global warming regulations. If they can't use secret fake data then they have nothing. Nothing at all.
 
I'm sure somehow science using full disclosure is a bad thing somehow.


Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Scott Pruitt will soon end his agency's use of "secret science" to craft regulations.

"We need to make sure their data and methodology are published as part of the record," Pruitt said in an exclusive interview with The Daily Caller News Foundation. "Otherwise, it's not transparent. It's not objectively measured, and that's important."

Pruitt will reverse long-standing EPA policy allowing regulators to rely on non-public scientific data in crafting rules. Such studies have been used to justify tens of billions of dollars worth of regulations.

"EPA regulators would only be allowed to consider scientific studies that make their data available for public scrutiny under Pruitt’s new policy. Also, EPA-funded studies would need to make all their data public."

EXCLUSIVE: Scott Pruitt Will End EPA’s Use Of ‘Secret Science’ To Justify Regulations
Scientific American certainly believes it is a bad thing: "This is a move that serves no purpose other than to prevent the EPA from carrying out its mission of protecting public health and the environment."
Somehow I knew full disclosure was a problem for the Gorebal Warming Mythers.
 
I'm sure somehow science using full disclosure is a bad thing somehow.


Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Scott Pruitt will soon end his agency's use of "secret science" to craft regulations.

"We need to make sure their data and methodology are published as part of the record," Pruitt said in an exclusive interview with The Daily Caller News Foundation. "Otherwise, it's not transparent. It's not objectively measured, and that's important."

Pruitt will reverse long-standing EPA policy allowing regulators to rely on non-public scientific data in crafting rules. Such studies have been used to justify tens of billions of dollars worth of regulations.

"EPA regulators would only be allowed to consider scientific studies that make their data available for public scrutiny under Pruitt’s new policy. Also, EPA-funded studies would need to make all their data public."

EXCLUSIVE: Scott Pruitt Will End EPA’s Use Of ‘Secret Science’ To Justify Regulations
How is this draining the swamp? Also this bill was put up in he past... Why didn’t it pass the senate when they had a Republican majority? Maybe there’s more to the story than the dailycaller presents?
 
I'm sure somehow science using full disclosure is a bad thing somehow.


Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Scott Pruitt will soon end his agency's use of "secret science" to craft regulations.

"We need to make sure their data and methodology are published as part of the record," Pruitt said in an exclusive interview with The Daily Caller News Foundation. "Otherwise, it's not transparent. It's not objectively measured, and that's important."

Pruitt will reverse long-standing EPA policy allowing regulators to rely on non-public scientific data in crafting rules. Such studies have been used to justify tens of billions of dollars worth of regulations.

"EPA regulators would only be allowed to consider scientific studies that make their data available for public scrutiny under Pruitt’s new policy. Also, EPA-funded studies would need to make all their data public."

EXCLUSIVE: Scott Pruitt Will End EPA’s Use Of ‘Secret Science’ To Justify Regulations
How is this draining the swamp? Also this bill was put up in he past... Why didn’t it pass the senate when they had a Republican majority? Maybe there’s more to the story than the dailycaller presents?
House passes bill to ban EPA 'secret science'
 
This is what happens when you put a career politician with less of a science background than my 15 year old in charge of science based agency.

This is filling the swamp, not emptying it


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com
Yes, keeping data and sources secret is the foundation to good science.

Yes, very often the data is confidential. I work as a statistician/data analyst. I collect data from individual operations and then provide reports from the aggregate data provided. The data is provided to me on the condition of that no individuals data will be disclosed, just the aggregate of all the reports. Without this stipulation nobody would share their operations information as it could be used by their competitors.




Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com
 
This is what happens when you put a career politician with less of a science background than my 15 year old in charge of science based agency.

This is filling the swamp, not emptying it


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com
Yes, keeping data and sources secret is the foundation to good science.

Yes, very often the data is confidential. I work as a statistician/data analyst. I collect data from individual operations and then provide reports from the aggregate data provided. The data is provided to me on the condition of that no individuals data will be disclosed, just the aggregate of all the reports. Without this stipulation nobody would share their operations information as it could be used by their competitors.




Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com
Data being used to create law should be secret?

Stalin would be proud of you.
 
uh huh
Scott Pruitt needs to answer for what he's done to the EPA

I'm for providing more information though, but the OP is a bad aim at bs.
Great news, Deep State is pissed.

Love your “news” story.

“Despite being the driving force behind the Trump administration’s relentless attacks on our environment and our communities”

:boohoo:

Somehow I knew full disclosure was a problem for the left.
Your op is shit, as is Pruitt. Whether the EPA was properly managed before is a different issue.
 
I'm sure somehow science using full disclosure is a bad thing somehow.


Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Scott Pruitt will soon end his agency's use of "secret science" to craft regulations.

"We need to make sure their data and methodology are published as part of the record," Pruitt said in an exclusive interview with The Daily Caller News Foundation. "Otherwise, it's not transparent. It's not objectively measured, and that's important."

Pruitt will reverse long-standing EPA policy allowing regulators to rely on non-public scientific data in crafting rules. Such studies have been used to justify tens of billions of dollars worth of regulations.

"EPA regulators would only be allowed to consider scientific studies that make their data available for public scrutiny under Pruitt’s new policy. Also, EPA-funded studies would need to make all their data public."

EXCLUSIVE: Scott Pruitt Will End EPA’s Use Of ‘Secret Science’ To Justify Regulations
Scientific American certainly believes it is a bad thing: "This is a move that serves no purpose other than to prevent the EPA from carrying out its mission of protecting public health and the environment."
Somehow I knew full disclosure was a problem for the Gorebal Warming Mythers.


Funny thing is that these stupid global warming scientists admitted themselves that they were using fake data. How dumb was that?
 
I'm sure somehow science using full disclosure is a bad thing somehow.


Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Scott Pruitt will soon end his agency's use of "secret science" to craft regulations.

"We need to make sure their data and methodology are published as part of the record," Pruitt said in an exclusive interview with The Daily Caller News Foundation. "Otherwise, it's not transparent. It's not objectively measured, and that's important."

Pruitt will reverse long-standing EPA policy allowing regulators to rely on non-public scientific data in crafting rules. Such studies have been used to justify tens of billions of dollars worth of regulations.

"EPA regulators would only be allowed to consider scientific studies that make their data available for public scrutiny under Pruitt’s new policy. Also, EPA-funded studies would need to make all their data public."

EXCLUSIVE: Scott Pruitt Will End EPA’s Use Of ‘Secret Science’ To Justify Regulations
Scientific American certainly believes it is a bad thing: "This is a move that serves no purpose other than to prevent the EPA from carrying out its mission of protecting public health and the environment."

I agree. We need EPA to protect us from scientists that cook data in order to proof their theories.
 
This is what happens when you put a career politician with less of a science background than my 15 year old in charge of science based agency.

This is filling the swamp, not emptying it


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com
Yes, keeping data and sources secret is the foundation to good science.

Yes, very often the data is confidential. I work as a statistician/data analyst. I collect data from individual operations and then provide reports from the aggregate data provided. The data is provided to me on the condition of that no individuals data will be disclosed, just the aggregate of all the reports. Without this stipulation nobody would share their operations information as it could be used by their competitors.




Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com
Data being used to create law should be secret?

Stalin would be proud of you.

Fuck, you people are so stupid. Go back to flipping burgers, your break time is over.

No business is going to give information about their operations that can be used by a competitor knowing it will be made public for all to see.

The analysis, the methodology and the process for the conclusions are all made public. The individual data points are not and never have been.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com
 
I'm sure somehow science using full disclosure is a bad thing somehow.


Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Scott Pruitt will soon end his agency's use of "secret science" to craft regulations.

"We need to make sure their data and methodology are published as part of the record," Pruitt said in an exclusive interview with The Daily Caller News Foundation. "Otherwise, it's not transparent. It's not objectively measured, and that's important."

Pruitt will reverse long-standing EPA policy allowing regulators to rely on non-public scientific data in crafting rules. Such studies have been used to justify tens of billions of dollars worth of regulations.

"EPA regulators would only be allowed to consider scientific studies that make their data available for public scrutiny under Pruitt’s new policy. Also, EPA-funded studies would need to make all their data public."

EXCLUSIVE: Scott Pruitt Will End EPA’s Use Of ‘Secret Science’ To Justify Regulations
Scientific American certainly believes it is a bad thing: "This is a move that serves no purpose other than to prevent the EPA from carrying out its mission of protecting public health and the environment."






If that were their true goal then they should have no problem sharing their science with others. That IS the Scientific Method after all. Any scientist who doesn't follow the SM is on a political mission because if their science can't stand up to scrutiny....it isn't science.

Do you understand that very basic concept?
 

Forum List

Back
Top