Skip to comments.Government Scientist Gets Fired for Telling the Truth
Posted on 01/19/2013 5:17:24 AM PST by Kaslin
Somethings amiss at the Department of Interior. Eight government scientists were recently fired or reassigned after voicing concerns to their superiors about faulty environmental science used for policy decisions. Which begs the question, Are some government agencies manipulating science to advance political agendas?
Fictional book authors operate in a convenient world, unconstrained by facts and experiences of the real world. The antithesis of works of fiction are scientific findings solely based on provable facts and experience. For agenda-driven environmental science, facts can sometime prove inconvenient. Its far easier to advance an agenda with agreeable science, even if that means creating science fiction or fictional science. Fictional science thus becomes the pseudo-reality of environmentalists absolutism and any science that disagrees with their predetermined conclusions of man-made harm to the environment is ignored or distorted. Now we learn that in some government agencies, scientists who question the veracity and validity of scientific evidence used to formulate environmental regulations and policies are shunned, kept quiet, and purged.
The purpose of fictional environmental science is to sway public opinion through what amounts to propaganda. Intransigent purveyors of green propaganda know their greatest enemy is truth. One of the most famous propaganda experts was Germanys Joseph Goebbels, who taught that if a lie is repeated often enough it will eventually be accepted as truth. Goebbels also knew that truth has to be suppressed if it contradicts the objectives of the propaganda. Goebbels wrote, It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.
Over the past three decades, government has unleashed an unprecedented wave of environmental rules and regulations that affect nearly every aspect of American life, and for the most part the public has tolerated it. Public embrace of environmental propaganda and fear mongering about the apocalyptic consequences of mankinds abuse of the planet have elevated environmentalism to a status above national security. The public is now more likely to give up rights and freedoms for the cause of saving the planet than for security reasons.
Rural America has long been a target of environmentalists. Government agencies such as the EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) and the DOI (Department of Interior) have been hijacked by extreme elements of environmentalism and rural America is feeling the heat. When environmental protocol is pitted against the welfare of a rural community, these agencies almost exclusively side with the environmental cause, and adverse consequences to the human element are considered last, if at all.
The Department of Interior refers to itself as the nation's landlord. It controls almost 30% of the nation's 2.27 billion acres of land and its natural resources, and as a regulatory agency, it creates policies to govern how public land and these resources are used. Under the leadership of Secretary Ken Salazar the agency has engaged in an aggressive crusade to obstruct and undermine the use of natural resources, restrict human access to public lands, and increase its influence over private property. Decisions made by the agency are presumed to be based on sound scientific analysis, but often times policy is driving the science, rather than science driving environmental policy. This has led to harmful decisions and a violation of the public trust.
A case in point is the story of DOI science adviser and scientific integrity officer, Dr. Paul Houser, who found out that by simply doing his job can be hazardous to ones career. Dr. Houser is an expert in hydrology who was hired by DOIs Bureau of Reclamation to evaluate scientific data used in the departments decision making process. He was assigned several Western State projects including a scheme to remove four hydroelectric dams on the Klamath River in Northern Californiathe largest dam removal project in U.S. history. When a summary of science posted on the web to support DOIs claim for removal of the dams omitted several crucial factors from expert panel reports, Dr. Houser brought his concerns to his superiors. He was repeatedly told to refrain from sharing his concerns through electronic communication, which could be subject to Freedom of Information Act discovery.
Dr. Houser learned firsthand that policy was driving the science, rather than the other way around, when he was told by his superiors at DOI, Secretary Salazar wants to remove those dams. So your actions here arent helpful.
According to the DOI the premise for Klamath River dams removal is to restore Coho salmon spawning habitat above the dams. However, official DOI documents reveal scientific concerns that dam removal may, in fact, result in species decline based on millions of tons of toxic sediment build up behind the dams that will make its way to the ocean. Water temperature increases without the dams could also negatively impact the salmon. These studies were ignored. Concerns about the human toll and impact to local Klamath Basin communities were also brushed aside. Those most interested in the well-being of the environment they live and work in, were given a backseat to special interests thousands of miles away.
The Klamath hydroelectric dams provide clean inexpensive energy to thousands of local residents who will be forced to pay much higher premiums if the dams are removed because California has strict new laws for use of renewable energy. The town of Happy Camp sits on the banks of the Klamath River and could be wiped out with seasonal flooding without the dams. Once Coho salmon are introduced into the upper Klamath, farmers and ranchers will be faced with water use restrictions and invasive government regulation of private land. The economic impact will be devastating, property values will depreciate and the agriculture community, often operating on slim profit margins, will be subjected to the fate of the once vibrant logging industry which fell victim to the spotted owl crusades.
Last year, Dr. Houser raised these concerns and was subsequently fired by the DOI. I put my concerns forward and immediately thereafter I was pushed out of the organization, he stated. The agency sent a clear message to the rest of their employees and scientists - Salazars dam busting agenda cannot be subject to any internal scientific scrutiny. Goebbels would be proud. Truth must be repressed when it contradicts the objective.
Dr. Houser did the right thing. He did his job. His integrity as a scientist was more important than a paycheck. But he remains concerned about his colleagues in DOI, There are a lot of good scientists that work for the government but they are scared, they are scared that what happened to me might happen to them. This is an issue (about) the honesty and transparency of government and an issue for other scientists in government who want to speak out. A few weeks ago Dr. Houser settled a wrongful discharge case with the DOI. Terms of his settlement are not public.
Now, seven more DOI scientists working on the Klamath Project have filed a complaint with PEER (Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility) claiming they have been reassigned or terminated for disagreement with the integrity of the science used to support dam removal. They have charged DOIs Bureau of Reclamations management with coercive manipulation, sublimating science to political priorities, censorship, and scientific misconduct.
The governments use of fictional science in the Klamath dam removal project should concern every American. Our public servants at DOI are brazenly advancing their own agendas at the expense of the truth and regardless of adverse impacts on the environment, humans, and on rural communities. Environment and human interests are not incompatible. We have to find solutions that work to the benefit of both. That requires agendas be put aside and allow complete science to determine policy.
DOI Secretary Ken Salazar is stepping down in March. His replacement needs to be someone who can be trusted to end the culture of fictional science as a means to advance environmental agendas.
(Video: When Government Can't be Trusted)
Salazar is in the position he is in because he is a willing dupe, don't expect his replacement to be any less so.
The same is true with replacements of sec of state and all other cabinet level positions. We can howl to high heaven about Kerry and even if his nomination were stopped, the next nominee would be equally moon batty liberal.
Not a chance. The new SecDoI will be far worse as Obamugabe is unconstrained by reelection.
I know this is pedantic, but it's a pet peeve of mine. To "beg the question" means to evade the question, not to elicit the question. Think "beg off". There was a time when any respectable news editor would never have made a mistake like that.
this is UN's dangerous agenda of removing infrastructure (dams) to return land to wilderness . Saving fish is the fake reason. Once destroyed is will be too expensive to rebuild.
Neo-Lysenkoism in the service of Luddism.
We are so screwed.
Remember this is the “reality based community”, the self proclaimed party of Science with a Kapital W.
Careful. Uncle kenny already threatened someone with a beat down for questioning him. “How dare you (as in you lowly puke) question my goals.” “Why I oughta.......Whoop whooop whoop” (a la 3 stooges) Did he get some boxing lessons from hairy screed? You know that radical left wing extremists from NV. The one with an A rating from the NRA. Well, will the NRA still give him an A once the new(?) finesteen bill comes up? Isn’t lisa jackson looking for a job? Maybe she can just slide over to interior. She is very astute in the field of fictional science. And surreptitious email accounts. Hello. Richard windsor? Is that you?
Obviously, if it was worth building the first time, it will be worth building again, like a home destroyed by fire in a desirable part of town. Only in America today, the arsonists are running the fire department, so you are correct, it will not be rebuilt.
There was a recent quotation [don’t remember who] that said every movement starts off with good intentions, becomes a business and ends up a scam.......Like this one
Well—It all worked for Stalin, didn’t it?
Thank you for that clarification. I was beginning to wonder at my previous understanding of the expression and assumed I’d been wrong.
I don’t regard it as pedantic when someone points out errors like this. I regard it as educational.
I keep in mind that liberal troll the site. I don’t want to give them any side issues to use as ammunition against us. I want them to be forced to debate us on our ideas and not on our grammar.
Of course in this case you can look at it both ways. The question is begging to be asked, but the government is evading the question.
“Truth is treason in the empire of lies” - Ron Paul
There is an endless supply of moon batty liberals. I don’t expect any new person in this administration to be any better than the person he is replacing. But that doesn’t mean that we shouldn’t keep trying to get them removed from their positions. At minimum, the disruption caused by replacement will slow down the liberal agenda.
This should go all the way to the top. Replace Zippy. Yes, of course Biden is a clueless twit. Replace Zippy anyway. Then start working to replace Biden.
How do you eat an elephant? (No political metaphor intended) One bite at a time.
Then, you know we already have a problem. Ofttimes, the spelling on FR is atrocious. So many of our posters must have been asleep in English class. Think of the continual misuse of "loose" for "lose," for example. Makes me want to pull out my hair.
And don't get me started on "there," "their," and "they're."
Yes, and I left the “s” off of “liberals.” I cut a lot of slack for rapid typing mistakes, especially since I make them myself. Ouch.
“Loose” and “lose” is probably my biggest annoyance! Sometimes I send a private reply to Freepers with atrocious spelling and grammar. I do not want to embarrass anyone publicly, but I try to remind them privately that this is our public face to the world and if we want the world to take our arguments seriously, we need to take ourselves seriously. A well-reasoned and thoughtful post deserves to be written in proper English so that the poster does not look ignorant.
That said, not all posts need to be perfect. I am glad we have a sense of humor here and we can cut each other some slack. But overall, this problem is hugh and series!
Obama’s perversion of truth and fact rivals that of Orwell’s Big Brother right down to the Ministry of Truth, the US media, who will willingly put anything down the “memory hole” that contradicts the current party line.
coercive manipulation, sublimating science to political priorities, censorship, and scientific misconduct.
Didn’t they accuse Bush of doing this?
Liberals are known for lying. They are also known for projections
Oh, that one just drives me nuts every time I see it! It isn't just here either. I see that error often, and virtually everywhere on the Net.
“Rural America has long been a target of environmentalists.”
I published an article for "Operation America" on FR in 2001 (now here discussing the flawed technical bases and real motives for enviro-racketeering in the Klamath basin. Nothing has changed except that the green goals are bigger than ever. It will be of some tragic irony to see what happens to the tribes that served as foils for this gambit when that river floods. Interestingly, although the fishery will be damaged by removal of those dams, a good flood would at least break up some of the gravels that they need to spawn. There was an easier way to get that done that might even make money, but nobody seems interested.
No, it's not. It's about money. Luddism merely serves as the ideological glue to get their minions doing the logically indefensible on the cheap.
I have been involved in this issue for more than a decade and Spady is right on the mark. The EIR was shocking. The scientists would come to one conclusion in their official panel report and the writer of the EIR would completely and glaringly misstate what they had said to support their dam removal agenda. Our County has indicated that it will proceed with a lawsuit I they continue with the document.
There is also another issue. The Upper Basin water is heavily nutrient rich from the millions of years of migratory birds using the shallow lakes. The dams currently act as settling ponds to remove organic matter and clean up the water. If dams are removed, the quality of the water will take a nose dive. The high summer temperatures will also create algae blooms that will remove the dissolved oxygen in the water. Between water quality and sediment, I believe there is a pretty good chance that dam removal could extirpate coho salmon and likely impact steelhead, Chinook and sturgeon as well.
Freepers for the most part are getting long of tooth and have poor or declining eyesight as well.
Propaganda, should make you mad, not grammar or spelling.
Thanks for the comments about the problem. They made sense.
As regards the last sentence, both propaganda and poor English anger me.
Truth is most people learn grammar by reading good writings, not from diagramming sentences. Not a lot of good exemplars in news today so people adapt, sad but true.
Speech to text will soon replace typing along with all the errors that produces.
Also, if you or anybody else is aware of a specific keyword for articles that expose and/or showcase what might otherwise be classified as "junk science" in a different context. In any case, if there's not a keyword for these types of articles, might I suggest "politicalscience"? Descriptive don't you think???
I’ll email you some ‘fo on that.
Have bears been known to defecate in remote wooded areas?