Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Scientists planted hairs from lynx in 3rd forest
Washington Times ^ | 01/04/2002 | Audrey Hudson

Posted on 01/03/2002 10:25:56 PM PST by Pokey78

Edited on 07/12/2004 3:50:24 PM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]

Government scientists planted samples of lynx hairs in a third national forest, according to documents obtained by The Washington Times.

"A preliminary investigation by the U.S. Forest Service said planted samples were submitted from the Mount Baker/Snoqualmie National Forest in Washington state, but the report did not say how many additional samples were submitted from that region.


(Excerpt) Read more at washtimes.com ...


TOPICS: Breaking News; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: enviralists; klamathbasincrisis
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-167 next last

1 posted on 01/03/2002 10:25:56 PM PST by Pokey78
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Pokey78
Shouldn't these people do time? Taxpayer fraud, or something?
2 posted on 01/03/2002 10:37:55 PM PST by brat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pokey78
Interesting- I wonder how much more of these types of shenanigans have been perpetrated by the commie leftist wacko environmentalists? I have a feeling that a lot of our evironmental policies are based on fraudulent data such as what is mentioned in the article- but I suppose we here at FR already knew that.
3 posted on 01/03/2002 10:41:25 PM PST by Major Matt Mason
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pokey78
Standard procedure: only the whistle-blower will be punished.
4 posted on 01/03/2002 10:45:49 PM PST by meadsjn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Carry_Okie
Uh-oh, the plot thickens!

Please bump this to the usual suspects. I don't know the list.

The report said one state scientist has acknowledged sending an additional three samples of bobcat hair taken from a pelt and labeled as lynx, but the laboratory reported that five samples were submitted.

Whoa there, maybe the WA state scientists really were trying (sloppily) to check for false positives! The WA state people were the ones who gave their samples non-existent location numbers.

5 posted on 01/03/2002 11:05:51 PM PST by jennyp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: meadsjn
Standard procedure: only the whistle-blower will be punished.

Sadly. And how pathetic is that? It's really very frustrating.

6 posted on 01/03/2002 11:06:54 PM PST by newzjunkey
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: *enviralists
Hey-there's-a-bump-list-for-this BUMP.
7 posted on 01/03/2002 11:12:21 PM PST by jennyp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jennyp
Wonder how many spotted owl feathers were planted during that hoopla?
8 posted on 01/03/2002 11:26:58 PM PST by jrewingjr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: jennyp
The lynx hair bombers have struck again, or is it yet? A proper punishment for such capers would be to scatter the guily one's hair across three forests.

I wonder when the Justice Department will find time to prosecute this case of fraud and deception? Perhaps Bush will have to exercise his Presidential privilege because it truly is a problem of national security when government starts being this manipulative and underhanded.

9 posted on 01/03/2002 11:29:41 PM PST by meenie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Pokey78
Does this surprise anyone? The lengths to which these people and their special interest groups will go to, are seemingly unlimited. You'd could almost see these groups gathering together to protect a species of fish that isn't even endangered, to the detriment of thousands of farming families.
10 posted on 01/03/2002 11:29:50 PM PST by DoughtyOne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne
Go Klamath Basin people too!
11 posted on 01/03/2002 11:57:05 PM PST by steelie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Major Matt Mason
My guess is that most of the enviro regulations are based on junk science.

I was researching the arsenic rules, last summer because our local paper was making a big deal of the Democrat claim that Bush was trying to poison the children by not lowering the arsenic percentage. I found this great website with all these studies that showed that arsenic and selenium were related, in that one cancelled out the other (it's more complicated than that). But when Bush passed the Clinton standard in October, I went back to the website and the finished report had deleted all the studies which showed that arsenic was not really poisonous as long as selenium was also present (it usually is because they are both found in areas of former volcanic activity). And to make matters worse, the author of the bogus study was put in charge of inacting the arsenic rules.

12 posted on 01/04/2002 12:01:04 AM PST by Eva
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Pokey78

    "They don't care about the lynx but about how much land they can tie up," the staffer said.

 

And they are doing it on your dime. Your tax dollars. How come these bums are not fired at a time when many other Americans are out of a job? Let these jokers try their luck in the real world. Talk about living a charmed life!

13 posted on 01/04/2002 12:14:09 AM PST by dennisw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pokey78
These are government employees, they can't do anything wrong they can't be held accountable. Pathetic. Anyone know any good manatee recepies??? Maybe know how to attract spotted owls for dinner?
14 posted on 01/04/2002 12:42:54 AM PST by Joe Boucher
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #15 Removed by Moderator

To: meadsjn
Standard procedure: only the whistle-blower will be punished.

Probably why the whistle-blower reported it just the day before he retired.

16 posted on 01/04/2002 1:10:41 AM PST by connectthedots
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Pokey78
That tears it. Next time they want to close off a forest because an endangered critter is present; they need to provide four pelts of said critter verified to have been shot in said forest.

Four should be enought to establish that there ARE said critters present. No more "hairs".

17 posted on 01/04/2002 2:33:19 AM PST by packrat01
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pokey78; editor-surveyor
e-s, for your ping list.
18 posted on 01/04/2002 2:38:44 AM PST by packrat01
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Eva
I went back to the website and the finished report had deleted all the studies which showed that arsenic was not really poisonous as long as selenium was also present

A tip for everyone - If you see material on the web that you think you might want to use again, bookmark it AND save it to your hard drive. Disk space is really cheap.

19 posted on 01/04/2002 2:42:33 AM PST by FreedomPoster
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Pokey78
"Had the whistleblower not tipped this off, we may never have known about it," said one source close to the investigation.

OK, I'll ask the obvious question...Considering this scheme and the global warming fiasco, How much more of what we think is "environmental science" is total bullsquat?

I'll also venture the first quess at slightly more than half.

20 posted on 01/04/2002 3:47:29 AM PST by copycat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: meenie
I wonder when the Justice Department will find time to prosecute this case of fraud and deception?

A highly publicized trial is this case would go a long way toward neutering environmental whack-jobs and protecting land rights for the next decade. Let's find out whose side the Bush Admin is on...Constitution v. Communist Manifesto.

21 posted on 01/04/2002 3:50:55 AM PST by copycat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: copycat
Your question needs an answer and how long has this been going on?
22 posted on 01/04/2002 3:52:50 AM PST by kassie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: kassie
How long? IMHO, ever since the commies among us realized they could institute the "public land" plank of the Communist Manifesto by becoming "environmentalists."
23 posted on 01/04/2002 3:56:42 AM PST by copycat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: copycat
Just so you know Mikhail Gorbachev is President of Green Cross International.
24 posted on 01/04/2002 4:00:55 AM PST by goldstategop
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Pokey78
But lets not punish them, they were doing it for the children endangered species.
25 posted on 01/04/2002 4:05:31 AM PST by VRWC_minion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: VRWC_minion
No my good friend. They were doing it for the lynxes. I mean what's a forest without the ear splitting yowl of oversized kitties eh? ;-)
26 posted on 01/04/2002 4:07:51 AM PST by goldstategop
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Pokey78
All "science" connected with environmentalism is at least partially tainted. The left is always willing to lie to promote their cause. It is just their nature. They rationalize this behavior because they feel they are doing it for the right reason.
27 posted on 01/04/2002 4:07:54 AM PST by Always Right
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pokey78
But....but...but...(sniffle...sniffle)...they only did it because they...(sniffle) care! After all,....(sniffle)...it's for the children!...(sniffle)
28 posted on 01/04/2002 4:18:29 AM PST by Redleg Duke
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pokey78
Is this anymore disturbing than a left wing liberal making up numbers to justify government action.

Poverty, mediscare, the homeless, racism, overcrowded classrooms, health insurance, etc.

Which happens a lot more and cost more taxpayers money than this little scheme.

29 posted on 01/04/2002 4:21:13 AM PST by Osprey
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pokey78
The scientists say they submitted the false samples to test laboratory accuracy

Isn't that what most people say when they do something stoopid and embarrasing? "Just testing"

Jerks ought to be jailed for life. If this aiin't fraud, someone's gonna have to point out to me what is.

Godspeed

30 posted on 01/04/2002 4:34:34 AM PST by America's Resolve
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pokey78
After the story was reported Dec. 17 by The Washington Times, key congressional leaders called for two investigations by the inspector general, an audit by the General Accounting Office of the entire survey, and House and Senate hearings to be conducted after Congress returns later this month. Senators and representatives have called for the federal employees involved to be fired, and Washington state legislators are also pushing for an investigation. "Had the whistleblower not tipped this off, we may never have known about it," said one source close to the investigation.

Yes, but how many here will actually write/call their rep/senators to ask that they pursue this to the fullest?

31 posted on 01/04/2002 4:51:20 AM PST by anniegetyourgun
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Major Matt Mason
In New Mexico they wanted to shut down old, poor mexicans, indians and whoever from getting firewood from a national forest. I think they( the environazies ) invented the "Mexican" spotted owl. It was so rare and endangered it was never seen. Perfect. Later the owls were seen building nest downtown in lamposts, a/c ducts ect. Kida like pigions. You know come to think of it, the lot next door isn't mine but it is vacant. Hum, maybe I'll report seeing jackalopes eating there at dawn.
32 posted on 01/04/2002 5:06:12 AM PST by Leisler
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Pokey78
Absolutely incredible. Makes you wonder how long they've been falsifying data in order to justify land grabs.
33 posted on 01/04/2002 5:09:58 AM PST by DouglasKC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Eva
The cost of removing non harmful arsenic from small, poor, rual communities will cause the tax/bond rate to sore beyond the ability of the local economy to carry such a burden. People will leave smaller towns. Adios rural America, everybody crowd together in the camps. Thanks Rich, urban, suburban, white shoe republican elitists for selling out your base. Again. Reagan would never of done it, just the whimpy Bush family and crew.
34 posted on 01/04/2002 5:12:19 AM PST by Leisler
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop
Bump!

Where have all the commies gone?
Gone to the enviromentalist.
When will we ever learn?
When will we learn?

35 posted on 01/04/2002 5:16:19 AM PST by Leisler
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: dennisw
Speaking of spending our money on land tie ups any news on the CARA bill? This has to be the mother of all eco rip offs
36 posted on 01/04/2002 5:18:58 AM PST by johnny reb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Pokey78
"lynx habitat that would establish land-use restrictions"

P78, THAT is what ALL of the "environmentalism" is about. CONTROL of property rights by godgov and environmental "non-governmental" organizations in their "Public Private Partnerships! Peace and love, George.

37 posted on 01/04/2002 5:24:02 AM PST by George Frm Br00klyn Park
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: anniegetyourgun
--can't answer your question on "how many will write and call" on this phony science issue, but here's a clue. How many wrote and called for a full investigation of matters BESIDES monicas bj's during the impeachment, and what became of it in the final analysis? Millions did, qand basically nothing happened but washington/NYC axis soap opera on tv.

Here's another, even if 100% of all the lynx hairs were real, exactly what does that prove on whether or not to allow humans to use the forest, anyway? Like really, like what difference would it make? We're still having to deal with the fact that the feds make off-limits any national resource as soon as some "endangered species" is found there. That part is still rigorusly enforced at gunpoint by the feds. This lynx story is yet another partial red herring, it stops short of the fundamental rightness and wrongness of the feds involvment in these matters. Even if these perps got jail time, how is that going to stop the ESA and other unconstituional measures being "enforced" at gunpoint, and with stolen tax payer money, again, stolen at gunpoint? Ther suckerfish are real, they aren't phony, so the crime of federal gansterism continues, and it's fully inside both parties interests to continue these crimes. They are profiting from it in many ways, and both parties mouth the soothing words their sheep want to hear, and that's about it.

There's a much bigger beef here, and by the feds leading people by the nose to concentrate on smaller issues, play acting and pretending that they are 'doing something about cleaning up government", they continue with the really big and dangerous power plays, which is seizing all the land, even seizing private property, at gunpoint again, without paying for it. They are still being goons about this, and it ought to be sinking in to more people how fully entrenched this fascism-gangsterism is into the bureaucracy and in both major entrenched parties by now..

"Waco" investigation, jfk warren commission report investigation, gulf of tonkin and a decades long war, lies after lies after lies, and they always come up with some really minor issues to divert peoples attention from the much larger issue-which is, they are 100% completely fully out of fascist control, and have been for years, and will continue to do so as long as they are able to fake people out to keep supporting them.

38 posted on 01/04/2002 5:25:52 AM PST by zog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop
[...yowl of oversized kitties]

You mean "TASTY" oversized kitties.
39 posted on 01/04/2002 5:28:57 AM PST by sidegunner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: jennyp
If you find the "list", put me on it.

Thanks!!

40 posted on 01/04/2002 5:33:16 AM PST by pad 34
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: zog
Yes, I know many like you who have given up.
41 posted on 01/04/2002 5:34:03 AM PST by anniegetyourgun
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Pokey78
The lefties have been BUSTED AGAIN. I love it. Now give us the land back, liberal theives!
I love it when the crimminals in this country are caught "red" handed!
42 posted on 01/04/2002 5:47:03 AM PST by concerned about politics
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pokey78,brat
Government bureacrats has always slanted their rports to get their way.

From WACO to Ruby Ridge to clean air act, to U.N. reports.

Congress can be so easily led by these reportsM

43 posted on 01/04/2002 5:54:45 AM PST by expose
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pokey78
The initial Forest Service investigation raises the specter that agenda-driven biologists may have taken matters into their own hands

Something like this would never be done in some other agenda-driven scientific field, like, say, evolution science, right?

44 posted on 01/04/2002 5:58:37 AM PST by KillerWabbit
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Always Right
All "science" connected with environmentalism is at least partially tainted. NO, it's ALL tainted.

These are not 'scientists,' they are only POLITICAL activists with an agenda. The whole notion of planting evidence or faking your data to support an agenda is anti-science.

Environmentalism started in 1972 and has just now come to its end.

Environmentalism -- R.I.P.

It's fraud is over now.

Stop all governement funding for environmentalism now!

45 posted on 01/04/2002 6:01:23 AM PST by flamefront
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: anniegetyourgun
--oh, bite me. You don't know me and I haven't "given up". That's a bald faced lie, and you failed to address a single point of my original post to boot. What has happened to me is that I-finally and reluctantly, but it happened- realise that most people have stuck to the notion that if they vote in liar A or liar B that anything besides lie A or lie B federal actions will result. THOSE people have given up-given up thinking and looking at the evidence. They are sticking to their ostrich head in the sand cultish belief that somehow "Just one more election cycle" of switching around a group of capital R repubs and capital D dems is going to solve anything substantial, and I contend that is naieve and stupid anymore, to anyone who takes the time to step back and actually LOOK at the evidence.

This lynx fur deal is a real issue, and should be persued, but I'll repeat--so what? So what if all the scientists involved are found guilty, and get jail time? Then what? That's going to stop the land grabs? That's going to stop this juggernaut of federal ownership aned control?

Let's revisit klamath again, shall we? The "science" involved in the klamath situation is so fundamentally flawed as to be ridiculous, EVERYONE involved in it from bush and norton on down the pike to the local street sweeper knows it, and exactly what again has this REPUBLICAN administration done about it? Go ahead, list what they have done to 'fix" this situation. Go ahead, be my guest, show me how the farmers are all un-screwed now, let's see some URL's supporting that notion. How many examples can you find where the constitution and common sense and basic human dignity and 'rightness"is actually followed. I'd like to see them myself.

My bottom line is I merely switched my personal "activism"-which is as strong as it ever was- to what is right and wrong for the US, I don't push some hack political party lying partisan agenda. Let the gooners at DU do that, I ain't interested, and I wish more constitutionalists would follow that as well. I used to, push party politics, but finally had to admit to myself that supporting those lying paid off bribed and blackmailed pieces of crap and those bogus two party's was a no win situation for the nation. That isn't "giving up", that's being realistic and looking at events over decades. I will not support either the political party crips or the bloods, they are both gangs. There's a gang of them at 'the other sites" and there's sure a gang of them here, but at least at freepers there are a few constitutionalists left. I compare what those political gangsters say,and then what happens, it's always two completely different things. They mumble some differnces, but bottom reality is full speed ahead total federal control of the people and material wealth of this nation. I'm just not going to keep biting on their lies anymore, so in that sense, you are right, I "gave up" supporting any liars.

46 posted on 01/04/2002 6:09:38 AM PST by zog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: zog
Yes, I understand that you are voting for those who cannot win. Like I said, you've given up. Enjoy your less than single-digit candidates "victories."
47 posted on 01/04/2002 6:14:25 AM PST by anniegetyourgun
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: Pokey78
"The investigation was concluded in June, and the employees were disciplined but not fired. Federal officials refuse to name their employees, citing privacy reasons."

Have to fire the employees, their bosses, and anyone else who obstructs this investigation. Off to write my congressman, cheers:)

48 posted on 01/04/2002 6:16:44 AM PST by monday
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pokey78
The World's No.1 Science & Technology News Service

Plot to undermine global pollution controls revealed

19:00 02 January 02

Mick Hamer

A secret group of developed nations conspired to limit the effectiveness of the UN's first conference on the environment, held in Stockholm in 1972. The existence of this cabal, known as the Brussels group, is revealed in 30-year-old British government records that were kept secret until this week.

The Stockholm conference was set up in response to rising concern about damage to the environment. It ended with a ringing declaration of the need to protect the natural world, and the UN Environment Programme was set up as a result.

But the ambitious aims of the conference organisers, who included Maurice Strong, the first director-general of UNEP, were held in check by the activities of the Brussels group, which included Britain, the US, Germany, Italy, Belgium, the Netherlands and France.

The group was "an unofficial policy-making body to concert the views of the principal governments concerned", according to a note of one of the group's first meetings written by a civil servant in the British Foreign and Commonwealth Office. "It will have to remain informal and confidential." This meeting took place in July 1971, nearly a year before the Stockholm conference opened.

Familiar arguments

Many of the arguments the group employed would sound familiar to today's anti-globalisation protesters. The group was concerned that environmental regulations would restrict trade and also wanted to stop UNEP having a large budget to spend as it saw fit. Foreign Office papers say the group "made real progress on this difficult problem", though without specifying how this was done.

The group seemed unconcerned about what its stance would mean for poorer countries. Its chief aim in the diplomatic jockeying during the run-up to Stockholm was for developed countries to get what they wanted "and perhaps be less worried about making it a success for developing countries".

This unalloyed self-interest won it few friends, and the notes record that Strong had already been grumbling about the group's activities. "We may get some criticism from the Swedes and others [and] we must be careful when expanding the group not to include awkward bedfellows," the note adds.

Sonic booms

A more concrete idea of the group's aims can be gleaned from a note laying out Britain's position prior to a secret meeting in Geneva in December 1971, one of a number of such meetings in the run-up to Stockholm.

Written by an official in what was then the Department of the Environment, it says that Britain wanted to restrict the scope of the Stockholm conference and reduce the number of proposals for action. In an indirect reference to what would later become UNEP, the paper says a "new and expensive international organisation must be avoided, but a small effective central coordinating mechanism ... would not be welcome but is probably inevitable".

It then goes on to detail the subjects that Britain wanted left out of the Stockholm action plans. At the top of the list were controls on sonic booms from aircraft and pollution in the upper atmosphere. These measures would have seriously damaged the economics of the Anglo-French supersonic airliner, Concorde.

Moral pressure

At the time, Concorde was already in deep trouble, with only the British and French national airlines likely to buy it, and earlier in the year the British Cabinet had discussed axing the plane. Arguments raged about whether the noisy plane would be allowed to land in New York. Controls on sonic booms could have sounded its death knell.

The British government was also firmly opposed to any international standards regulating environmental quality or polluting emissions. It feared that any international agreement might force it to clean up its act.

"Universal guidelines ... could cause moral pressure for compliance with philosophies of doubtful validity or benefit," say the papers.

Despite the efforts of the Brussels group, the Stockholm conference is widely recognised to have been a watershed. Though the group's lobbying ensured the conference focused on only a limited number of subjects, such as transboundary pollution, UNEP later tackled a wider range of topics such as the problems of deforestation and urbanisation.

49 posted on 01/04/2002 6:17:39 AM PST by expose
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pokey78
>Government scientists planted samples of lynx hairs in a third national forest, according to documents obtained by The Washington Times.

But, but, "conspiracy theories" are just delusions of lone nuts and wackos... You mean sometimes they really exist?!

lol.

Mark W.

50 posted on 01/04/2002 6:25:05 AM PST by MarkWar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-167 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson