Global Warming report "eviserated?" The problem with the "Science."
Two days ago the NYT reported:
"The White House significantly edited testimony prepared for a Senate hearing on the impact of climate change on health, deleting key portions citing diseases that could flourish in a warmer climate, documents obtained by the Associated Press showed Wednesday. The White House on Wednesday denied that it had 'watered down' the congressional testimony that Dr. Julie Gerberding, director of Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, had given the day before to the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee. But a draft of the testimony submitted for White House review shows that six pages of details about specific disease and other health problems that might flourish if the Earth warms were not delivered at the hearing. "
Today, AP reports that Gerberding says "I was absolutely happy with my testimony in Congress. I don't let people put words in my mouth, and I stand for science."
Of course, we all know that's a load of hooyee, because if she really stood for science she would have never gotten the job in the first place. It's been pretty well established by now that this administration makes its own reality.
White House press secretary Dana Perino says some parts of the draft were deleted because they didn't "comport with the science" of a UN report on the effects of global warming on the rise of infectious diseases.
One of the deleted parts of the reports said : "Climate change-driven ecological changes such as variations in rainfall and temperature could significantly alter the range, seasonality and human incident of many zoonotic and vector-borne diseases."
A 2005 United Nations Environment Programme press release states:
"Scientists are linking a rise in new and previously suppressed infectious diseases with the dramatic environmental changes now sweeping the planet. Loss of forests, road and dam building, the spread of cities, the clearing of natural habitats for agriculture, mining and the pollution of coastal waters are promoting conditions under which new and old pathogens can thrive. . . Today the changing pattern of infectious diseases is as much due to environmental change as to trade, travel, migration and social conditions."
Now who would know better about something like this, W. and his gut feelings or or stuffy old UN scientists? Your life may depend on the answer.
"The White House significantly edited testimony prepared for a Senate hearing on the impact of climate change on health, deleting key portions citing diseases that could flourish in a warmer climate, documents obtained by the Associated Press showed Wednesday. The White House on Wednesday denied that it had 'watered down' the congressional testimony that Dr. Julie Gerberding, director of Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, had given the day before to the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee. But a draft of the testimony submitted for White House review shows that six pages of details about specific disease and other health problems that might flourish if the Earth warms were not delivered at the hearing. "
Today, AP reports that Gerberding says "I was absolutely happy with my testimony in Congress. I don't let people put words in my mouth, and I stand for science."
Of course, we all know that's a load of hooyee, because if she really stood for science she would have never gotten the job in the first place. It's been pretty well established by now that this administration makes its own reality.
White House press secretary Dana Perino says some parts of the draft were deleted because they didn't "comport with the science" of a UN report on the effects of global warming on the rise of infectious diseases.
One of the deleted parts of the reports said : "Climate change-driven ecological changes such as variations in rainfall and temperature could significantly alter the range, seasonality and human incident of many zoonotic and vector-borne diseases."
A 2005 United Nations Environment Programme press release states:
"Scientists are linking a rise in new and previously suppressed infectious diseases with the dramatic environmental changes now sweeping the planet. Loss of forests, road and dam building, the spread of cities, the clearing of natural habitats for agriculture, mining and the pollution of coastal waters are promoting conditions under which new and old pathogens can thrive. . . Today the changing pattern of infectious diseases is as much due to environmental change as to trade, travel, migration and social conditions."
Now who would know better about something like this, W. and his gut feelings or or stuffy old UN scientists? Your life may depend on the answer.
posted by William Duane at 1:56 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home