WINNING!! EPA chief to ban use of ‘secret science’ in rulemaking
JunkScience.com has been working this issue for 20+ years.
EXCLUSIVE: Scott Pruitt Will End EPA’s Use Of ‘Secret Science’ To Justify Regulations
MICHAEL BASTASCH, The Daily Caller, March 19, 2018
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.
“When we do contract that science out, sometimes the findings are published; we make that part of our rule-making processes, but then we don’t publish the methodology and data that went into those findings because the third party who did the study won’t give it to us,” Pruitt added.
“And we’ve said that’s fine — we’re changing that as well,” Pruitt told TheDCNF.
Conservatives have long criticized EPA for relying on scientific studies that published their findings but not the underlying data. However, Democrats and environmental activists have challenged past attempts to bring transparency to studies used in rule making.
Venstrefløjserne vil bestemme over os, så alle tænkelige redskaber til formålet hives frem eller opfindes. Og her er statistik og databaser en guldgrube af muligheder. Min kollega Ole underviste biologer, medicinere og andre i statistik: “De fatter ikke en hujende skid af det” sagde han hver gang han kom fra forelæsningerne, men det gør nok ikke noget – hm?
Meget små dataserier umulige at rense for indflydelse af andre faktorer, gør anvendelse af fx patientdata til en meget tvivlsom affære, intet fornuftigt menneske ville have for meget lid til.
Men det generer ikke socialisterne – alt kan som sagt bruges, så der laves uendelige dynger af junk-videnskab, som afstumpede og idiotiske politikere kan lade gå ud over sagesløse befolkningsgrupper. Og helt fint bliver det jo, hvis forskningen er hemmelig, så ingen kan se vanviddet. Et fint eksempel er CO2 og klimaet, hvor det er umuligt for udenforstående at finde kilder til de luftige teorier.
Det er det samme med epidemiologisk forskning. I virkeligheden er det bare statistik, men forskerne misbruger resultaterne til at få flere bevillinger, og de kan sno politikere og journalister om deres lillefingre, for de fatter intet af resultaternes begrænsninger.
Man ser det færdige resultat jævnligt i TV-Avisen.