Countable member jameslj said:
"At the very, very least the science needs to be publicly available and reproduceable. Better, the EPA would need to base any regulation on peer-reviewed science from independent scientists. A huge problem with the regulatory milieu in this country right now is that the agencies err on the side of restricting freedom, rather than allowing innovation to flourish. It's absolutely crucial that these agencies be reined in, or else we will continue to see little to no growth in the economy. Domestic regulation (including wage controls), not China and Mexico, is the greatest threat to American productivity."
I think he's right!
As for those of you who think this bill is an attack on science, I say "HOGWASH!" I see it as just the opposite! If a scientist has any personal integrity and objectivity where his work is concerned, he should WELCOME public scrutiny and input! He should WANT to see if there are any flaws in his work. Scientific progress happens when there's collaboration. Science should have no room for the ego-driven or the scientist with a political agenda!
Also, as Countable member Byron said:
"Politicized science is its own religion based on faith in their theories and viewpoints. Science needs to be exposed as its own dog eat dog, turf protecting political regime. On the question of other viewpoints such as the possibility that God exists..."absence of proof is not proof of absence." This is a quote by one of NIH's own card carrying scientists. Very often in so called scientific findings, the WISH is the father of the discovery. In other words belief often guides the biology!"
I VOTE YEA! I'm tired of them basing their regulations on what they see in chickens' entrails! They never met a U.N. agenda they didn't like!
LOVE, LOVE, LOVE this opinion given by Countable member "operaman"!
"Science? Who's science? We certainly heard that Climate Change has been proven because 1,000s of "proclaimed" scientists say it's so. Then we read that NASA/NOAA has fudged the data or simply made a "educated" guess. And even if Climate Change were true, all the money citizens would pay for it's reduction only changes future temperature by 0.2%C. Maybe a CO2 level of 450ppm would be perfect for growing plants and would also increase O2. Carbon tax would do nothing except make taxpayers poorer while transferring America's wealth to foreign lands. I vote for real science and proven theories based on real facts that can be duplicated multiple time. Addendum: Judicial Watch filed a Feb. 6, 2017, Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request seeking communications between National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) scientist Thomas Karl and White House Office of Science and Technology Policy Director John Holdren over the course of Barack Obama’s presidency."