(National Sentinel)Â Hoax-Free Science: Environmental Protection Agency administrator Scott Pruitt said that he is putting an end to the use of “secret science” by the government office to drive climate policymaking.
“We need to make sure their data and methodology are published as part of the record,â€ Pruitt said in an exclusive interview with The Daily Caller. â€œOtherwise, itâ€™s not transparent. Itâ€™s not objectively measured, and thatâ€™s important.â€
The DC noted:
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 Pruittâ€™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 donâ€™t publish the methodology and data that went into those findings because the third party who did the study wonâ€™t give it to us,â€ Pruitt added.Â â€œAnd weâ€™ve said thatâ€™s fine â€” weâ€™re changing that as well.”
In the past, that level of secrecy was employed by the EPA to hide suspicious methodologies used to conclude, mostly, that climate change is being driven by human activity. Though conservatives have pushed for a more open process, Democrats have fought to keep study methodologies hidden.
â€œIf we use a third party to engage in scientific review or inquiry, and thatâ€™s the basis of rulemaking, you and every American citizen across the country deserve to know whatâ€™s the data, whatâ€™s the methodology that was used to reach that conclusion that was the underpinning of what â€” rules that were adopted by this agency,â€ Pruitt told The DC.
The news site noted further:
EPA has primarily relied on two 1990s studies linking fine particulate pollution to premature death. Neither studies have made their data public, but EPA used their findings to justify sweeping air quality regulations.
To date, there isn’t a single study that has been published in its entirety proving human activity is causing the planet to warm or the climate to change.
Nevertheless, Democrats and Left-leaning environmentalists have used a flawed survey to claim that 97 percent of climate scientists have formed a “consensus” that human-caused warming is real.
But as James Taylor, president of the Spark of Freedom Foundation noted in 2013, “Global warming alarmists and their allies in the liberal media have been caught doctoring the results of a widely cited paper asserting there is a 97-percent scientific consensus regarding human-caused global warming.”
“After taking a closer look at the paper, investigative journalists report the authorsâ€™ claims of a 97-percent consensus relied on the authors misclassifying the papers of some of the worldâ€™s most prominent global warming skeptics,” he continued.
“At the same time, the authors deliberately presented a meaningless survey question so they could twist the responses to fit their own preconceived global warming alarmism,” Taylor wrote.
Also, as reported byÂ Investors Business DailyÂ last year, Christiana Figueres, executive secretary of U.N.â€™s Framework Convention on Climate Change, frankly admitted that the overarching goal of the â€œglobal warming/climate changeâ€ hoax is toÂ reorientÂ the worldâ€™s economic modelÂ away from capitalism.
â€œThis is the first time in the history of mankind that we are setting ourselves the task of intentionally, within a defined period of time, to change the economic development model that has been reigning for at least 150 years, since the Industrial Revolution,â€ she said, the paper reported.
We need your help to fight social media censorship! Find out how by clicking here!