Why do you think the Feds prefer censored science data?
The Daily Signal headline asks a question: “Why Does Washington Want to Hide Science Data From the Public?”
Imagine a teacher asking this in a class where yours truly is a student.
“Oh… oh, oh, oh… Mr. Kotter… Mr. Kotter… me… me…”
Why are they hiding data? Because it’s Gruber data—total garbage to achieve a desired end, rather than authentic science.
When federal bureaucrats drive up costs for American families and businesses through heavy-handed regulation, it shouldn’t be too much to ask for a solid scientific underpinning for that regulation. And it shouldn’t be too big of a burden for the federal government to make its data available to the public. Congressman David Schweikert’s, R-Ariz., Secret Science Reform Act (HR 4012) would address this.
HR 4012 would force the Environmental Protection Agency to disclose all scientific and technical information before proposing or finalizing any regulation. Doing so would allow for independent analysis and allow qualified experts to reproduce the results. The public would have access to the data, computer codes and models, as well as descriptions as to how to use and run the data. The legislation would be an important check on an agency running rogue and landing punch after punch to the American economy.
Rep. Lamar Smith, R-Texas, chair of the House Committee on Science, Space and Technology, wrote in the Wall Street Journal that he “received a letter of support for the Secret Science Reform Act that was signed by more than 80 scientists, including physicians and professors of environmental science, physics, statistics, economics and engineering.” He added:
“The signatories included George Wolff, former chair of the EPA’s Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee in the Clinton administration, and Forrest J. Remick, former commissioner of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission in the George H.W. Bush administration. They wrote that the bill would ‘make the agency’s regulations more accountable, credible and enforceable‘ and that its transparency requirements ’can be accomplished without imposing unnecessary burdens, discouraging research or raising confidentiality concerns.’”
It’s like the Climate Research Unit at East Anglia University—one of the main producers of “Climate Change” research where it’s just been revealed that they lost all of the original data, so they made it up out of whole-cloth, and then shared the “results” with the world. Yep… lies… imagination… unicorns.
That’s why they hide the data. It’s Gruber-Garbage.