With Andrea Leadsom, the UK’s Energy and Climate Minister and prominent Vote Leave campaigner, poised for promotion, how could leaving the EU...
Criticism just keeps pouring in.
A United Nations report, native leaders, wildlife officials and the David Suzuki Foundation have all taken issue with Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s maneuver last weekend blocking agreement on binding greenhouse emissions targets. Pressure is mounting for Harper to atone when negotiations on a successor to Kyoto convene next month in Bali.
A key question is, how can we best champion nature and the environment when both are changing due to global warming, and when we lack—or, worse, when our government denies us—adequate information about the nature of those changes and how to cope with them?
How do we prepare ourselves for a changing climate, community by community, region by region? How should San Diegans get ready for global warming, and how does that differ from how Floridians or Kansans should respond?
“Edits” does not even come close to describing the grammatical massacre the White House undertook with CDC Director Julie Gerberding's Senate testimony on the public health effects of climate change.
These were not minor edits the White House PR spin machine would like us to believe. The word-count on the CDC Director's Senate testimony went from 3,107 to 1,500 after the White House got through with it.
Whole sections on health related effects to extreme weather, air pollution-related health effect, allergic diseases, water and food-borne infectious diseases, food and water scarcity and the long term impacts of chronic diseases and other health effects were completely wiped out of the testimony.
White House Press Secretary Dana Perino is digging a deeper and deeper hole trying to spin the latest White House science muzzling scandal uncovered earlier this week.
In her daily press briefing yesterday, Perino stated that:
I’m sure lots of people would love to ridicule me when I say this, but it is true that many people die from cold-related deaths every winter. And there are studies that say that climate change in certain areas of the world would help those individuals.”
But according to research released this summer, the increase in extremely hot summers predicted by climate change models will lead to a higher death toll that will not be offset by fewer deaths during warmer winters.
So it looks like Perino's statement is clearly not true, or at the least not as scientifically conclusive as she would hope we could be lead to believe by the White House spin machine.
Today, scientists are publicly denouncing the White House for the “censoring of science,” after it was uncovered earlier this week that significant edits were made to testimony prepared for a Senate hearing on the impact of climate change on health.
White House officials deleted key portions citing diseases that could flourish in a warmer climate.
“Dr. Gerberding is the lead of the premiere public health agency in the U.S.,” said Kim Knowlton, a science fellow on global warming and health at the National Resources Defense Council in New York. “It's shocking that she was not allowed to say in a public discussion some of these vital details.
“One has to wonder why was this is so threatening to the White House.”
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.
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.
Last month, I filed a Freedom of Information Request (FOIA) to the Office of Administration in Washington DC, asking for copies of any records “relating to the Deep Space Climate Observatory (DSCOVR) mission, formerly known as Triana, from the period January 1, 2000 to the present.” (documents attached to the end of this post).
Update: someone just sent this Washington Post article to us, seems we're pretty justified in our outrage.
President Bush is trying hard to polish his image on global warming, but buried in his fancy talk about setting long-term goals for reducing emissions by mid- 2008, the U.S. president’s core message is still the same – don’t dare mess with economic growth.
Instead of binding limits on greenhouse-gas emissions, favored by the United Nations and many countries, he’s still pushing a voluntary approach on climate change and lobbying some of the world’s biggest polluters to rally behind him.
The meeting began just two days after a United Nations gathering aimed at finding agreement on binding limits on greenhouse-gas emissions, which the U.S. and Canada have opposed. While U.S. officials insist the latest conference was not designed to undercut UN efforts, opening remarks heralded a collision course between the Bush Administration and other world leaders seeking tough new standards to succeed the Kyoto Protocol when it expires in 2012.