2-17-07, 9:41 am

Gabcast! Poltical Affairs #2 - Bush's Censors Scientists on Global Warming
Bush Censors Scientists on Global Warming; Kentucky House of Representatives Calls for Passage of National Health Insurance Act; Workers Call for Passage of Pro-union Law

THE U.S. government has been resorting to reprehensible methods to deceive citizens about a subject that involves humanity as a whole: climate changes that are leading to increased global warming. Hundreds of scientists who were asked admitted to having suffered some type of pressure or interference in their studies on the subject.

Excesses were committed with them, such as demanding that they purge from their statements and documents anything that could give an idea of the events caused by human beings that are affecting our habitat, above all the use of terms that imply long-term effects. Some report that their communiqués were changed, or that the warnings stemming from their research were minimized.

This was not a small thing, given that it led to hearings by the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, where several of those experts were questioned. One of them, Dr. Drew Shindell, said:

“In the fall of 2004, a team I led at NASA published a paper providing an explanation of how ozone depletion over Antarctica and increasing greenhouse gases could together account for this observed cooling of Antarctica. The study was the first to look at how these two factors work together to influence Antarctic temperatures. It not only helped to explain the observed cooling, but also predicted a warmer future for Antarctica based on projections of continued increases in greenhouse gases. This has clear implications both for the debate on global warming and for potential sea-level rise, as Antarctica contains an enormous reservoir of water in its ice sheets.”

After making these observations, Shindell took the findings to the NASA press corps to issue a press release. While previous press releases had been published immediately, this one was repeatedly delayed and “watered down,” he said.

“When we at GISS [Goddard Institute of Space Studies] enquired of those higher up the NASA chain what was going on, we were told in the fall of 2004 [inaudible] that releases were being delayed because two political appointees and the White House were now reviewing all climate-related press releases.”

Likewise, it was established that a NASA press officer had to be present during all interviews, whether in person or by telephone, related to climate research, “a measure most of us felt was unbefitting of a democratic society.” He noted that “scientists provide information to policymakers and the public on issues affecting society. Climate change is clearly such an issue...” and for that reason, should not be kept secret.

The incident is related to the publication in Paris of the conclusions reached by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, a UN group that included participation by 2,500 scientists from 131 countries, who said that increased carbon dioxide levels stemming from uncontrolled consumption of fossil fuels are heating up the Earth, a situation that is leading to a melting of the polar icecaps, the subsequent rise in ocean levels and, with that, the flooding of large coastal areas, among a number of other disasters.

The Bush government’s efforts to distort the outcome of serious investigations responds to very local interests that feed into the president’s own family finances, as well as those of close collaborators and patrons.

One of the many opinions on the subject is that of Zbigniew Jaworowski, of the Central Laboratory for Radiological Protection in Warsaw, and an advisor to the U.S. government itself, who says that Washington is using the climate issue as a psychological weapon in both cases, both global warming and cooling, given they are convenient excuses for its military to demand more money for defending the “sweet land of liberty” from all kinds of evils.

When Bush took power, one of the first things he did was to reject the Kyoto Protocol, which many considered insufficient, and which Clinton had signed at the last minute. Later, aside from aforementioned pressures, he also used malleable individuals to deny evidence about climate change. The goal is to retain the status quo with respect to existing models of production and consumption, so that big business does not need to spend money on ways of attenuating harm to the environment.

Meanwhile, diverse projects to control the climate have continued to prosper, but not with the purpose of preventing misfortunes such as those caused by large hurricanes which, like Katrina, affected areas in Bush’s own country; rather, they are aimed at negatively influencing other countries.

To date, climate engineering – intentional manipulation – has above all, war-related purposes. During wars on Vietnam and Cambodia, the CIA implemented experiments for causing heavy and long-lasting rain, with the goal of destroying roads or crops. These and other experiments are well known, and so much so that they led to the creation of a UN convention that forbids the utilization of environmental modification techniques for military or other hostile purposes. The United States sometimes signs it and sometimes no, but always does whatever it wants afterward, continuing its projects in this field and continuing to make efforts to adulterate warning calls and programs for attenuating problems stemming from climate change.

Bush is receiving assistance from others interested in the issue. Exxon Mobil is offering $10,000, along with travel expenses and other benefits to those who can help cast doubt over the recent report made public in the French capital.

According to information from the British newspaper The Guardian, that transnational oil corporation founded the American Enterprise Institute, which houses — or oversees — several think tanks willing to emphasize — or if necessary invent — defects in the report produced by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

As a basic summary of something that has a lot of twists and turns and quite a few dark areas, there is the fact that the country that claims to be the most open, free and democratic, is gagging its scientists or censoring them. It is distorting reality and evidence not because it has valid opinions or other theses, but for its own sordid reasons. This could be considered additional evidence.

From Granma