• Having solved all other problems, Congress thought they'd just check the EPA's citations... oh who a
    22 replies, posted
[URL="http://news.sciencemag.org/environment/2013/08/house-panel-subpoenas-epa-air-pollution-data?rss=1"]House Panel Subpoenas EPA for Air Pollution Data[/URL] [QUOTE]In a rare step, the science committee of the U.S. House of Representatives voted yesterday to subpoena the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for data from key studies used to justify air pollution regulations. Following a heated exchange of letters between Committee Chair Lamar Smith (R-TX) and ranking member Eddie Bernice Johnson (D-TX), the committee approved its first subpoena in 21 years. The vote was strictly along party lines, with Democrats opposing the measure. The information in question includes the underlying data in a 1993 paper considered to be groundbreaking work on the impact of air pollution. In the so-called Six Cities Study, Harvard researchers followed more than 8000 participants for 14 to 16 years and found an association between death rates and particulate matter, or soot, in the air. The study informed EPA’s 1997 decision to tighten its air quality standards and continues to underpin Clean Air Act regulations. Smith has repeatedly requested that EPA hand over raw data from the Six Cities Study and from a related (and much larger) American Cancer Society study known as “Cancer Prevention Study II,” plus all subsequent reanalysis of the studies. He accused the agency of using “secret science” to justify environmental regulations. Smith gave EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy an ultimatum in a 22 July letter, threatening a subpoena if the information—which would include personal health information from study participants promised confidentiality—wasn’t turned over by the end of the month. On Tuesday, Johnson responded to Smith’s subpoena threat with outrage. In her letter, she claimed that his evidence for questioning the validity of the studies was shoddy and that a subpoena would violate the trust of hundreds of thousands of Americans who had participated in the Six Cities Study and other research included in the subpoena.[/QUOTE] Why is this man even employed, much less a federal politician and the Committee Chair of the House science committee?
I can't even think of a response. How can he use the term "secret science" seriously.
Lamar Smith everyone.
Why is Lamar Smith on the Science Committee, he doesn't even deserve to be on any committee. [editline]4th August 2013[/editline] He has [I]zero[/I] science background. A community college science freshman is more qualified than he is do be a chairman of anything scientific.
We may have made air pollution regulations stricter [i]for nothing[/i] this is the slow march to tyranny my friend we should have the RIGHT to get asthma
[QUOTE=OvB;41705582]Why is Lamar Smith on the Science Committee, he doesn't even deserve to be on any committee. [editline]4th August 2013[/editline] He has [I]zero[/I] science background. A community college science freshman is more qualified than he is do be a chairman of anything scientific.[/QUOTE] Democracy (or republics or the general american political system). Where everyone complains about how stupid their political leaders are; but noone has the will or power to do anything about them, and the few that do don't have power in the first place to do so, or are uninformed about the administration that makes their decisions for them. I sure as hell don't see a way to make our american political system work as intended.
Texas depresses me. 90% of the younger adults here are liberal, radiating outwards from Austin. None of them vote. None of them get involved in politics. None of them call their representatives to express their opinions on certain bills. It's infuriating. All the old republicans go out and vote, but none of the younger people do. I'm just glad to see that my congressional district is classified as "swing" and that Republicans have been quickly losing votes. Their opinions scare me.
[QUOTE]In his response, the chairman acknowledged that the data would need to be “de-identified” to protect the privacy and health information of the participants.[/QUOTE] I don't quite get it, why is making this data public an issue? Especially seeing as they're going to remove personal information...
[QUOTE=Morcam;41705846]I don't quite get it, why is making this data public an issue? Especially seeing as they're going to remove personal information...[/QUOTE] They're afraid of being called out on any bullshit they put in there
[QUOTE=.Isak.;41705691]Texas depresses me. 90% of the younger adults here are liberal, radiating outwards from Austin. None of them vote. None of them get involved in politics. None of them call their representatives to express their opinions on certain bills. It's infuriating. All the old republicans go out and vote, but none of the younger people do. I'm just glad to see that my congressional district is classified as "swing" and that Republicans have been quickly losing votes. Their opinions scare me.[/QUOTE] Texas is forecast to become a purple state, and then a blue state in 20-50 years though due rising minority demographics and as you said, Austin hipsters.
This is the same asshat that tried to push SOPA through. He's just a dumbass. You could tell him how the sky is blue and he'd still find a way to disbelieve ya. He shouldn't even be on capitol hill. [QUOTE=OvB;41705582] He has [I]zero[/I] science background. A community college science freshman is more qualified than he is do be a chairman of anything scientific.[/QUOTE] I have a better qualification to be the chairman of the scientific committee and I never got past high school...formally. Though I do play an assload of KSP and love looking at space/reading about space stuff. And I have a stiffy for V8s coupled with a massive disdain for any car that isn't internal combustion. Lamarr Smith is just a terrible politician every way you look at him.
[QUOTE=Morcam;41705846]I don't quite get it, why is making this data public an issue? Especially seeing as they're going to remove personal information...[/QUOTE] Because we've learned enough about Big Data and there are enough databases with peoples' info out there that you can track someone down with some of the tiniest details. Remember, a while back AOL released a gigantic pile of (what they thought were) anonymized search queries for research. Each AOL user had their username/other identifiers replaced with a simple number, allowing you to call up all searches by, say, user #2740. Even these were enough to identify people, down to their exact street address. If you anonymize it [I]too[/I] much, you strip out all of the useful data from it, because these peoples' lives are necessarily intertwined in the data about their lives used in the study.
[QUOTE=OvB;41705582]Why is Lamar Smith on the Science Committee, he doesn't even deserve to be on any committee. [editline]4th August 2013[/editline] He has [I]zero[/I] science background. A community college science freshman is more qualified than he is do be a chairman of anything scientific.[/QUOTE]Fuck that, myself or just about anyone on facepunch is more qualified than Lamar Smith. You know what else could do a better job than Lamar? A retarded lemming. Yeah....y'all see where I'm going with this.
[QUOTE=Solo Wing;41707397]Fuck that, myself or just about anyone on facepunch is more qualified than Lamar Smith. You know what else could do a better job than Lamar? A retarded lemming. Yeah....y'all see where I'm going with this.[/QUOTE] Could we have Lamar Smith replaced with random chance? I think we'd honestly be better off.
The House Science Committee is a complete and total farce now that it's been packed with evangelical Republican climate-denying zealots. Maybe they will believe the scientists when the Chesapeake is lapping at the steps of the Capitol Building.
What's wrong with asking for the data? Surely it'll just support the conclusion of the paper?
[QUOTE=.Isak.;41705691]Texas depresses me. 90% of the younger adults here are liberal, radiating outwards from Austin. None of them vote. None of them get involved in politics. None of them call their representatives to express their opinions on certain bills. It's infuriating. All the old republicans go out and vote, but none of the younger people do. I'm just glad to see that my congressional district is classified as "swing" and that Republicans have been quickly losing votes. Their opinions scare me.[/QUOTE] Well in that case, someone should do a PSA for Texas liberals to convince them to become active voters; that'll help swing the alignment of the state, hopefully. Red's dead, blue is probably true, even if the President isn't all we hoped he would be (at least from what I've heard).
Why is this guy an idiot? I don't see anything wrong with checking the validity of such important research.
[QUOTE=supersnail11;41715087]Why is this guy an idiot? I don't see anything wrong with checking the validity of such important research.[/QUOTE] Why is he going after 16-year-old air pollution regulations when he has a documented history of being in the pocket of corporate interests? Why is he attacking environmental regulations and accusing scientists of using "secret science" (what the fuck) in 20-year-old studies that formed the baseline for clean air regulations a few years later? Why [I]now[/I]?
[QUOTE=elixwhitetail;41715137]Why is he going after 16-year-old air pollution regulations when he has a documented history of being in the pocket of corporate interests? Why is he attacking environmental regulations and accusing scientists of using "secret science" (what the fuck) in 20-year-old studies that formed the baseline for clean air regulations a few years later? Why [I]now[/I]?[/QUOTE] If the science is concrete, as it should be, why are you so worried he's exercising a power within his right to use? Because I'm not. And if the science [I]isn't[/I] concrete, well...
[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;41715190]If the science is concrete, as it should be, why are you so worried he's exercising a power within his right to use? Because I'm not. And if the science [I]isn't[/I] concrete, well...[/QUOTE] Doesn't he have better things to do? Like actually learn something about climate science instead of rejecting it except when the numbers agree with him? I'm not saying "Impeach him" or think he's going to uncover some conspiracy. I think he's fucking around sticking his dick in a light socket while the iceberg stretches out its arms to give the Titanic a hug.
[QUOTE=elixwhitetail;41715137]Why is he going after 16-year-old air pollution regulations when he has a documented history of being in the pocket of corporate interests? Why is he attacking environmental regulations and accusing scientists of using "secret science" (what the fuck) in 20-year-old studies that formed the baseline for clean air regulations a few years later? Why [I]now[/I]?[/QUOTE] [URL="http://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/secondhand-smoke-charade"]epa has been known to fuck up on important studies[/URL]
[QUOTE=elixwhitetail;41715137]Why is he going after 16-year-old air pollution regulations when he has a documented history of being in the pocket of corporate interests? Why is he attacking environmental regulations and accusing scientists of using "secret science" (what the fuck) in 20-year-old studies that formed the baseline for clean air regulations a few years later? Why [I]now[/I]?[/QUOTE] Well, are you suggesting that if a study goes unquestioned for long enough, that it should be immune to scrutiny? That's quite a can of worms there. I don't see any harm in asking for the data. It doesn't matter if the person asking is a diehard Republican, a show-me-the-numbers lawyer, or a scientist looking for public validation.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.