Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

'Editing' of global warming reports defended

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
TechBear_Seattle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-20-07 08:10 AM
Original message
'Editing' of global warming reports defended
'Editing' of global warming reports defended

By ANDREW C. REVKIN AND MATTHEW L. WALD
THE NEW YORK TIMES

WASHINGTON -- A House committee released documents Monday that showed hundreds of instances in which a White House official who was previously an oil-industry lobbyist edited government climate reports to play up uncertainty or play down evidence of a human role in global warming.

In a hearing of the House Oversight Committee, the official, Philip Cooney, defended his editing in government reports, saying it was part of the normal White House review process and reflected findings in a climate report written for President Bush by the National Academy of Sciences in 2001.

They were the first public statements on the issue by Cooney, the former chief of staff of the White House Council on Environmental Quality. Before joining the White House, Cooney was the "climate team leader" for the American Petroleum Institute, the main industry lobby in Washington.

He was hired by Exxon Mobil after resigning in 2005 following New York Times reports on the editing. The White House said his resignation was not related to the disclosures.

The article continues at http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/308232_climate20.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
BOSSHOG Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-20-07 08:12 AM
Response to Original message
1. "Normal (Bush) White House Review Process"
Change factual data to satisfy an ignorant base.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TechBear_Seattle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-20-07 08:15 AM
Response to Reply #1
2. Or hide inconvenient truths. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-20-07 08:22 AM
Response to Original message
3. Cooney was a total sleaze in the hearings but the scientist
whose name I can't retrieve was excellent. He didn't let himself be bullied by the Repuliscum on the committee and he rebutted Cooney's mendacity very well. :thumbsup:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sat May 04th 2024, 01:31 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC