Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) is not to say who is responsible for removing all references to climate change part of a forthcoming scientific report, and has at least one researcher jumping crazy.
Dr. John B. Anderson (pictured, left), an oceanographer at Rice University, told Raw Story that its report on the estuary of Galveston Bay, and the effect of raising the level of its fragile ecosystem has been censored for political reasons.
"This is a clear case of censorship," he said, an exclusive interview. This is not scientific editing. It 'was definitely eliminates almost all the information related to global change.
But now more urgent, Anderson report cites recent years, dramatic changes in sea level, which is in stark contrast to historical standards. If these changes are not recognized and no measures are taken to mitigate the consequences, he said, ecosystems along the Gulf Coast of Texas could suffer seriously in the coming years.
Anderson added that he extended to Buddy Garcia, a TCEQ commissioner appointed by Governor Rick Perry (R), to ask why the changes had been made, but Garcia has never responded. Raw Story asks to speak with Commissioner Garcia was also rejected.
Reached for comment, which was involved in drafting the report TCEQ spokeswoman Andrea Morrow abruptly hung Raw Story, after promising a written statement.
Follow-up requests for information, which was involved in drafting the report of Anderson has been met with a refusal. Request for public information, the names of those people was presented.
"This is the report of the TCEQ, which we contract in advance of Houston Research Center, published in the State of Galveston Bay," the agency said in a prepared statement. "It would be irresponsible to take all sent to us and to publish it. And here, the information was included in the report that we do not agree.
"This chapter was censored was actually a summary of the scientific literature," Anderson told Raw Story. "No new data presented in this chapter actually. [...] One of these statements was even out of the journal Science, the last I heard was an acceptable scientific journal. What surprised me your answer was that they did not accept some of these points of view.
"To say that you do not accept it when it was published in peer-reviewed scientific literature, which usually means that you need some kind of against-argument to say that there is also evidence published in the peer literature that could refute, he added. But [they offered] nothing of the sort. It is censorship when they omit these references and does not give any constructive criticism or comments.
TCEQ Commissioner Garcia, said the office had tried to follow Anderson, but not the destination. Anderson denied that was the case. "I gave 30 days to hear back and I do not feel anything," he said. "That's why I decided to go public at this stage was clear, I'm not going to listen to Mr. Garcia."
The Office also noted that the information on Anderson is "contrary to agency policy," but did not prepare for what politics is. All Raw Story follow-up questions later ignored.
"We scientists generally criticized for not going to bother with training, and it was my way of doing that dimension, to write an article that is not directed to the scientific community," Anderson said. "Then you are the very decision to turn around and say that we do not accept any of this is rather depressing. I refer to Texas as the prohibition of state, and I do not think we are the only coastal state to grant this."
"These people are responsible for the look, not only voters, but voters in the future," he said. "They have to pay the tab. As long as we live in a ban state, we only have a passing control our grandchildren to deal with."
0 comments:
Post a Comment