Pirate's Cove

Ever since Scott Pruitt announce that the science would no longer be secret, at least not on the taxpayer dime, all the Warmists have been coming up with various different Excuses as to why making the science transparent is a bad idea

(Daily Caller) The New York Times editorial board came out against Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Scott Pruitt’s plan to stop “secret science” from being used as the basis of regulations.

Pruitt will soon require EPA to only rely on studies that make their data publicly available when crafting regulations. The Times opposed Pruitt’s transparency plan, echoing liberal critics’ claims it would violate patient privacy.

“He told his subordinates that they could no longer make policy on the basis of studies that included data from participants who were guaranteed confidentiality,” The Times editorial board wrote on Saturday.

“Over the years, such studies have been crucial to establishing links between mortality and pollution, led to regulations and saved many lives,” the editorial board wrote. “Limiting policymakers to only those studies with publicly available health data greatly narrows the field of research.”

It’s easy to see that Pruitt’s policy is primarily aimed at the climate change scam and some of the enviroweenie regulations that we were seeing implemented during the Obama years, ones that had an impact on citizens, and the People had very little access to the actual data.

The editorial board quoted an op-ed by former Obama EPA officials who argued, “Mr. Pruitt’s goal is simple: No studies, no data, no rules.” The Times editorial ties Pruitt’s latest plan into the Trump administration’s alleged “disdain” for science.

If the data cannon stand up to transparency, then it’s not particularly good data. In fact, the full quote at the Times reads

Far better to stick his head in the sand, ostrichlike; do that, and the need for policies regulating greenhouse gas emissions or dangerous pollutants like soot and mercury magically disappears. Which is certainly Mr. Pruitt’s modus operandi. As Gina McCarthy, a former E.P.A. administrator, and her deputy for air quality, Janet McCabe, said in a recent Times Op-Ed: “Mr. Pruitt’s goal is simple: No studies, no data, no rules.”

So, requiring that the science no longer be secret is Pruitt sticking his head in the sand, Ostritchlike? Really? Science must be replicable. It is supposed to be open. Why are Warmists advocating so strongly for it to be secret? It doesn’t take an Einstein to arrive at the real answer.