The Trump Administration, Slanted Science and the Environment: 4 Essential Reads
14 April 2018
Popular
March for Science in Portland, Oregon, April 22, 2017. Another Believer / CC BY-SA
By Jennifer Weeks
Scientists and environmental advocates will be speaking out this month about the Trump administration and what they view as its abuses of science. This year's March for Science on Saturday, April 14, has a goal of holding leaders accountable for "developing and enacting evidence-based policy."
<p style="">
<a href="https://www.earthday.org/" target="_blank">Earth Day</a>, which falls on Sunday, April 22 this year, is approaching its 50th anniversary and has become a global event. Although many Earth Day events will focus on issues—such as this year's theme, <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/plastics">plastic pollution</a>—the Trump administration's efforts to roll back environmental regulation will also loom large.
</p><p style="">
These articles from our archives provide some examples to support charges that the Trump administration is politicizing science on climate change and other environmental issues to drive an anti-regulatory agenda.
</p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-twitter_embed">
</p><div id="0fcc0" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="PAFO221576663439"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="983380494904676352" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">More than a year ago, the Senate confirmed Pruitt as the head of the @EPA .Since then, he has repeatedly taken acti… https://t.co/9ufBZxNKMO</div> — March for Science (@March for Science)<a href="https://twitter.com/MarchForScience/statuses/983380494904676352">1523291154.0</a></blockquote></div>
<p></p><p style="">
<strong>1. Restricting Information</strong><br>
</p><p style="">
Across many federal agencies, information about <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/climate-change">climate change</a> and policies to address it has been removed from the internet or archived in hard-to-access locations. Terms like "climate change" have been removed from agency websites, and others have been renamed. For example, the Department of Energy's Clean Energy Investment Center is now simply the Energy Investor Center.
</p><p style="">
Morgan Currie, a postdoctoral fellow at Stanford University's Digital Civil Society Lab, and Britt S. Paris, a Ph.D. student in information studies at UCLA, acknowledge that public information on government activities changes to reflect the policy directives of different administrations. But <a href="https://theconversation.com/buried-altered-silenced-4-ways-government-climate-information-has-changed-since-trump-took-office-92323" target="_blank">as they note</a>, climate change is still occurring, whether it is reported or not:
</p><p style="margin-left: 20px;">
"In our view, burying climate science diminishes our democracy. It denies the average citizen the information necessary to make informed decisions, and fuels the flames of rhetoric that denies consensus-based science."<br>
</p><p style="">
<strong>2. Stacking Advisory Panels</strong>
</p><p style="">
Many scientists provide advice without pay to federal agencies on issues within their areas of expertise. But the Trump administration has downgraded or eliminated independent scientific input on a number of key issues.
</p><p style="">
For example, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Scott Pruitt has barred scientists receiving agency grants from serving on EPA advisory committees, and has <a href="http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2017/11/epa-unveils-new-industry-friendlier-science-advisory-boards" target="_blank">replaced</a> a number of academic board members with representative of industries and state governments.
</p><p style="">
Interior Sec. Ryan Zinke has created a new advisory board on <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/zinke-creates-new-outdoor-recreation-panel-made-up-entirely-of-industry-advisers/2018/03/26/04f3e960-2f9a-11e8-8688-e053ba58f1e4_story.html?utm_term=.93b40b1aa48a" target="_blank">recreation</a> that is heavily weighted toward industry and another on <a href="https://www.denverpost.com/2018/03/15/trump-wildlife-protection-board-trophy-hunters/" target="_blank">international wildlife protection</a> made up mainly of trophy hunters.
</p><p>
Past administrations that tried to stack advisory boards ultimately <a href="https://theconversation.com/history-shows-that-stacking-federal-science-advisory-committees-doesnt-work-80590" target="_blank">failed to achieve their goals</a>, according to Donald Boesch, a professor of marine science at the University of Maryland Center for Environmental Science who has served on many federal advisory committees. Other scientists, not affiliated with the administration, will call out biased conclusions and unsupported recommendations from these slanted panels, Boesch predicts:
</p><p style="margin-left: 20px;">
"Consequently, policies and regulations based on the panels' recommendations will be less likely to withstand public or political scrutiny and be more open to legal challenges than if they were based on more balanced input."
</p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-rebelmouse-image" style="">
<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8xNzU0NTIxMi9vcmlnaW4uanBnIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTYyNjIwMjIwNX0.2p-sVuYfqlg0Lx4ENs4a4EFLr5SuHobdQ_wYH_ldhXs/img.jpg?width=980" id="3e9d5" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="21137742c11c6265b596e0de2b26b929" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image">
<small class="image-media media-caption" placeholder="add caption...">Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke, flanked by U.S. Sen. Todd Young and U.S. Rep. Jackie Walorski, announces his new 'Made in America Recreation Advisory Committee,' July 18, 2017.</small><small class="image-media media-photo-credit" placeholder="add photo credit..."><a href="https://flic.kr/p/WDWnmr" target="_blank">DOI</a>, <a href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/" target="_blank">CC BY-SA</a></small>
</p><p style="">
<strong>3. Manufacturing Controversy</strong><br>
</p><p>
Although his proposal was ultimately <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/09/climate/pruitt-red-team-climate-debate-kelly.html" target="_blank">rejected</a> by the White House, EPA administrator Pruitt campaigned energetically in 2017 for a "red team-blue team" review of current climate science. Such an exercise, Pruitt asserted, would provide fresh perspective.
</p><p>
Critics viewed this idea as an attempt to undercut a widely supported consensus that human actions are changing Earth's climate, by putting climate deniers on an equal footing with mainstream experts.
</p><p style="">
Red team-blue team exercises center on "the spirit of challenge by an antagonist," explains University of Michigan climate scientist Richard Rood, who has participated in these types of reviews. Rather than shedding light on serious scientific questions, Rood <a href="https://theconversation.com/red-team-blue-team-debating-climate-science-should-not-be-a-cage-match-80663" target="_blank">describes Pruitt's proposal</a> as a performance designed to advance a political agenda:
</p><p style="margin-left: 20px;">
"Such spectacle will be based on emotional appeal and will rely on manipulating the message about the role that uncertainty plays in scientific investigation. The goal will be the amplification and persistence of public doubt—a goal that would be undoubtedly achieved."
</p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-youtube">
<span style="display:block;position:relative;padding-top:56.25%;" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="4fa48f3828731493b071baab9b2576b3"><iframe type="lazy-iframe" data-runner-src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/dauzaFv2baY?rel=0" width="100%" height="auto" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" style="position:absolute;top:0;left:0;width:100%;height:100%;"></iframe></span>
</p><p style="">
<strong>4. Distorting Scientific Findings</strong><br>
</p><p>
Many statements about climate change by Trump administration officials have questioned whether climate change is occurring or have downplayed the need to take action. Most recently, in late March 2018, EPA staffers received a list of "talking points" about climate change that instructed them to emphasize uncertainty when discussing the issue with local communities and Native American tribes.
</p><p style="">
For example, one point <a href="https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/epa-climate-adaptation_us_5abbb5e3e4b04a59a31387d7?ux" target="_blank">stated</a>:
</p><p style="margin-left: 20px;">
"Human activity impacts our changing climate in some manner. The ability to measure with precision the degree and extent of that impact, and what to do about it, are subject to continuing debate and dialogue."<br>
</p><p style="">
Joe Arvai, a professor of sustainable enterprise at the University of Michigan who served on EPA's Chartered Science Advisory Board from 2011 to 2017, <a href="https://theconversation.com/im-suing-scott-pruitts-broken-epa-heres-how-to-fix-it-94089" target="_blank">calls this framing an exaggeration</a> of uncertainties around the human causes of climate change. "In effect, Pruitt is asking EPA staffers to lie," Arvai contends.
</p><p style="">
In another area—the health impacts of exposure to pollutants and toxics—Pruitt has proposed to <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/26/climate/epa-scientific-transparency-honest-act.html" target="_blank">change EPA policy</a> so that the agency would only consider scientific research if underlying raw data can be made public for external scientists and organizations to review. Pruitt says this approach will increase transparency, but Arvai argues otherwise:
</p><p style="margin-left: 20px;">
"[I]n reality, this rule would mean that critical public health studies could no longer be used to inform EPA policy because some of the data are protected by doctor-patient or researcher-participant confidentiality."
</p><p style="">
<em>Reposted with permission from our media associate </em><em><a href="https://theconversation.com/the-trump-administration-slanted-science-and-the-environment-4-essential-reads-94711" target="_blank">The Conversation</a></em><em>.</em>
</p><script async="async" data-counter="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/94711/count?distributor=republish-lightbox-advanced" id="theconversation_tracker_hook" src="https://theconversation.com/javascripts/lib/content_tracker_hook.js" type="text/javascript"></script>
From Your Site Articles
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
Standing Up for Science: More Researchers See Public Engagement as Crucial Part of Their Job
11 April 2018
Science
Bill Nye was one of many scientists making public statements at the March for Science on April 22, 2017. wolfkann / Flickr
By Chelsea Rochman, Priya Shukla, Susan Williams and Tessa M. Hill
As the first anniversary of the March for Science approaches, researchers continue to reflect on the relationship between science and society. A recent survey of 2017 marchers indicated that nearly all were also actively participating in other types of science advocacy. In the past year, inspired by the call to stand up for science, scientists have written editorials, contacted members of Congress, attended public protests, initiated runs for political office, and organized new groups to support diversity, inclusion and justice.
<p>
<em><em>How are today's scientists rethinking public engagement? Here, four scientists spanning multiple academic career stages—entering Ph.D. student (<a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=qlaybZcAAAAJ&hl=en" target="_blank">Shukla</a>), early career (<a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=3PgkPboAAAAJ&hl=en&oi=ao" target="_blank">Rochman</a>), midcareer (<a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=ZgoB98kAAAAJ&hl=en" target="_blank">Hill</a>), and senior scientist (<a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=h7Na1OoAAAAJ&hl=en&oi=ao" target="_blank">Williams</a>)—discuss whether society is witnessing a fundamental change in how scientific researchers perceive their interaction with the public and policymakers.</em></em>
</p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-rebelmouse-image">
<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8xNzUzOTU5MC9vcmlnaW4uanBnIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTYzODQxOTE5OH0.trypwogzbqxVsdiXXWX-GuloS3kjiFVHjHLD0v_t7RQ/img.jpg?width=980" id="d18f9" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="34946354fada07fd6f1bd4dfada494ff" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image">
<small class="image-media media-caption" placeholder="add caption...">Author Priya Shukla presents her work to a general audience at a science festival. </small><small class="image-media media-photo-credit" placeholder="add photo credit...">Taste of Science San Francisco Festival, CC BY-ND</small>
</p><p>
<strong>Why should scientists engage?</strong>
</p><p>
Williams: The public deserves to know about our science. Scientific discoveries help people understand our world and <a href="https://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/nasa-tess-satellite-launch-habitable-planets-kepler-space-galaxy-cape-canaveral-a8276061.html" target="_blank">galaxies beyond</a>, <a href="https://www.space.com/40066-landslide-prediction-nasa-satellite-model.html" target="_blank">predict the future</a>, <a href="https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/why-science-is-important/" target="_blank">fuel economic growth</a> and reconnect all of us back to our childlike wonder.
</p><p>
<a href="http://hillbiogeochemistry.squarespace.com/" target="_blank">Hill</a>: I'll add that the majority of science in the U.S. is <a href="https://www.aaas.org/page/federal-rd-budget-dashboard" target="_blank">paid for by taxpayers</a>, thus we work on behalf of the public. Personally, I want to encourage decision-making supported by evidence, both for individuals in their daily lives and for politicians setting official policy. If we don't provide the evidence, how can people make decisions based upon it?
</p><p>
Rochman: <a href="http://scienceliteracy.ca/" target="_blank">Public engagement also improves science literacy</a>. I was inspired by a scientist. Because of him, I am a scientist.
</p><p>
<strong>How have your perceptions of public engagement changed over time?</strong>
</p><p>
Williams: If scientists had engaged more before now, we as a society might not be in the situation where "alternative facts" exist. Today, I'm more strategic about engagement. I engage when my expertise is core to the issue at hand, and also when I think I can reach a diverse audience.
</p><p>
Rochman: I also prioritize reaching more diverse audiences. More than ever before, I try to connect with people where they are—based upon shared values—to make headway in this time of political differences. I also engage with both sides of the political aisle.
</p><p>
Shukla: As a young scientist, I feel obligated to stand up for the integrity of science in civic decision-making. I also think it's important to <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.08.288" target="_blank">communicate the benefits of research to non-scientists</a>, so that people can understand, and feel part of, the whole enterprise. For me, public engagement is about embedding ourselves in our communities and helping inform a path forward.
</p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-rebelmouse-image">
<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8xNzUzOTU5MS9vcmlnaW4uanBnIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTYwOTI2ODg4MX0.pJzLdbzKUNrGCI2FouJ6_IIpvUGAmnJqvePvB4TrGoA/img.jpg?width=980" id="e44da" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="ba743a59a0a4fc731dad35a9ac54148c" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image">
<small class="image-media media-caption" placeholder="add caption...">Author Tessa Hill presents research findings to legislators and policymakers at the House Committee on Natural Resources Forum on Ocean Change, 2017. </small><small class="image-media media-photo-credit" placeholder="add photo credit...">Tessa Hill, CC BY-ND</small>
</p><p>
Hill: Important progress sometimes comes from being in uncomfortable situations. In that sense, the current political climate and concerns for the future of science are an opportunity—we shouldn't let this pass us by! What worries me is that many scientists are doing engagement work on their own time because academic institutions <a href="http://www.sciencemag.org/careers/2015/02/public-engagement-balancing-altruism-and-self-interest" target="_blank">primarily value and reward</a> time devoted to research, teaching and institutional service.<br>
</p><p>
Rochman: I am optimistic! I think <a href="https://theconversation.com/why-academics-are-losing-relevance-in-society-and-how-to-stop-it-64579" target="_blank">academic culture</a> is shifting to <a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-018-03925-8" target="_blank">embrace public engagement</a>. Some departments and universities now encourage these activities and the <a href="http://www.sciencemag.org/careers/2010/04/transitioning-researcher-outreacher" target="_blank">next generation is hungry for it</a>.
</p><p>
Williams: When I was a student, engagement was discouraged because it reputedly detracted from scholarship and was perceived to sully the ivory tower objectiveness. We've begun to move on from that point of view.
</p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-rebelmouse-image">
<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8xNzUzOTYwNS9vcmlnaW4uanBnIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTYyNTEzNDA0NX0.oKgUyMEapTz9JIQRbdoX_xqjukU8VM0MvDU8pTlVNCs/img.jpg?width=980" id="836fe" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="fb6cade781242fdb189c1831838f55a9" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image">
<small class="image-media media-caption" placeholder="add caption...">Author Chelsea Rochman presents her research at the United Nations. </small><small class="image-media media-photo-credit" placeholder="add photo credit...">United Nations, CC BY-ND</small>
</p><p>
<strong>What type of engagement do you think has the most impact?</strong>
</p><p>
Rochman: Putting scientific evidence in the hands of policymakers in a way they can digest. During my postdoc, <a href="https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201520160AB888" target="_blank">bills</a> to ban plastic microbeads were being introduced. In some cases, they were stalled because of a perceived lack of scientific information. I led the development of a policy brief and sent it to state legislators. We also wrote open-access communications in <a href="https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.5b03909" target="_blank">Environmental Science & Technology</a> and <a href="https://theconversation.com/tiny-beads-big-problem-easy-fix-why-scientific-evidence-supports-a-ban-on-microbeads-42511" target="_blank">The Conversation</a>. This engagement led to <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/microbeads-soon-will-be-banned-from-toothpaste-soaps-shampoos/2016/01/07/254166a8-b4c1-11e5-a842-0feb51d1d124_story.html" target="_blank">media interviews</a>, phone calls with legislators and opportunities to testify. This experience taught me that engagement is valued and without it, scientific evidence may be left out of the policy process.
</p><p>
Williams: My own testimony before U.S. congressional committees provided the background for an expansion of <a href="https://oceanservice.noaa.gov/news/june15/expansion.html" target="_blank">two national marine sanctuaries</a>. Although the process lasted about a decade, the result was tangible. Lines actually changed on maps because of this work.
</p><p>
Shukla: I think about two kinds of "impact": via a medium that influences many people, and via a mode that reinvigorates me. For example, I can <a href="https://medium.com/the-prosaic-mosaic" target="_blank">write a blog</a> that is viewed by more than 1,000 people. But, public talks, where I can engage one-on-one, remind me why I became a scientist and have taught me that sharing our stories with individuals can be just as important as sharing the ultimate findings of our research.
</p><p>
Hill: Sometimes it is easy to forget how important <em>listening</em> is in advocating for science. Some of the most important engagement opportunities I've had were actually conversations with people about their values, and how science fits in.
</p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-rebelmouse-image">
<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8xNzUzOTYwNy9vcmlnaW4ucG5nIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTYwNDc0NzA2N30.xHRITkSkweeT3d10BA-19OPhKqEsS2baPjFRpj1Z70k/img.png?width=980" id="007ab" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="a2ce04538a94b79ab4f6af2fba0e35dc" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image">
<small class="image-media media-caption" placeholder="add caption...">Author Susan Williams on a dive. In order to engage with authority, the research must be solid. </small><small class="image-media media-photo-credit" placeholder="add photo credit...">Susan Williams, CC BY-ND</small>
</p><p>
Williams: I would add that our credibility is ultimately based on establishing our scientific credentials by doing good work. First and foremost, we need to focus on our scientific output. Change does not come overnight it requires vision and perseverance. Over our careers, there are plenty of opportunities to engage meaningfully.
</p><p>
Shukla: So we've come up with these themes around effective engagement:
</p><ol class="ee-ol">
<li>Start with the highest-quality science.</li>
<li>Communicate to diverse audiences to increase scientific literacy, inspire awe and inform evidence-based decision-making.</li>
<li>Be strategic and have fun, trusting that true impact takes time.</li></ol><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-twitter_embed">
</p><div id="a4011" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="HS5UQM1576664211"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="972604288022274048" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">20,000 Scientists Have Now Signed 'Warning to Humanity' https://t.co/0g8d9DDla2 @YaleClimateComm @tcktcktck</div> — EcoWatch (@EcoWatch)<a href="https://twitter.com/EcoWatch/statuses/972604288022274048">1520721907.0</a></blockquote></div>
<p></p><p><em>Reposted with permission from our media associate <a href="https://theconversation.com/stand-up-for-science-more-researchers-now-see-engagement-as-a-crucial-part-of-their-job-91801" target="_blank">The Conversation</a>.</em><br></p><script async="async" data-counter="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/91801/count?distributor=republish-lightbox-advanced" id="theconversation_tracker_hook" src="https://theconversation.com/javascripts/lib/content_tracker_hook.js" type="text/javascript"></script>
From Your Site Articles
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
EcoWatch Daily Newsletter
Chicago Science March, April 22, 2017. Tim Skirvin / Flickr
From the Women's March on Washington to the March for Science, the first year of the Trump administration saw an increase in highly-publicized mass demonstrations, leading to the sense that the president's policies are mobilizing people with progressive beliefs to defend their views in the streets.
Now, a Washington Post-Kaiser Family Foundation poll reported by The Washington Post on Friday provides the numbers to confirm that narrative.
<p>The poll, the most in-depth look at U.S. protesters in more than a decade, found that 20 percent of Americans have joined a political rally or street demonstration since the start of 2016. For 19 percent of them, that rally was the first they had ever attended. </p><p>According to the poll, dissatisfaction with Trump was a major motivator for demonstrators: 70 percent of them disapproved of the job the president is doing compared with 30 percent who approved. Half of demonstrators attended events at least partly because of Trump.</p><p>Concerns about the environment were also a key motivating factor for American rally-goers. Thirty-two percent of demonstrators who attended a rally in the past two years did so to express their views on "the environment and energy issues," according to the results. It was the issue that attracted the second-largest percentage of demonstrators, after women's rights at 46 percent.</p><p>A vast majority of those environmental demonstrators supported environmental protections and action on <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/climate-change">climate change</a>. <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/page/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2018/04/06/National-Politics/Polling/question_20150.xml?uuid=QZ2EhDmaEeivPCEjcV943w" target="_blank">Deeper analysis</a> of the data shows that 29 percent of rally-goers attended "an event in support of protecting the environment or fighting climate change" and only two percent raised their voices "in support of increasing access to oil, natural gas, or coal." </p><p>The data did not indicate how many environmental protestors were new to the game or how many were specifically motivated by the Trump administration's reversal of environmental regulations and denial of climate <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/science/">science</a>. </p><p>However, vocal opposition to Trump's environmental agenda has been a big part of the anti-Trump "resistance" from day one. </p><p>Days after the inauguration, the Badlands National Park <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/badlands-national-park-trump-2213976759.html" target="_self">made headlines</a> for tweeting out facts about climate change after Trump suspended the National Park Service's Twitter usage because of tweets unfavorably comparing the size of his inauguration crowds to Obama's. </p><p>The April 2017 <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/march-for-science-truth-to-power-2375041158.html" target="_self">March for Science</a>, a response to Trump's disregard for scientific facts, mobilized a group that has traditionally preferred the lab to the street. </p><p>"Scientists have not been eager to get politically involved, but in the face of unceasing attacks and organized denial, they're putting their credibility to good use," <a href="http://350.org/" target="_blank">350.org</a> co-founder <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/community/bill_mckibben/" target="_self">Bill McKibben</a> said of the march. </p><p>Polls have also suggested that the majority of Americans' views on climate change do not match the rhetoric of the Trump administration. For example, a <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/climate-policy-polling-2493266686.html" target="_self">2017 poll</a> by <a href="https://epic.uchicago.edu/news-events/news/infographic-where-americans-stand-climate-and-energy" target="_blank">AP-NORC and the Energy Policy Institute at The University of Chicago</a> found that 61 percent of Americans thought climate change was a threat that the federal government should act to mitigate. </p><p>The Washington Post poll questioned a random sample of 1,850 U.S. adults and was conducted in January and February of 2018. </p><p>Overall, it has important implications for the upcoming midterm elections which will determine which party controls the House and Senate. Eighty-two percent of demonstrators, who are largely upset with Trump, said they would be "certain" to vote in 2018.</p>
<p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-twitter_embed">
</p><div id="e1fb1" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="J2L34O1576661697"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="954371771351912449" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">Why We'll March Again https://t.co/aJVR5nzzxL @SierraClub @greenpeaceusa @foe_us @CleanAirMoms @MomsRising… https://t.co/BT9Ftewduu</div> — EcoWatch (@EcoWatch)<a href="https://twitter.com/EcoWatch/statuses/954371771351912449">1516374936.0</a></blockquote></div>
<p></p>
From Your Site Articles
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
First look at new NASA satellite map reveals global carbon dioxide hotspots. NASA
By Lauren McCauley
The amount of carbon in the Earth's atmosphere is now officially off the charts as the planet last week breached the 410 parts per million (ppm) milestone for the first time in human history.
<p>"It's a new atmosphere that humanity will have to contend with, one that's trapping more heat and causing the climate to change at a quickening rate," <a href="http://www.climatecentral.org/news/we-just-breached-the-410-parts-per-million-threshold-21372" target="_blank">wrote</a> Climate Central's Brian Kahn. "Carbon dioxide hasn't reached that height in millions of years."</p><p>The milestone was <a href="https://twitter.com/Keeling_curve/status/854882582877491200" target="_blank">recorded</a> Tuesday at the Mauna Loa Observatory in Hawaii by the Keeling Curve, a program of the Scripps Institution of Oceanography at University of California San Diego. Since the planet reached the <a href="https://www.commondreams.org/news/2016/05/10/dangerous-new-normal-400-ppm-carbon-baseline-expected-within-days" target="_blank">dangerous new normal</a> of <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/carbon-dioxide-levels-set-to-pass-400-ppm-and-remain-above-symbolic-th-1891173361.html">400 ppm last year</a>, scientists have <a href="http://e360.yale.edu/features/how-the-world-passed-a-carbon-threshold-400ppm-and-why-it-matters" target="_blank">warned</a> that that the accelerated rate at which concentrations of CO2 are rising means that humanity is marching further and further past the symbolic red line towards climate chaos.</p><p>What's more, as Aarne Granlund, a graduate student researching <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/climate-change/">climate change</a> at the University of the Arctic, pointed out, the recording was taken before carbon levels are expected to reach their annual peak, meaning they could soon notch even higher.</p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-twitter_embed"></p><p>But despite the unprecedented threat, climate action has <a href="https://www.commondreams.org/tag/scott-pruitt" target="_blank">ground to a halt</a> in the U.S. under the leadership of <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/trump-watch/">President Donald Trump</a> and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency chief <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/scott-pruitt">Scott Pruitt</a>, forcing campaigners and concerned citizens to take to the streets in droves to prompt the government to do something to address the threat of planetary devastation.<br></p><p><a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/march-for-science-truth-to-power-2375041158.html">Saturday's March for Science</a> saw tens of thousands of people <a href="https://www.commondreams.org/news/2017/04/22/march-science-sweeps-cities-around-world" target="_blank">rally</a> in Washington, DC and <a href="https://www.commondreams.org/news/2017/04/22/photos-scientists-worldwide-fight-back-against-anti-science-trump-agenda" target="_blank">across </a>the world to send a message to the Trump administration that governance should be based on research and facts—not ideology.</p><p>Speaking at the march in San Diego, Ralph Keeling, director of the CO2 program at Scripps whose father founded the Keeling Curve, gave an impassioned speech on why legislators need to abandon the partisan effort to stymie environmental legislation, <a href="https://twitter.com/SUPScientist/status/855833977663373312" target="_blank">declaring</a>: "The climate change debate has been over for decades."</p><p>Now, infused by the energy of the March for Science, campaigners are <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/march-science-earth-day-2372249213.html">gearing up</a> for next weekend's <a href="https://peoplesclimate.org/" target="_blank">Peoples Climate March</a> with a <a href="https://peoplesclimate.org/week-of-action/" target="_blank">week of action</a> that centers on creating a just transition away from fossil fuels.</p><p>"The Peoples Climate March is the next step for the March for Science, a call to get more engaged in our political system, to confront power and to demand solutions," explained May Boeve, executive director of <a href="https://350.org/" target="_blank">350.org</a>.</p><p>"The demands we will put forward—respect for Indigenous peoples, investments in communities on the front lines of the climate crisis, transitioning from fossil fuels to 100 percent clean energy economy that works for all and more," Boeve continued, "highlight the intersections between our different struggles and the common solutions we can work for together."</p><p>Dubbed "From Truth to Justice: Earth Day to May Day 2017," the more than 50 events in the lead-up to Saturday will include strategy sessions, a massive youth convergence, the <a href="https://www.facebook.com/events/648300702033923/" target="_blank">introduction</a> of a 100 percent Clean Energy Bill in Congress and non-violent direct actions.</p><p>On Friday, activists will form "Mother Earth's red line" on the Capitol lawn to symbolize the multiple lines that must not be crossed by corporations and governments in the increasingly severe climate crisis, organizers said.</p><p>"This is about strength in unity; diverse groups of people are coming together like never before and are creating a red line of protection against capitalism, militarism and racism," said Kandi Mossett, Indigenous energy and climate campaign organizer with the <a href="http://www.ienearth.org/" target="_blank">Indigenous Environmental Network</a>, one of the group's organizing the direct action. "We are here to push for solutions like Indigenous rights, <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/divest">divestment</a> and <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/renewable-energy/">renewable energy</a> as we continue to fight for a just transition away from a fossil fuel based economy." </p><p> <em>Reposted with permission from our media associate <a href="https://www.commondreams.org/news/2017/04/24/planet-breaches-410-ppm-back-back-protests-demand-trump-wake" target="_blank">Common Dreams</a>.</em></p>
Read More
Show Less
Tens of thousands of people celebrated Earth Day Saturday by taking to the streets in a historic day of action for science and truth. A massive March for Science took place in Washington, DC, and more than 600 sister marches took place in other cities around the world.
<p>"We are marching today to remind people everywhere, our lawmakers especially, of the significance of science for our health and our prosperity," <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/bill-nye-march-for-science-2338025789.html">Bill Nye</a>, honorary co-chair of the March for Science, told the crowd in DC.</p><p>Saturday's March for Science was the perfect launching pad to a <a href="https://peoplesclimate.org/week-of-action/" target="_blank">week of action</a> that will culminate in the <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/peoples-climate-march-2326255364.html">Peoples Climate March</a> in Washington, DC, on April 29. As Ploy Achakulwisut, PhD Candidate in Atmospheric Science at Harvard University, <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/march-science-earth-day-2372249213.html">put it</a>, "the Science March is about respecting science, the People's Climate March is about acting on it."<span></span></p><p>The week of action, dubbed "From Truth to Justice: Earth Day to May Day 2017," will feature more than 50 events, including the launch of visionary clean energy legislation, a speak-out of the <a href="http://ecowatch.com/community/Our_Childrens_Trust" target="_blank">21 young people</a> suing the U.S. government, massive youth convergence, direct actions and more.</p><p>"Scientists have not been eager to get politically involved, but in the face of unceasing attacks and organized denial, they're putting their credibility to good use," <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/community/bill_mckibben/">Bill McKibben</a>, <a href="http://350.org/" target="_blank">350.org</a> co-founder, said. "Now the rest of us can back them up next weekend when everyone gets to march!"</p><p>May Boeve, 350.org executive director, shared the same sentiment.</p><p><span></span>"The Peoples Climate March is the next step for the March for Science: a call to get more engaged in our political system, to confront power and to demand solutions," she said.</p><p>"The demands we will put forward—respect for Indigenous peoples, investments in communities on the front lines of the <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/climate-change/">climate crisis</a>, transitioning from fossil fuels to 100 percent clean energy economy that works for all, and more—highlight the intersections between our different struggles, and the common solutions we can work for together."</p><p>In addition to the march in DC this weekend, there will be <a href="https://peoplesclimate.org/sister-marches/" target="_blank">hundreds of sister marches</a> in cities across the globe.</p><p><span></span>Check out these amazing tweets from the March for Science:</p><div class="rm-embed embed-media"> <a class="twitter-timeline" data-dnt="true" href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/ScienceMarch" data-widget-id="856488303125778434">#ScienceMarch Tweets</a>
<script>!function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],p=/^http:/.test(d.location)?'http':'https';if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src=p+"://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js";fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document,"script","twitter-wjs");</script></div>
Read More
Show Less
'The Science March Is About Respecting Science, the People's Climate March Is About Acting on It'
21 April 2017
Popular
This Saturday's March for Science is inherently connected to the April 29 People's Climate March, climate scientists and environmentalists say: one march is about listening to science, the other is about acting on it.
<p>The <a href="https://www.marchforscience.com/" target="_blank">March for Science</a>, taking place on Earth Day, will march in defense of truth and scientific fact. A week later, these values will manifest at the People's Climate March where movements for climate, jobs and justice will put forward a vision to build bold solutions that tackle <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/climate-change/">climate change</a>, create and retain fair jobs, and bring forth justice truly for all. </p><p>"The Science March is about respecting science, the <a href="https://peoplesclimate.org/" target="_blank">People's Climate March</a> is about acting on it," said Ploy Achakulwisut, PhD Candidate in Atmospheric Science at Harvard University.</p><p>"Science has helped us understand the climate crisis, now we need to demand political action to help solve it. The March for Science calls for science-based policymaking, and the People's Climate March puts this value into practice by opposing Trump's reckless anti-climate agenda, defending the integrity of climate science and democracy, and standing up for justice." </p><p>The March for Science and People's Climate March will bring the fight for truth and justice right to the doorstep of the Trump administration. The <a href="https://peoplesclimate.org/week-of-action/" target="_blank">week of action</a>, dubbed "From Truth to Justice: Earth Day to May Day 2017," will see more than 50 events, including: climate education opportunities and the launch of visionary legislation, youth speak-outs and convergences, direct actions and more.</p><p>A series of climate education videos have been developed for use during the "Truth to Justice" week of action. The videos feature <a href="http://350.org/" target="_blank">350.org</a> co-founder Bill McKibben, actor and activist Maggie Gyllenhaal, renowned climate scientist James Hansen, longtime head of the EPA Environmental Justice program Mustafa Ali, and top atmospheric scientist Katharine Hayhoe.</p><div class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="deed28f23ab1e03fa21c75ca60e4805c"><div class="fb-video" data-href="https://facebook.com/EcoWatch/videos/1520354927977439/" data-allowfullscreen="true"></div></div><p>Many of the organizers and participants of the March for Science have backgrounds in climate science, and many have been advocating for bold climate action well before the election of Donald Trump.</p><p>"The March for Science and the People's Climate March go hand-in-hand," said MIT and Harvard renewable energy modeler Dr. Geoffrey Supran.</p><p>"Because attacks on science don't just hurt scientists, they hurt scientists' ability to protect the people, and climate change epitomizes that. When politicians cater to fossil fuel interests by denying the basic realities of climate science and pursuing anti-science climate policy, they endanger the jobs, justice, and livelihoods of ordinary people everywhere. The People's Climate March is about scientists and citizens uniting to protect the people and places we love by demanding that evidence, not ideology, inform policy."</p>
Read More
Show Less
Science isn't everything. But it is crucial to governing, decision-making, protecting human health and the environment and resolving questions and challenges around our existence.
<p>Those determined to advance industrial interests over all else often attack science. We've seen it in Canada, with a decade of cuts to research funding and scientific programs, muzzling of government scientists and rejection of evidence regarding issues such as <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/climate-change/">climate change</a>.<u></u><u></u></p><p>We're seeing worse in the U.S. The new administration is proposing <a href="http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2017/03/trumps-first-budget-analysis-and-reaction" target="_blank">drastic cuts</a> to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, National Institutes of Health, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, NASA and others. Information about climate change and environmental protection is being scrubbed from government websites, and scientists are being muzzled. Meanwhile, the government is increasing spending on military and nuclear weapons programs.<u></u><u></u></p><p>There's nothing wrong with challenging research, developing competing hypotheses and looking for flaws in studies. That's how science works. But rejecting, eliminating, covering up or attacking evidence that might call into question government or industry priorities—evidence that might show how those priorities could lead to widespread harm—is unconscionable. It's galling to me because I traded a scientific career for full-time communication work because good scientific information helps people make the best decisions to take us into the future.<u></u><u></u></p><p>Many scientists prefer to work quietly, letting their research speak for itself. But recent attacks are galvanizing scientists and supporters throughout the U.S. and elsewhere. The <a href="https://www.marchforscience.com/" target="_blank">March for Science</a> on Earth Day, April 22, has been building steam for months. The main march will take place in Washington, DC, but <a href="https://www.marchforscience.com/satellite-marches/" target="_blank">more than 425 marches</a> are planned around the world. That kicks off a week of action, culminating in the <a href="https://peoplesclimate.org/" target="_blank">Peoples Climate March</a> on April 29—also focused on Washington but with satellite marches throughout the world.<u></u><u></u></p><p>The March for Science website says organizers are "advocating for evidence-based policymaking, science education, research funding, and inclusive and accessible science."<u></u><u></u></p><p>The group's 850,000-member Facebook page is inspiring, with "advocates, science educators, scientists, and concerned citizens" sharing personal testimonials about their reasons for marching and why science is important to them, along with ideas for posters and slogans, questions about the march, articles about science and exposés of climate disinformation <a href="http://blog.ucsusa.org/guest-commentary/is-no-place-safe-climate-change-denialists-seek-to-sway-science-teachers" target="_blank">sent to schools and science teachers</a> by the anti-science <a href="http://davidsuzuki.org/blogs/science-matters/2013/09/attacks-on-climate-change-science-hinder-solutions/" target="_blank">Heartland Institute</a>.<u></u><u></u></p><p>March participants are a wide-ranging group, from a neuroscientist who is marching "for the thousands of people suffering from spinal cord injury" to sci-fi fans who are marching "Because you can't have science fiction without science!" to a scientist marching to honor "the many, many women and young girls interested or involved in science" to those marching "because we know climate change is real."<u></u><u></u></p><p>Celebrating and advocating for science is a good way to mark Earth Day. I'll be in <a href="https://evidencefordemocracy.ca/en/march-for-science-canada" target="_blank">Ottawa</a>, where a march is also taking place. David Suzuki Foundation senior editor Ian Hanington and I will launch our new book, <em><a href="https://greystonebooks.com/products/just-cool-it" target="_blank">Just Cool It!</a></em>, at an <a href="http://www.writersfestival.org/events/spring-2017/earth-day-2017-with-david-suzuki-ian-hanington-and-leanne-betasamosake-simpson" target="_blank">Ottawa Writers Festival</a> event that also features award-winning Nishnaabeg musician, scholar and writer <a href="https://www.leannesimpson.ca/" target="_blank">Leanne Betasamosake Simpson</a>.<u></u><u></u></p><p>Climate change is one area where anti-science rhetoric and actions at the highest levels of society are endangering human health and survival. Our book is a comprehensive look at the history and implications of climate science, the barriers to confronting the crisis and the many solutions required to resolve it.<u></u><u></u></p><p>It's discouraging to witness the current attacks on science, and the ever-increasing consequences of climate change, diminishing ocean health and other human-caused problems, but seeing so many people standing up for science and humanity is reason for optimism. Of all the many solutions to global warming and other environmental problems, none is as powerful as people getting together to demand change.<u></u><u></u></p><p>Every day should be Earth Day, but it's good to have a special day to remind us of the importance of protecting the air, water, soil and biodiversity that we all depend on for health and survival. Politicians are supposed to work for the long-term well-being of people who elect them, not to advance the often short-sighted agendas of those who pay large sums of money to get their way regardless of the consequences. Standing together to make ourselves heard is one of the best ways to ensure they fulfill their responsibilities.<u></u><u></u></p>
Read More
Show Less
As President Donald Trump takes aim at Earth science with his proposed NASA cuts, the Autonomous Space Agency Network (ASAN) has launched the "first protest in space."
<p>The independent space agency, which advocates for DIY space exploration, launched a weather balloon 90,000 feet above Earth carrying a rude tweet directed at Trump's frequently used Twitter handle, literally taking the act of protesting the president to new heights:</p><p style="margin-left: 20px;">"@realDonaldTrump LOOK AT THAT, YOU SON OF A BITCH"</p><p>The ballon lifted off on April 12, or Yuri's Night, named for Yuri Gagarin, the first human to launch into space. </p><p>The missive was in reference to the words of the late Edgar Mitchell, NASA astronaut and sixth person to walk on the moon, who once said about his humbling experience in space:<br></p><p style="margin-left: 20px;">"From out there on the Moon, international politics look so petty. You want to grab a politician by the scruff of the neck and drag him a quarter of a million miles out and say, 'Look at that, you son of a bitch.'"</p><p>ASAN's feat was also in solidarity with the upcoming <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/march-for-science">March for Science</a> on April 22, Earth Day.</p><p><span></span>In case you are wondering, it does not actually cost that much to send a tweet to space. The whole operation only set back ASAN <a href="https://twitter.com/ASANspace/status/852665234611347460" target="_blank">$750</a> for two helium tanks, 160 cubic feet of helium, a camera and a balloon. </p><p><span></span>Trump's reaction, if he were to see the suborbital slam, is sure to be priceless. </p><p><span></span>Watch the whole execution here:</p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-youtube"><span style="display:block;position:relative;padding-top:56.25%;" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="5697ad3c6dabab8e49aa3bcecd2eb84e"><iframe type="lazy-iframe" data-runner-src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/damWIvQn1Eo?rel=0" width="100%" height="auto" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" style="position:absolute;top:0;left:0;width:100%;height:100%;"></iframe></span></p>
Read More
Show Less
Trending
Average carbon dioxide concentrations, Oct. 1 - Nov. 11, 2014, measured by the Orbiting Carbon Observatory-2 satellite. Photo credit: NASA
In an effort to understand how climate change is altering the carbon cycle, a project between the University of Oklahoma and NASA is headed to space. Orbiting 22,000 miles above Earth's surface, this host of instruments will track carbon as it flows through the Earth delivering real-time data and helping scientists quantify just how much humans are affecting the planet.
<p>The carbon cycle is an inconspicuous, but vital, system in all ecosystems, including marine habitats, forests and even deserts. All plants need carbon to complete photosynthesis, and when they die, that carbon is either released back into the atmosphere, or buried deep under ground to create fossil fuels over thousands of years. As we are seeing today, the carbon cycle plays a huge role in temperature fluctuation and weather patterns and unfortunately, the more carbon we trap in the atmosphere, the more unpredictable these fluctuations become. </p><p>The University of Oklahoma is calling the mission the Earth Venture Mission, and the payload (the part that will attach to one of Earth's satellites) is called the Geostationary Carbon Observatory, or <a href="https://www.nasa.gov/press-release/nasa-announces-first-geostationary-vegetation-atmospheric-carbon-mission" target="_blank">GeoCarb</a>. Although it may seem like an extreme measure to take, scientists believe it is necessary. The increase of carbon in the atmosphere well surpassed the <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/noaa-carbon-dioxide-levels-2321635970.html" target="_blank">point of no return</a>—or carbon threshold—in 2016 and has continued to steadily rise above 400 parts per million. This is rapid warming compared to the 280 ppm that persisted for thousands of years before the industrial revolution. Scientists say we've reached a state of unknown, and launching the GeoCarb is our best bet in being able to predict where we go from here. </p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-rebelmouse-image"><img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy85ODEzODY2L29yaWdpbi5wbmciLCJleHBpcmVzX2F0IjoxNjQwNjA4MzI4fQ.n6TvWocnbg_ETqVVhpTbX4J39_9ndT-4BfcLq9faaq8/img.png?width=980" id="6f7c5" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="0ce4ac023b9895cc1456b8671aaf9e17" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image"><small class="image-media media-caption" placeholder="Add Photo Caption...">From 1958 to 2017, carbon has been shy rocketing. </small><small class="image-media media-photo-credit" placeholder="add photo credit..."> Scripps Institution of Oceanography</small></p><p>The GeoCarb will rotate in tandem with Earth at 85 degrees west longitude where it will be able to record human activity in developed nations from urbanized areas to agricultural lands. It will take measurements of carbon dioxide, methane and carbon monoxide once or even twice daily. It will also measure solar induced fluorescence, which is the light that plants can't absorb and is therefore repelled from Earth. This measurement will be closely tied to the rate of photosynthesis, and will help map out where carbon sinks exist. The map will also help scientists understand where there is a natural release in carbon, such as when a plant dies and decays, versus when human-induced carbon is released. It will be the first time scientists are able to watch the Western Hemisphere breathe in and out every day.</p><p>"Knowing what fraction of these changes is caused by human activities is important for understanding our impact on the planet, and observing and measuring it is essential to any conversation about strategies for reducing CO2 emissions," Berrien Moore, director of the National Weather Center at the University of Oklahoma, told <a href="https://theconversation.com/watching-the-planet-breathe-studying-earths-carbon-cycle-from-space-72344" target="_blank">The Conversation</a>.</p><p>"These observations, along with direct measurements of photosynthetic activity from SIF observations, will raise our understanding of the carbon cycle to a new level." <br></p>
From Your Site Articles
Read More
Show Less
By Brenda Ekwurzel
I have had the thrill of sharing the latest discoveries in the classroom with students who asked probing questions, when I was a faculty member of a university. That journey of discovery is one that parents and family members delight in hearing about when students come home and share what they have found particularly intriguing.
<p>What if the information the student shared was not based on the best available evidence? Misinformation would begin to spread more widely. If corrected, the student might distrust the teacher who may have not known the source material was compromised.</p><p>This scenario is not fiction. It has happened and <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/heartland-institute-climate-science-2334892782.html" target="_blank">may still be occurring</a> in some U.S. schools. Anyone concerned about this can learn more with an update forthcoming from those who keep track—the National Center for Science Education (<a href="https://ncse.com/" target="_blank">NCSE</a>).</p><p>According to the NCSE, during October 2013 educators <a href="https://ncse.com/files/nipcc.pdf" target="_blank">received</a> a packet chock full of misinformation about <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/climate-change/">climate change</a>. The report includes an abbreviation that looked similar to a highly respected source—the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change—for international climate assessments.</p><p>It has happened again (starting in March 2017). Many teachers found a packet in their mailbox with a report from the same group that spread the misinformation back in October 2013. This report has a "second edition" gold highlight with a cover image of water flowing over a dam and a misleading title.</p><p>The report runs counter to the agreement among scientists who publish on <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/climate-change/">climate change</a> in the peer-reviewed scientific literature. More than 97 percent of scientists <a href="http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/8/2/024024/meta;jsessionid=CA704F6EEFD42EE913AC9AFC639A0927.c5.iopscience.cld.iop.org" target="_blank">agree</a> that climate change is caused by human activities.</p><p>The Heartland Institute is <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/heartland-institute-climate-science-2334892782.html">infamous</a> for its rejection of climate science and <a href="https://green.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/05/04/a-new-tactic-for-climate-skeptics/?_r=0" target="_blank">unsavory tactics</a>. According to a reported statement by the CEO of Heartland Institute, they <a href="http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/article/climate-change-skeptic-group-seeks-to-influence-200000-teachers/">plan to keep sending</a> out copies to educators over the weeks ahead.</p>
<p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-twitter_embed"></p><div id="96b48" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="E9XNX31491663931"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="847557839849742337" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">Koch-Funded Group Tries to Persuade 200,000 Science Teachers That Climate Change Is Debatable https://t.co/Qd4qFk8hYL @ALECExposed @prwatch</div> — EcoWatch (@EcoWatch)<a href="https://twitter.com/EcoWatch/statuses/847557839849742337">1490908510.0</a></blockquote></div><p></p>
<p>If you see any student or teacher with this report or DVD please let <a href="https://ncse.com/" target="_blank">NCSE</a> know about it and share what you have learned to help stop the spread.</p><p><em><a href="http://blog.ucsusa.org/author/brenda-ekwurzel" target="_blank">Brenda Ekwurzel</a> is a senior climate scientist and the director of climate science at the <a href="http://www.ucsusa.org/" target="_blank">Union of Concerned Scientists</a>.</em></p>
Read More
Show Less
The March for Science has announced three honorary national co-chairs for the April 22 march in Washington, DC.
They are: Dr. Mona Hanna-Attisha, a pediatrician and key whistleblower of the Flint water crisis, Dr. Lydia Villa-Komaroff, a biologist who made critical contributions to how bacterial cells could be used to generate insulin, and Bill Nye, beloved science educator and CEO of The Planetary Society.
<p>
According to a Planetary Society <a href="http://www.planetary.org/blogs/bill-nye/20170330-bill-nye-marching-for-science.html" target="_blank">blog post</a>, Nye is marching to "celebrate science," "advocate for space" and "inspire unity."
</p><p>
"The March for Science champions robustly funded and publicly communicated science as a pillar of human freedom and prosperity," the post stated. "We unite as a diverse, nonpartisan group to call for science that upholds the common good and for political leaders and policymakers to enact evidence-based policies in the public interest."
</p><p>"See you in Washington, and around the world," the Science Guy signed off. </p><p>
Thousands of scientists and science advocates plan to descend on the nation's capital this Earth Day. More than 400 satellite rallies have also been organized around the country.</p><p>The march has grown into an international movement since it was first hatched in January but it was not without its share of controversies. </p><p>A recent <a href="https://www.buzzfeed.com/azeenghorayshi/march-for-science-diversity?utm_term=.uiqAPZrBj#.ltgX5EY03" target="_blank">Buzzfeed News</a> report highlighted concerns over diversity as well as the mixing of political goals with scientific goals. </p><p>As Buzzfeed reported, "As recently as last week, Nye was slated to be the march's first honorary co-chair. But after a fresh round of complaints that the group was not taking diversity issues seriously enough, Hanna-Attisha and Villa-Komaroff, both women of color who have long fought for science to serve communities it has traditionally left behind, were added to the lineup."</p><p>Hanna-Attisha is a first-generation Iraqi immigrant who has spoken out about the Trump administration's proposed immigration restrictions. Villa-Komaroff is a Mexican American who co-founded the Society for Advancement of Chicanos/Hispanics and Native Americans (<a href="http://sacnas.org/" target="_blank">SACNAS</a>). </p><p><span></span>"Science, and our society, are stronger when the people doing science reflect our society as a whole," Villa-Komaroff said.</p>
Read More
Show Less