Dozens Of Pissed-Off Scientists Swarm Capitol To Talk About Bush Interference In Policy, Science

[hatrack]

EDIT

The scientists say political appointees at Interior, or those who report to them, have been altering their reports recommending "critical habitat" preservation to favor industries whose interests conflict with the findings. They singled out decisions by Julie A. MacDonald, former deputy assistant secretary for fish, wildlife and parks. She was criticized last year by Interior's inspector general for repeatedly instructing scientists at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to change recommendations on safeguarding plants and animals from oil and gas drilling, power lines, and real estate development. MacDonald, who had no science background, resigned in April.

Interior Department spokesman Shane Wolf said Deputy Secretary Lynn Scarlett met for two hours with the scientists and is committed to maintaining the integrity of endangered species decisions. In July, Scarlett requested that career officials review hundreds of decisions that may have been inappropriately influenced, and eight were found to warrant possible revision.

EDIT

Peter Rafle, spokesman for the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, said the committee is working with Interior on a date for a hearing within the next few weeks. "We think there are at least 50 different species decisions" that appear more politically than environmentally motivated, said Jon Hunter, policy director at the Washington-based Endangered Species Coalition. To some on the Hill, "this is eye-opening, when they recognize this issue is widespread," he said. But with elections looming, "this is going to be a tough year to get some things done."

EDIT

Stuart Pimm, professor of conservation ecology at Duke University and a 30-year veteran of renowned environmental battles, says he is fed up. He has worked for two decades on Everglades conservation and says that under this administration, he is seeing his habitat preservation suggestions steamrolled, as it were. "In the past, scientists have written their reports, said, 'This is what the science is,' and the policymakers made their decisions from it," he said. Now, he said, "decisions that come out of Fish and Wildlife ignore the science and fabricate evidence in the crudest, most unsophisticated way."

EDIT/END

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/15/AR2008011503428.html

[OKIsItJustMe]

1. I don't belive that dozens can "swarm"

But I'm glad they're making a ruckus!

[truedelphi]

2. IS there a word for dozens of scientists?

It's not flock or pod, or school, or pride (though a rare scientist or two may be snotty) nor as you point out, is it swarm.

So what is it?

Anyway the scientific community gave up on Bush at least three years ago. You know your country is in trouble when members of the American Chemical Society want to lynch a President.


I don't know what the word for large numbers of chemists is either.

[OKIsItJustMe]

3. Well, one could use "dozens of scientists"

The question is which verb is appropriate.

I rather like descend in this case (as in "Dozens of Pissed off Scientists Descend on Capitol...")


As for a collective noun, I guess it depends on their specialty:
http://jcs.biologists.org/cgi/content/full/114/13/2355

[truedelphi]

6. That is a wonderful and very funny article

Will be passed around at the dinner table

[phantom power]

4. how about: "a symposium of scientists"

[diane in sf]

7. How about a scintilla of scientists?

[jtrockville]

5. According to Williamson, they SWARMED because...

because they're mad as vespinae.

* shrugs *

Works for me :)

[Kurovski]

8. Anybody remember the scathing, sarcastic editorials written by the Scientific American

about The Bush Administration's anti-science stance?