AkaSci 🛰️
@AkaSci@fosstodon.org  ·  activity timestamp 4 days ago

Here is the 459-page review written by 85 scientists in response to the DOE Climate Working Group report, which was published on July 29, and which mocks climate science, extols the virtues of higher CO2 levels and argues for expanded use of fossil fuels to meet energy needs.

Home website with links to docs - https://sites.google.com/tamu.edu/doeresponse/home
#Climate#DOE#Science
1/n

First page of the press release from the review group - Leading Scientists Conclude DOE’s New Climate Report is “Not Scientifically Credible” Expert review exposes cherry-picked evidence, lack of peer review, and predetermined outcome Today, more than 85 climate experts released a review of the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)’s new climate report, finding it biased, full of errors, and not fit to inform policymaking. In a carefully documented response, this large group of experts highlights DOE’s reliance on discredited research, misrepresentation of evidence, and failure to follow the peer review processes expected of credible scientific assessments. Employing tactics similar to those used by the tobacco industry, the DOE convened just five hand-picked authors well-known for manufacturing the appearance of scientific uncertainty about the dangers of climate change. Their report seeks to downplay the risks of record-breaking heat, intense rainfall, worsening wildfires, rising sea levels, and widespread health harms – all well-established by decades of peer-reviewed science. The release comes as the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to revoke its 2009 Endangerment Finding, eliminating its role in regulating climate pollution, and as the Trump administration pushes to expand fossil fuel production while cutting incentives for clean energy. EPA’s proposed rule relies heavily upon the DOE report for its scientific backing. ...
First page of the press release from the review group - Leading Scientists Conclude DOE’s New Climate Report is “Not Scientifically Credible” Expert review exposes cherry-picked evidence, lack of peer review, and predetermined outcome Today, more than 85 climate experts released a review of the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)’s new climate report, finding it biased, full of errors, and not fit to inform policymaking. In a carefully documented response, this large group of experts highlights DOE’s reliance on discredited research, misrepresentation of evidence, and failure to follow the peer review processes expected of credible scientific assessments. Employing tactics similar to those used by the tobacco industry, the DOE convened just five hand-picked authors well-known for manufacturing the appearance of scientific uncertainty about the dangers of climate change. Their report seeks to downplay the risks of record-breaking heat, intense rainfall, worsening wildfires, rising sea levels, and widespread health harms – all well-established by decades of peer-reviewed science. The release comes as the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to revoke its 2009 Endangerment Finding, eliminating its role in regulating climate pollution, and as the Trump administration pushes to expand fossil fuel production while cutting incentives for clean energy. EPA’s proposed rule relies heavily upon the DOE report for its scientific backing. ...
First page of the press release from the review group - Leading Scientists Conclude DOE’s New Climate Report is “Not Scientifically Credible” Expert review exposes cherry-picked evidence, lack of peer review, and predetermined outcome Today, more than 85 climate experts released a review of the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)’s new climate report, finding it biased, full of errors, and not fit to inform policymaking. In a carefully documented response, this large group of experts highlights DOE’s reliance on discredited research, misrepresentation of evidence, and failure to follow the peer review processes expected of credible scientific assessments. Employing tactics similar to those used by the tobacco industry, the DOE convened just five hand-picked authors well-known for manufacturing the appearance of scientific uncertainty about the dangers of climate change. Their report seeks to downplay the risks of record-breaking heat, intense rainfall, worsening wildfires, rising sea levels, and widespread health harms – all well-established by decades of peer-reviewed science. The release comes as the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to revoke its 2009 Endangerment Finding, eliminating its role in regulating climate pollution, and as the Trump administration pushes to expand fossil fuel production while cutting incentives for clean energy. EPA’s proposed rule relies heavily upon the DOE report for its scientific backing. ...
AkaSci 🛰️
@AkaSci@fosstodon.org  ·  activity timestamp 4 days ago

Here is the 459-page review written by 85 scientists in response to the DOE Climate Working Group report, which was published on July 29, and which mocks climate science, extols the virtues of higher CO2 levels and argues for expanded use of fossil fuels to meet energy needs.

Home website with links to docs - https://sites.google.com/tamu.edu/doeresponse/home
#Climate#DOE#Science
1/n

First page of the press release from the review group - Leading Scientists Conclude DOE’s New Climate Report is “Not Scientifically Credible” Expert review exposes cherry-picked evidence, lack of peer review, and predetermined outcome Today, more than 85 climate experts released a review of the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)’s new climate report, finding it biased, full of errors, and not fit to inform policymaking. In a carefully documented response, this large group of experts highlights DOE’s reliance on discredited research, misrepresentation of evidence, and failure to follow the peer review processes expected of credible scientific assessments. Employing tactics similar to those used by the tobacco industry, the DOE convened just five hand-picked authors well-known for manufacturing the appearance of scientific uncertainty about the dangers of climate change. Their report seeks to downplay the risks of record-breaking heat, intense rainfall, worsening wildfires, rising sea levels, and widespread health harms – all well-established by decades of peer-reviewed science. The release comes as the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to revoke its 2009 Endangerment Finding, eliminating its role in regulating climate pollution, and as the Trump administration pushes to expand fossil fuel production while cutting incentives for clean energy. EPA’s proposed rule relies heavily upon the DOE report for its scientific backing. ...
First page of the press release from the review group - Leading Scientists Conclude DOE’s New Climate Report is “Not Scientifically Credible” Expert review exposes cherry-picked evidence, lack of peer review, and predetermined outcome Today, more than 85 climate experts released a review of the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)’s new climate report, finding it biased, full of errors, and not fit to inform policymaking. In a carefully documented response, this large group of experts highlights DOE’s reliance on discredited research, misrepresentation of evidence, and failure to follow the peer review processes expected of credible scientific assessments. Employing tactics similar to those used by the tobacco industry, the DOE convened just five hand-picked authors well-known for manufacturing the appearance of scientific uncertainty about the dangers of climate change. Their report seeks to downplay the risks of record-breaking heat, intense rainfall, worsening wildfires, rising sea levels, and widespread health harms – all well-established by decades of peer-reviewed science. The release comes as the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to revoke its 2009 Endangerment Finding, eliminating its role in regulating climate pollution, and as the Trump administration pushes to expand fossil fuel production while cutting incentives for clean energy. EPA’s proposed rule relies heavily upon the DOE report for its scientific backing. ...
First page of the press release from the review group - Leading Scientists Conclude DOE’s New Climate Report is “Not Scientifically Credible” Expert review exposes cherry-picked evidence, lack of peer review, and predetermined outcome Today, more than 85 climate experts released a review of the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)’s new climate report, finding it biased, full of errors, and not fit to inform policymaking. In a carefully documented response, this large group of experts highlights DOE’s reliance on discredited research, misrepresentation of evidence, and failure to follow the peer review processes expected of credible scientific assessments. Employing tactics similar to those used by the tobacco industry, the DOE convened just five hand-picked authors well-known for manufacturing the appearance of scientific uncertainty about the dangers of climate change. Their report seeks to downplay the risks of record-breaking heat, intense rainfall, worsening wildfires, rising sea levels, and widespread health harms – all well-established by decades of peer-reviewed science. The release comes as the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to revoke its 2009 Endangerment Finding, eliminating its role in regulating climate pollution, and as the Trump administration pushes to expand fossil fuel production while cutting incentives for clean energy. EPA’s proposed rule relies heavily upon the DOE report for its scientific backing. ...
petersuber
@petersuber@fediscience.org  ·  activity timestamp 6 months ago

Update. It's just a coincidence that the newer open letter to Congress in the previous post, this thread (nd but approx March 3) …
https://ucs-documents.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/science-network/Scientific-Society-Sign-On-Letter-signed-2-28-25.pdf

… and this older letter (nd but approx Feb 17) …
https://unitedsciencealliance.org/

… were both initially signed by 48 scientific societies. They're different letters, organized by different groups, and signed by (mostly) different societies.

#DefendResearch #Trump#USPol#USPolitics
petersuber
@petersuber@fediscience.org replied  ·  activity timestamp 6 months ago

Update. The American Physical Society (#APS, @apsphysics) is running a survey on the impact of cuts to US science #funding. Please take it if you're affected or likely to be affected.
https://apsphysics.fillout.com/t/6ESUva3vwGus

"This survey collects stories showcasing the transformative positive impact of #NSF, #NIST, #DOE, #NASA, and #DOD-funded research and programs as well as what would be lost if support for basic research evaporates. You can document your experiences and share how recent executive actions have impacted you. Individual stories will be only be used publicly with permission or when fully anonymized."

#DefendResearch #Trump#USPol#USPolitics
petersuber
@petersuber@fediscience.org  ·  activity timestamp 7 months ago

Update. "While we at the #PEGI Project [Preservation of Electronic Government Information] have been aware of the potential for a crisis like this since the start of our project in 2017, both the pace and extent of the removals and changes have been astonishing to witness. What has also been astonishing (and heartening!) is the willingness of a broad community to join together in quick action to save content, particularly data that cannot be easily captured as part of the End of Term Archive. The Public Environmental Data Partners, a project launched by the Environmental Data Governance Initiative (EDGI), has been working on collecting and preserving hard-to-crawl environmental data for the past couple of months. In the past two weeks, a coalition has formed to launch the Data Rescue Project, which then debuted its Data Rescue Tracker. They also have a helpful (and well-vetted!) list of Resources that can guide individuals and organizations wanting to contribute to this work."
https://www.pegiproject.org/blog/2025/2/14/pegi-project-urges-preservation-of-public-federal-data

#Censorship#DefendResearch#OpenData#Preservation#Takedowns #Trump#USPol#USPolitics
petersuber
@petersuber@fediscience.org replied  ·  activity timestamp 6 months ago

Update. "A Renewed Call for Preservation of At-Risk Government Data"
https://www.icpsr.umich.edu/web/about/cms/6103

"The directors of the University of Michigan's Institute for Social Research (#ISR) and the Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research (#ICPSR) are emphasizing the critical need for preserving government data that may be at risk due to recent policy shifts....Through #DataLumos, an ICPSR archive for valuable government data resources, ICPSR is helping the data community to preserve, document, and disseminate thousands of files from agencies such as the Centers for Disease Control [#CDC] and the Department of Education [#DOE]."

#Censorship#DefendResearch#Preservation#Takedowns #Trump#USPol#USPolitics