Can we talk about Trump's war on the scientific community?

[Amarok]

Take it from us up here . This is what it looks like when your government censors scientists.

[Cato]

There are public disclosure laws on the books which even Trump cannot violate. He can however control how information gets to the public. I'm trying to find the itemized list of instructions I saw on this matter. It suggested that the ban was temporary as people were put into place to vet/spin public communication. Every administration establishes standards and protocols for public engagement. The ban, even if temporary, is highly unusual. The list I saw had a timeline of vetting all public addresses and webinars through February. This also suggests that this is transition related. We'll have to wait and see.

Even if temporary, I would have allowed normal communication flow as I made changes, even if just for the sake of perception.

Regardless, the EPA can hardly be considered a paragon of transparency when it comes to public communication. Let us not forget the secret email accounts that caused heads to roll in the not too distant past.

http://www.weeklystandard.com/the-epas-s...cle/703151

---

Seems like the right place to share this without creating another thread. John Farrell of the New York Times, with POTUS press pool experience, has an opinion on Trump's lack of engagement with the media. He suggests that we should expect a deluge of 'leaks' throughout the administration and is encouraging journalists to make these the basis for reporting administration activity.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/24/opini...egion&_r=0

[Autumnlicious]

Cato, you always find a way to justify the inexcusable.

Trump doesn't need real facts to justify his actions - after all, he did have the biggest inauguration ever*.

But really, you can play counterpoint to your hearts content, but it really is wasted.

Mainly because the Trump administration doesn't need to react to a real event to put forth a reactionary policy - they've already shown the ability to imagine an event to justify a policy change.

* No, it wasn't a large inauguration if we judge by the last six presidents as a measure of performance.

[Cato]

Moros,

What's with the inauguration bit? I don't believe I've registered a comment in that regard here or in the thread dedicated to that topic. For the record, he's obviously wrong and is consistent with his never ending buffoonery. 

I also haven't justified anything. In fact, I clearly stated that I disagreed with the communication bans. My insurance/death thread contribution is certainly counterpoint; however, what I am mostly attempting to do is provide a different perspective for the sake of dialogue rather than simply increasing the volume of the echo chamber.

[RoadRunner79]

My first inclination with this, was to wait for more information (something a little more than gossip). It seems that I was right to do so.
http://www.uncommondescent.com/intellige...-is-false/

I can understand the fears, I have them to. It would be the same if Hillary had won. However, I think the important question is, wether you where hoping this story was correct or not?

[Aroura]

My first inclination with this, was to wait for more information (something a little more than gossip). It seems that I was right to do so.
http://www.uncommondescent.com/intellige...-is-false/

I can understand the fears, I have them to. It would be the same if Hillary had won. However, I think the important question is, wether you where hoping this story was correct or not?

Nope, I read that. This site cannot disseminate information well.

The USDA one seems to have been self inflicted and is already gone, but the bigger deal, the EPA one, is for real.

Sorry, but the gag order on the EPA is real and includes scientific research.

[Edwardo Piet]

Trump makes me sick.

[RoadRunner79]

I still wait for something more substantial and detailed......

[Anomalocaris]

Why so surprised?  Science deals in facts.  The WLB deals in Alternative "Facts."

Our descent to 3d world status is accelerating.

Just as a plaurality of the third world is rising out of third world status.    At the end of the 21st century, the hipster youths of china, India and Africa who could never be bothered with knowing anything that happened before 2080 would laugh in contemptuous dismissal at the any suggestion that the backward theocratic hellhole of midlatitude North America may ever have had any pretense to international significance in science, economy or geopolitics since, like, that Spanish Magellan dude. Or was that Colombo.

[Cato]

Just as a plaurality of the third world is rising out of third world status.    At the end of the 21st century, the hipster youths of china, India and Africa who could never be bothered with knowing anything that happened before 2080 would laugh in contemptuous dismissal at the any suggestion that the backward theocratic hellhole of midlatitude North America may ever have had any pretense to international significance in science, economy or geopolitics since, like, that Spanish Magellan dude.  Or was that Colombo.

Magellan? You could have used Neil Armstrong or Edmund Hillary, at least they had the distinction of completing their journey. Despite our vocal evangelicals, the U.S. can hardly be considered a backward theocratic hellhole. Like it or not, our contribution to science, economy and geopolitics will not soon be forgotten; certainly not by your future hipsters only a scant 83 years from now. Hyperbole is only effective as long as it maintains some semblance of truth.