The Environmental Protection Agency ( EPA ) is not what it used to be . or else of actually protecting the surroundings , it ’s now being headed by Scott Pruitt , a climate - denying attorney superior general that was instrumental in convincing the President to take the country out of the Paris agreement . Scientists there are beingbullied , censor , anddismissedwith heady abandon .
The forged thing that Pruitt has done during his time at the helm , however , is to suggest that the basic skill of climate change should bedebated by a committeecomposed of two teams : one of actual believable climatologist and another of fervid climate sceptic .
This is indubitably a terrible idea , as people have been point out on chirrup .
But nevertheless , Pruitt is immune to such logic . Doubling - down on this “ red team - blue team ” approach , he now plan to televise it to the commonwealth .
“ There are lots of questions that have not been require and answered ( about clime alteration ) , ” EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt explain in an audience withReuterson Monday . “ Who better to do that than a group of scientists … get together and get a robust discussion for all the earth to see . ”
When asked if he believe it should be broadcast on hot tv , he answer in the affirmative , saying that “ the American people would be very interested in consuming that . I think they merit it . ”
allow ’s get something very clean here . skill is decided by constructive argument between scientist presenting the best data uncommitted . What Pruitt is trying to set up here is a way to discredit the 97 to 99 percent of scientists that accord theclimate is changing , and we are commute it .
By splitting the panel between scientists and skeptics 50/50 , he ’s giving the impression that the science is not make up , and that there is still a massive degree of uncertainty within the scientific residential area . This is nothing less than a blatant attempt to discredit scientific discipline and those supporting cut to greenhouse gun emissions .
Imagine this happening to any other field of scientific discipline . Imagine the best doctor , nurses , clinical practitioner , and biomedical researchers sitting on a committee that was share evenly by anti - vaxxer confederacy theoriser . There ’s a good reason this wo n’t happen – although lest we forget the President is , or at least is likely , a vaccine skeptic himself .
How the debate between scientist and denier should play out . LastWeekTonightvia YouTube
Despite the fact that the bulk of the world is scientifically literate and brook the Paris agreement , the broadcast medium of this “ debate ” would be a powerful way to seed seeded player of distrustfulness within the public . It would be a frightening number of defamation , an example of nothing less than pro - fossil fuel propaganda .
Pruitt ’s EPA is not just a vestige of its former ego . It ’s chop-chop becoming the enemy to science , reason , and the environs itself .
