Real Science Is Not Tailored to Ideology
Gregg Easterbrook does a fine job of attacking a straw man in his April 6 commentary, “Politics and Science Do Mix.” Most scientists are not arguing that scientific results should not be used for political purposes; rather, that if scientific results are going to be used for political purposes, then it should be high-quality, peer-reviewed science that is used. The major complaint from scientists is that the Bush administration distorts scientific results, too often throwing out the best science and replacing it with questionable studies that are chosen because they fit an ideological point of view.
Richard T. Robertson
Costa Mesa
The Union of Concerned Scientists does not suppress data, even if it has a critical view of it. It has a history of addressing such issues within the realm of scientific debate. The problem with the Bush administration is that it is not doing science by repressing data that go against its views. If scientists were to do that in publishing, they could lose their careers.
As for ignoring Bush’s science advisor, John H. Marburger III: He is not the issue. We know what happens with competent members of the Bush administration who give sound advice (former counterterrorism chief Richard Clarke, former Treasury Secretary Paul O’Neill). Anyone ready for a Marburger book in 2005?
Michael Campbell
Anaheim Hills
Start your day right
Sign up for Essential California for news, features and recommendations from the L.A. Times and beyond in your inbox six days a week.
You may occasionally receive promotional content from the Los Angeles Times.
