The government continues to attempt to justify political actions based on “peer reviewed” science, with the public not understanding that they are being manipulated by politicians.

First, it is important to understand the “peer review” process.

A proposed paper is reviewed for clarity and obvious technical errors by fellow scientists who have a working knowledge of the subject matter. This is part of the pre-publication process to weed out obvious defects in the paper to be published.

These “peer” scientists do not express an opinion on the validity of the research or the merits of the presentation. They are simply well-informed copy editors who point out obvious mistakes and areas where the writing is ambiguous and unclear.

The “peer review” process has been severely compromised in the past by allowing the public to believe that the “peers” are actually endorsing the reviewed scientists findings. In addition, at least with respect to global warming papers in formerly well-respected journals, some editors appear to have refused to allow certain papers with an opposing viewpoint from being published.

And second, it is important to understand that the portrayal of results can be not-so-subtlety influenced by the sponsors of the research. In the case of papers whose researchers appear to have been funded by institutions linked to energy companies, the cry of bias is often heard. Never mentioning that the overwhelming amount of research is funded by individual states and the federal government which often uses such research to justify public policy leading to enlarged government, increased taxes and the loss of personal freedoms – such as the right to purchase and use certain types of lightbulbs, toilets and vehicles.

An example of government misstatement and misdirection for political purposes …

The Office of the Inspector General of the Department of Interior notes …

“The Office of Inspector General (OIG) completed its investigation into the allegation that senior U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI) officials, in an effort to help justify their decision to impose a 6-month moratorium on deepwater drilling in the Gulf of Mexico, misrepresented that the moratorium was reviewed and supported by a group of scientists and industry experts.”

Spinning the story for political advantage …

“The scientists and industry experts who peer reviewed the safety recommendations contained in the 30-Day Report to the President, relative to deepwater drilling operations in the Outer Continental Shelf, expressed concern that the Executive Summary to the 30-Day Report which
contained a policy decision by the Secretary of the Interior to recommend a 6-month
moratorium on deepwater exploratory drilling - was worded in a manner that implied that the experts had also peer reviewed and supported this policy decision.”

The major point being that the “peer review” process is more than an editorial procedure and implies that the peer reviewers accepted, vetted and supported the information which was presented for peer review … which is far from the truth.

When the truth was revealed in a report…

All DOI officials interviewed stated that it was not their intention to imply that the
moratorium had been peer reviewed by the experts, and that when the experts' concern was brought to their attention, they promptly issued an apology to the experts via conference call, letter, and personal meeting.”

Where, might I ask, is the apology to the American people for the Obama Administration’s misdirection and the cure for the damage caused by the Administration to those already suffering from what was characterized as the “worst environmental disaster” in history? And it appears that the government was willing to place the costs of an improper moratorium on BP – to further suck money out of a publicly-owned corporation. Made more so shocking as it was BP who participated in the writing of Obama’s cap-and-trade initiative and spent millions supporting far-left democrats and their causes.

Of course, it was all a mistake: no harm, no foul …

“While the 30-Day Report's Executive Summary could have been more clearly worded, the Department has not definitively violated the IQA [Information Quality Act].”

“For example, the recommendation for a moratorium is not contained in the safety report itself. Furthermore, the Executive Summary does not indicate that the peer reviewers approved any of the Report's recommendations.”

“The Department also appears to have adequately remedied the IQA concerns by communicating directly with the experts, offering a formal apology, and publicly clarifying the nature of the peer review.”

Of course, there was no indication that the peer reviewers approved any of the Report’s recommendations … that was the misdirection and misperception that was allowed to hang in the air.

And in other matters: conflicts of interest and fairness issues …

Again, from the Department of the Interior’s  Inspector General …

“Fish and Wildlife Division Fails to Address Conflicts of Interest, Fairness Issues”

“We performed this inspection after a hotline complaint alleged inconsistencies in the
Division's grants management practices.”

“Our inspection confirmed a failure to address conflicts of interest, as well as a lack of
objectivity and fairness in certain grant proposal review sessions. We also confirmed an insufficient separation of duties regarding the Chief s Account. In addition, we  discovered that the Division has been using funds from its general appropriation to cover grant program costs in excess of those allowed by legislation. Our Office of General Counsel has determined this administrative practice to be improper.”

“These findings may reflect an underlying systemic problem. As a result of inadequate
safeguards, the Division's structure, policies, and control environment all failed to prevent or detect the deficiencies discussed in this report.”

Of course, the use of the term “improper” is mild when considered against the possibility that a fraud was committed against “We the People,” the taxpayers who fund all government operations and grants.

Bottom line …

As I have said on numerous occasions, I strongly believe that the old environmental movement which was based on good stewardship of our natural resources and the reduction of artificial man-made pollutants has been infiltrated by Marxists and Communists for the sole purpose of seeking funding for their political agenda and to use our own laws against us; primarily to facilitate the collapse of our capitalist society from within so that it may be replaced by a Marxist-driven new world order.

From global warming, where institutions and scientists have received BILLIONS of dollars worth of grants and subsidies in order to allow corrupt politicians to pursue anti-America public policies in return for campaign contributions and voter support, to public policies which restrict industrial development and the production of foodstuffs to ostensibly protect small fish, rats, birds and butterflies .. the entire process has been corrupted by those who are wielding unaccountable, untraceable and unattributed foundation-funding to devolve the United States into chaos, confusion and bankruptcy.

As these reports show, we must be extremely vigilant when it comes to public policies which enlarge the size of government, increase taxes and further reduce our dwindling personal liberties. We must challenge, possibly at great cost, those who use pseudo-science and misleading reports to justify their political agenda.

But most of all, we need to bring a halt to the dishonestly in government; mostly from ideologically corrupt democrats and complacent republicans. It appears that there are “progressive democrats”  like Senator Chuck Schumer and  John Kerry as well as “progressive”republicans” like John McCain and Lindsey Graham who are willing to support “progressive” causes which places America and Americans at a great disadvantage with respect to their government.

All part of the same progressive program of supporting faux medical reform to support governmental control over individuals, faux regulatory reform to support governmental control over both individual and corporate finances, faux-science to support governmental control over the energy sector – and by extension our entire economy and faux concern for human rights which supports an invasion of America by foreign nationals with an allegiance to a foreign sovereign power.

We need honest brokers to support “We the People.” Something that we do not find in California and many of the one-party democrat-run states. We need to start holding these politicians accountable for their actions; possibly beyond voting them out of office – by prosecuting their criminal and/or treasonous actions where deserved.

Let’s decide to make a difference. Not selling out the Tea Party Movement to key politicians or former politicians who are trying to take advantage of the public’s indignation with the current status quo in order to seek funding and support for their political agenda.

Time to wake up and take back our government from those who are harming America and American citizens. From pumping billions of dollars into foreign dictators and economies to those who are pumping undeserved profits into the executives of financial institutions who produce absolutely nothing of value for Americans. And perhaps we should return to a time when “Buy American” is the watchword. Making sure that much of our spending is reserved for America. If Japan, Germany and others want to pay for American-based troops and/or protection, let them pay to subsidize the bases and personnel. No more freebies to buy cooperation and government photo-ops.

-- steve

Reference Links …

Department of the Interior, Inspector General

Department Officials Did Not Violate IQA, But Offer Apology

Fish and Wildlife Division Fails to Address Conflicts of Interest, Fairness Issues