A bill was introduced in Congress to provide whistleblower protection for scientists who expose political intereference in their research. Bill Sali introduced an amendment that would have gutted this protection. His amendment was defeated and
The bill, H.R. 985, passed by a 331 to 94 vote, with 229 Democrats and 102 Republicans voting in favor.Sali mustered a few arguments, like
The problem is that on scientific issues, the question of what is false or misleading is often a difficult question on which reasonable people can disagree, and on which sometimes scientific authorities have a hard time making up their minds. Are eggs good for you or bad for you? Is milk good for you or bad for you?but the transcript suggests that Sali's real motivation was to help bogus challenges to valid scientific viewpoints, or perhaps carry the water for the Bush administration to allow it to continue to supress scientific research that doesn't jive with its politics.
Don't mention polar bears at a global warming summit. Don't let NASA talk about the age of the universe. Intelligent design is equal to the theory of evolution. You know.