The signatures of Duke's William Schlesinger, dean of the Nicholas School of the Environment, Stuart Pimm, ecology professor, and John Gibbons, Graduate School '54, joined a list of more than 60 distinguished U.S. scientists in a 38-page report condemning the Bush administration's use of politics in scientific policymaking last week.
"I have been fairly alarmed and disappointed by how the administration has been ignoring or not using documented science," Schlesinger said. "I don't think there has been any indication that the best science has been used to decide the best policies."
Others feel that, while previous administrations have tried to demote various aspects of science, the Bush administration has gone beyond that--in some cases trying to influence results.
"No administration in the past, republican or democrat, has said we don't want to hear the news," said Pimm. "This is unprecedented. The decision of the administration to reach down into the committee level and to stack committees with industry friendly [senior scientists], and in some cases industry funded, has caused so much concern among the scientific community."
The report, "Scientific Integrity in Policymaking," published by the Union of Concerned Scientists, accused the Bush administration of distorting facts specifically in regard to the environment, nuclear weapons and other health-related issues.
"One example is in an EPA report on the environment, where the government simply took out a chapter on climate change since that chapter is not in accordance with what the administration wants to hear," said Pimm.
Schlesinger noted that distorting or ignoring the facts is a recurring theme for this administration, especially in regard to the Kyoto Protocol, a treaty that called for individual countries to cut their carbon dioxide levels by a certain percentage by the year 2010.
"During [his] second year in office, [President George W.] Bush said that we aren't going to deal with Kyoto--it is dead as far as we are concerned," said Schlesinger. "For me, Kyoto had some flaws, but in my opinion, if you aren't going to bring the ball to the court, you can't just take the ball home, especially if you are the United States, which people expect to be a leader on these issues."
John Marburger, science advisor to Bush, responded quickly to the Union's allegations. "I don't think [the union] makes the case for the sweeping accusations that it makes [in the recent report]," Marburger told the New York Times.
Schlesinger said he was disappointed in Marburger's reaction.
"I watched [Marburger's] response to the climate change issues and how he has essentially ignored the overwhelming consensus of the U.S.' scientists," Schlesinger said. "For him to call this act a conspiracy theory in the face of his past behavior is rather strange."
However, even with the recent government criticism, all of the scientists that signed the document seemed to know the inherent social and political risks. Pimm felt that the potential advantages outweighed the incoming political pressure.
"We elect politicians so that they will make wise policy decisions. They cannot make them when the advice they receive is poor," Pimm said. "Along with the others who signed this document, I believe it will encourage this present administration to obtain the best possible scientific advice on issues that affect our lives, our health and our environment."
Schlesinger said he was not concerned about how signing the report would affect his reputation within the scientific and political communities.
"I don't have a lot of dogs to fight any more in the scientific community," he said. "I feel strongly about this and at this stage of life... so I signed it. As for the political community, I'm not terribly concerned. Everybody knows that I am a hard-core environmentalist, and the Bush administration is the worst administration environmentally for a long time and so whatever they do I would be opposed to."
With over 20 Nobel laureates, many more scientists with other impressive awards and several science advisors from both the Democratic and Republican party, the document attracted a diverse crowd of experts.
"I think the number of people that are on the document with some note make it so that it is going to be hard to ignore," said Schlesinger. "I hope that it causes the administration to take note of this problem and that it becomes an item of interest to the upcoming election and that it sparks some debate."
Get The Chronicle straight to your inbox
Signup for our weekly newsletter. Cancel at any time.