Bush's Science Aide Rejects Claims of Distorted Facts - nytimes

April 3, 2004

Bush's Science Aide Rejects Claims of Distorted Facts
By ANDREW C. REVKIN

he White House issued a detailed rebuttal yesterday to accusations by
an advocacy group and 60 prominent scientists that the Bush
administration had distorted or suppressed scientific information to
suit its politics.

In a letter to Congress, which had requested a White House response,
Dr. John H. Marburger III, science adviser to President Bush, said most
of the accusations were false and in some cases "preposterous."

In February, the advocacy group, the Union of Concerned Scientists,
which has long criticized administration policies on issues like
biotechnology, global warming and nuclear power, released a 38-page
report, finding, "There is significant evidence that the scope and
scale of the manipulation, suppression and misrepresentation of science
by the Bush administration is unprecedented."

The report was endorsed by 60 influential scientists, including 20
Nobel laureates and people who had served in past Republican
administrations.

Yesterday, Dr. Marburger rejected almost every point. "The accusations
in the document are inaccurate, and certainly do not justify the
sweeping conclusions of either the document or the accompanying
statement," he wrote.

In a few places, he said, the administration had erred, but he added
that the mistakes had nothing to do with a lack of scientific integrity.

For instance, he agreed that the Environmental Protection Agency had
included text from a document prepared by lawyers for the utilities
industry in the preamble of a proposed rule restricting power-plant
pollution. But that text, he said, had no bearing "on the integrity of
the science used by E.P.A."

Yesterday, scientists and experts not directly involved in the debate
said the matter was not settled.

"The scientific community delivered a hard message and he has responded
on behalf of the administration and on behalf of his own views in a
thorough way," said Dr. Donald Kennedy, the editor in chief of the
journal Science and commissioner of food and drugs under President
Jimmy Carter.

The original report can be read on the Web at www.ucsusa.org and the
administration's response at www.ostp.gov.

One significant accusation in the group's report was that the
administration, in dealing with a wide array of scientific advisory
panels, had often dismissed experts, or selected others, because of
their views on contentious subjects.

Dr. Marburger said that the White House was determined to maintain
balance on such committees and that asking for experts' views on issues
was a way to achieve diversity.

But he said, "The accusation of a litmus test that must be met before
someone can serve on an advisory panel is preposterous."

He noted that he himself was "a lifelong Democrat."

The scientists' group also accused the administration of revising
scientific reports to make them mesh better with White House policy. A
notable example was a heavily edited section on climate change in a
draft E.P.A. report on the environment last year: the White House
removed almost any finding pointing to a human link to warming global
temperatures. After a battle with the White House, the agency dropped
the entire section, leaving a hole in what was supposed to be an
overview of environmental trends.

Yesterday, Dr. Marburger said the section was dropped because more
voluminous reports on climate change were in the works.

After a quick review of the White House rebuttal, which was released in
the afternoon with no notice, Dr. Kurt Gottfried, an emeritus professor
of physics at Cornell who is chairman of the Union of Concerned
Scientists, said the group would take a fresh look at all the issues.

"It's possible there are things we got wrong," Dr. Gottfried said.
"We're not infallible, like the Vatican or the White House. But I don't
think there's any reason to think we got the big picture wrong. In
fact, our case is stronger now than when we produced that report."

He did not back down from the group's contention that science was more
abused by the current administration than by its predecessors.

"I think the average age of those who signed the letter is well over
60," Dr. Gottfried said. "We've seen many an administration come and
go, and many have served in those administrations. When we say that
this pattern is, in extent, unprecedented we mean that."

_________

Lee A Wells
mobile: 917 723 2524
studio: 718 349 7951

[email protected]
http://www.leewells.org