I'd like to know too:
A Democratic member of Congress is digging into the funding of a handful of researchers who have questioned the prevailing view on the causes of climate change, The Washington Post reports.
Arizona’s Raul M. Grijalva, the top Democrat on the House of Representatives’ Committee on Natural Resources, wrote letters to seven university presidents asking for information about the funding sources for researchers at their institutions who have publicly questioned whether man-made pollution is to blame for the warming of the earth’s climate.
Mr. Grijalva’s effort follows the revelation that the climate-change skeptic Wei-Hock Soon, an astrophysicist at the Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory, had much of his research funded by energy-industry groups and others who have supported efforts to discredit research linking carbon emissions and climate change.
Mr. Grijalva addressed his letter to the presidents of:
- Arizona State University
- Georgia Institute of Technology
- Massachusetts Institute of Technology
- Pepperdine University
- University of Alabama at Huntsville
- University of Colorado system
- University of Delaware
The researcher at Colorado, Roger Pielke Jr., has spoken out about the inquiry, calling it a “witch hunt,” the Daily Camera reports.
via chronicle.com
Rather than a witch hunt, it only seems that members of Congress would like to know if those who testify before them might be biased in some way. From the WaPo:
Grijalva said Soon failed to properly disclose Big Oil’s support for his work when he testified to Congress and at the state legislature of Kansas — testimony that downplayed the seriousness of man-made climate change. “My colleagues and I cannot perform our duties if research or testimony provided to us is influenced by undisclosed financial relationships,” Grijalva wrote.
The economics profession went through this during the most recent recession. High profile economists failed to reveal financial interests that would have shed a different light on the things that they said about the health of the economy. This led to the American Economic Association's disclosure policy. I don't see why testimony before Congress should not be treated the same way.
