Multiple times in the last few years administration has taken a scientific report and decided to do something that completely contradicts his findings.
The most obvious of these is global warming, where it extends to the import of hunting trophies from abroad and the huge increase in the number of trophies allowed to be taken in the USA (likely to decimate wildlife populations within the country).
However having run up against this time and time again the trump administration is increasingly trying to forced all the arguments by putting in his false information into the report before it’s published.
An Insider in the interior department has been inputting the the totally discredited idea that trump has been regularly spouting- there’s an actuality extra carbon dioxide in the environment is good. Given the basis of the recent globally agreed treaties to deal with the increase in carbon dioxide emissions- and the clear need for the USA’s reduce it’s emissions given that it accounts for 25% of the world’s total, this is a clear attempt to justify abandoning its agreements.
In particular Trumps appointment who arrived early in his presidency, has continually tried to push the idea that at the current models have over-estimated the amount of warming that would occur. This is despite the data clearly stating this is not the case indeed if anything is has underestimated the impact.
The trump administration has attacked aggressively the interior department scientific outlook both in terms of studying future global warming and of studying diseases and epidemics. This second area has quite rightly come back to bite them as the Outbreak of the Corona virus has demonstrated the lack of readiness that the trump administration has for a significant illness spending in the population.
I should mention that this article was written in isolation from yesterdays article and on the basis of other articles, though it should be concerning that the Us government is both trying to make scientific papers play a smaller role in choosing what to do- and the same week an article suggesting that Trumps administration is demanding the right to change scientific articles to fit their own views before publishing.
Why is it necessary to do both? Is it clear, even to Trump, that whatever the position on scientific research you cannot be seen to continue to go against the evidence all the time? America currently leads the world in the amount of research it creates- however if Trump damages the reputation of this research and its impartiality, it could do untold damage to american universities and their world standings. This is likely to last far beyond Trumps administration- reelection or not.
