PEN Canada concerned by silencing of publicly funded scientists

[Cabbagesandking]

Government scientists are employed by government for the furtherance og government purposes. That is, to further the Public Good. Proprietary does not enter into it where things like the mitigation of Climate change is concerned.

It is the responsibility of government to act on the findings of scientists and to make their research available.

 

[jariax]

There is a disturbing trend in Canada.
Basically, research is funded by three sources:

1) Government
2) Charities
3) Business
4) Universities

The Harper government is already filtering publicly funded research. Apparently, we can't trust Canadians with the truth, we can only trust them with Conservative-government filtered truth. Publicly funded science is not a research arm of the Conservative government, it is there to discover the current and future state of things, so that we can take appropriate action. It is not there to reinforce decisions which the Conservative government has pre-determined.

Charities are under attack. Any charity that has an agenda, beyond simple research is under attack. The Suzuki foundation is the most egregious example. What charity would conduct research with obvious conclusions (global warming), and not lobby for change, based upon its findings? The lack of consistency with which this lobbying witchhunt takes place should be a clear indication of the misappropriation of power. Is the Fraser Institute coming under scrutiny for its constant lobbying for lower taxes?

Business is not under attack - which means that if big business wants to privately fund a study, there are no impediments. While this is as it should be, it skews the voices being heard, such that teh majority of research will come from big business, who generally supports lower taxes, lower labour standards, and lower environmental/safety regulation. This does not make for a comprehensive or healthy dialogue.

This leaves Universities as our last hope for research. We'll see how long it takes for them to come under attack.

 

[captain morgan]

There is a disturbing trend in Canada.


The Harper government is already filtering publicly funded research. Apparently, we can't trust Canadians with the truth, we can only trust them with Conservative-government filtered truth. Publicly funded science is not a research arm of the Conservative government, it is there to discover the current and future state of things, so that we can take appropriate action. It is not there to reinforce decisions which the Conservative government has pre-determined..

Maybe Harper should relent and publish all the findings 'as they occur', and let's make sure we include everything - no point in witholding research on genetic engineering of viruses just 'cause someone could use it to harm others - after all, it does belong to the public..

Maybe we can release the info on a daily basis... We can leave the conclusions to evolve as we move along.

Charities are under attack. Any charity that has an agenda, beyond simple research is under attack. The Suzuki foundation is the most egregious example. What charity would conduct research with obvious conclusions (global warming), and not lobby for change, based upon its findings? The lack of consistency with which this lobbying witchhunt takes place should be a clear indication of the misappropriation of power. Is the Fraser Institute coming under scrutiny for its constant lobbying for lower taxes?.

.. And here is an excellent example of a 'charity' that has released info that is, shall we say, less than accurate. And the clown Suzuki wants to influence public policy and reshape economies with their 'research'?

With this in mind, do me the favour of sparing me the references to 'the truth'

Business is not under attack - which means that if big business wants to privately fund a study, there are no impediments. While this is as it should be, it skews the voices being heard, such that teh majority of research will come from big business, who generally supports lower taxes, lower labour standards, and lower environmental/safety regulation. This does not make for a comprehensive or healthy dialogue. .

The only time that a business will be 'under attack' is if/when they are in contravention of the laws of the land (incl CRA)... This is what happened to Suzuki - he felt that his ego and agenda were more important than the objectives of his charity. He has no one to blame other than himself for his woes.

 

[petros]

.. And here is an excellent example of a 'charity' that has released info that is, shall we say, less than accurate. And the clown Suzuki wants to influence public policy and reshape economies with their 'research'?

With this in mind, do me the favour of sparing me the references to 'the truth'

You'll like this Cpt. Who funded David Suzuki's brochure, "Why You Shouldn't Eat Farmed Salmon?" - Rethink Campaigns

 

[mentalfloss]

You'll like this Cpt. Who funded David Suzuki's brochure, "Why You Shouldn't Eat Farmed Salmon?" - Rethink Campaigns

The Suzuki thread is over here.

 

[petros]

That's fine.

 

[captain morgan]

You'll like this Cpt. Who funded David Suzuki's brochure, "Why You Shouldn't Eat Farmed Salmon?" - Rethink Campaigns

Well, well, well... Ain't that a fine how-dee-doo.

Looks like Mr. Suzuki gets his funding from large American interests that compete with the Canadian industries that he condemns to economic death through his agenda.

Interesting

 

[petros]

He's an Alaskan fisheries Evil Corporate Wh*re, Not too far off the mark of being a traitor as well.

 

[captain morgan]

No doubt... Too bad that his foundation doesn't do some research into morals and ethics; but then again, would the international interests that fund him have interest in that?

 

[mentalfloss]

Well, well, well... Ain't that a fine how-dee-doo.

Looks like Mr. Suzuki gets his funding from large American interests that compete with the Canadian industries that he condemns to economic death through his agenda.

Interesting

What's wrong with getting funding from outside sources?

 

[petros]

Here, have a whiff, it's Sumatran.

The "outside sources" were "evil Corporatations" trying to compete against Canadian industry by spreading fear and BS. You are the one who keeps griping about "evil Corporations" and job losses.

Remember what I was saying about "evil corporations" using greens to do their dirty work by having greens thinking they are doing themselves a favour when in reality the greens are helping the Corps?

 

[captain morgan]

The "outside sources" were "evil Corporatations" trying to compete against Canadian industry by spreading fear and BS. You are the one who keeps griping about "evil Corporations" and job losses.

Let's not forget the special tax status that they get due to their status as a 'foundation'.... This ought to be a double-whammy for you MF, 'evil corp' that is subsidized by the public via corp welfare.

Damn 1%ers!

 

[petros]

HEY! Don't call it like it is. Reality is scary.

 

[mentalfloss]

Here, have a whiff, it's Sumatran.

The "outside sources" were "evil Corporatations" trying to compete against Canadian industry by spreading fear and BS. You are the one who keeps griping about "evil Corporations" and job losses.

Remember what I was saying about "evil corporations" using greens to do their dirty work by having greens thinking they are doing themselves a favour when in reality the greens are helping the Corps?

Who said a corporation is evil simply for donating money to a charity?

Let's not forget the special tax status that they get due to their status as a 'foundation'.... This ought to be a double-whammy for you MF, 'evil corp' that is subsidized by the public via corp welfare.

Damn 1%ers!

We're talking about a charitable donation. A corporation can be "evil" but it can also be "good". Donating money to a charity is not an evil thing as far as I understand.

 

[petros]

What did "the charity" do with the money? Lobby against "sustainable development" that you keep pimping in favour of one that depletes wild stocks?

That is kind of opposite of what "the charity" puts forth as an image isn't it?

 

[captain morgan]

That is kind of opposite of what "the charity" puts forth as an image isn't it?

Hence the reason that these foundations do not act directly in these issues.

 

[petros]

They are excellent cover for high powered corporate lobbyists.

 

[captain morgan]

No different than how they lobby gvt

 

[petros]

Image is everything especially when you have people thinking they are working against the "evil",

 

[DaSleeper]

There may be some good reasons for preventing scientists from divulging results ahead of the proper time.....

The summer of '99, I was camped out besides a lake on a road called "Chain of lakes" road up here.
On my walk that morning, I happened to see a guy panning for gold in a creek, the vehicle he was driving was a Dept of mines vehicle and he was a professor of geology from the University of Sudbury doing research for the Ontario department of mines, during the summer..

When I asked him if he could give me the results of what he had found so far, he explained that he was prohibited from giving the results of his finds until the release of the province wide findings in the fall.
Because that report is read by all claimstakers, and he might have given me an unfair advantage.

He did take my email addy and sent me the complete report in September that year, on the date that it came out to the general public.