←back to thread

EPA says it will eliminate its scientific research arm

(www.nytimes.com)
241 points anigbrowl | 3 comments | 18 Jul 25 23:00 UTC | HN request time: 0.462s | source
Show context
globalview ◴[19 Jul 25 00:46 UTC] No.44611487[source]▶
A lot of comments are rightfully pointing out the destructive nature of this move. But looking at it from another angle, is it possible this is a symptom of a deeper problem?

What if a significant portion of the electorate no longer believes institutions like the EPA are neutral arbiters of science, but instead see them as political actors pushing an agenda? If that belief is widespread, is an action like this seen not as 'destruction', but as 'dismantling a biased system', even if it seems counterproductive to the rest of us?

replies(7): >>44611499 #>>44611551 #>>44611557 #>>44611672 #>>44612027 #>>44613535 #>>44614601 #
consumer451 ◴[19 Jul 25 02:26 UTC] No.44612027[source]▶
> What if a significant portion of the electorate no longer believes institutions like the EPA are neutral arbiters of science, but instead see them as political actors pushing an agenda?

This is clearly the case. The next question is, how did this happen? Did these people come to this conclusion based on their own diligent research, or were they led to this opinion by supremely funded vested interests that influence every branch of our society?

replies(4): >>44612943 #>>44613985 #>>44614422 #>>44617064 #
1. dash2 ◴[19 Jul 25 05:58 UTC] No.44612943[source]▶
For sure Fox et al. have been pushing the idea that scientists have biases, but it can also be true that science has become more biased.

Update: a little evidence. This doesn't cover change over time, but it strikes me as fairly extreme, unless you are willing to go very far down the "reality has a liberal bias" road: https://github.com/hughjonesd/academic-bias

replies(1): >>44615937 #
2. throwaway4220 ◴[19 Jul 25 14:52 UTC] No.44615937[source]▶
Liberal in US = center right
replies(1): >>44617088 #
3. reliabilityguy ◴[19 Jul 25 16:49 UTC] No.44617088[source]▶
As opposed to…?