ForumGarden

Canadian Government Will Allow Scientists to “Speak Freely, Reversing Years of Conservative Damage

In the United States, we have an entire party that trashes what scientists say.

In Canada, under new Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, scientists are finally getting a chance to do their jobs — and tell the public about it — without the foot of the government keeping them down:
More at the link

Your link was screwed up and pointing to a different article, but I fixed it for you.

Not sure how the gummint can keep scientists from speaking freely. Or how they prevent scientists from publishing their findings.

I do know that the congress can limit funding from the gummint for research, and I suppose that they can find ways to hold that over the heads of depart supervisors to keep some projects in line.

Have you ever looked at the membership for the House and Senate Science committees?

It is not encouraging.

three members of the GOP Clown car sit on the Senate committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation

The title of that committee is enough to cause indigestion.

LarsMac;1489248 wrote:

Have you ever looked at the membership for the House and Senate Science committees?

It is not encouraging.

three members of the GOP Clown car


Clown car vs. the clown.

LarsMac;1489248 wrote: sit on the Senate committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation

The title of that committee is enough to cause indigestion.


United States Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation

Chicken soup might help.

I guess the thing that I wonder after reading this article is how, exactly, were the Scientists "muzzled" by the Canadian government during the conservatives, rule, and how, then could that be changed so quickly, once Trudeau took office.

LarsMac;1489280 wrote: I guess the thing that I wonder after reading this article is how, exactly, were the Scientists "muzzled" by the Canadian government during the conservatives, rule, and how, then could that be changed so quickly, once Trudeau took office.Did you read it?

On Friday, one of CBC’s health reporters, Pauline Dakin, wrote that in the past six to eight years she has never been granted an interview with the health minister.

But twice this week, her colleagues, including radio host Nicole MacLennan, were able to speak with Liberal ministers Kent Hehr and Bains within an hour of requesting interviews.

“It was very exciting, said MacLennan.

Ahso!;1489284 wrote: Did you read it?


[sigh]

yes, I read the article. The article is interesting, but seems to boil down to an opinion piece. A crispy snack for the true believer.

Where's the meat?

On Friday, one of CBC’s health reporters, Pauline Dakin, wrote that in the past six to eight years she has never been granted an interview with the health minister.

But twice this week, her colleagues, including radio host Nicole MacLennan, were able to speak with Liberal ministers Kent Hehr and Bains within an hour of requesting interviews.

“It was very exciting, said MacLennan.


So, let me simplify the question.

How does a reporter not being granted an interview with the health minister keep that scientist from doing his job, or speaking to the press?

You appear to think that articles posted on the forum are like homework assignments handed in by school students for you to critique and grade - they're not - what they are is pieces offered for discussion in an effort to open dialogue on subjects.

It's one thing to submit a thread for discussion and not have any knowledge of the topic or piece offered, having, say, not read it.

I'm not going to go running around the internet to fetch information for you as you come up with criticisms to the articles I offer up, do that yourself and then discuss your findings within the scope of the thread. This is not difficult to do.

Ahso!;1489286 wrote: You appear to think that articles posted on the forum are like homework assignments handing in by school students for you to critique and grade - they're not - what they are is pieces offered for discussion in an effort to open dialogue on subjects.

It's one thing to submit a thread for discussion and not have any knowledge of the topic or piece offered, having, say, not read it.

I'm not going to go running around the internet to fetch information for you as you come up with criticisms to the articles I offer up, do that yourself and then discuss your findings within the scope of the thread. This is not difficult to do.


That seems like a fancy way to say, "I haven't the foggiest."

:wah: So then give me an "F" and be done with it.

Well, I was actually looking to discuss the issue. And yes, I am searching out some information and trying to get an idea what it is all about. But, I find it rather boring to just sit here and talk to myself about it.

So, after some digging around, and of course, googling, I came across this article from BBC:

Canadian government is 'muzzling its scientists' - BBC News

In which I found this statement:

The protocol requires that all interview requests for scientists employed by the government must first be cleared by officials. A decision as to whether to allow the interview can take several days, which can prevent government scientists commenting on breaking news stories.


So the gummint in Canada, has been attempting to control what gummint employed scientists can say about things like the environment and health and such.

That's a more in depth article. Funny how conservative governments are so restrictive and controlling. I understand that for the sake of jobs governments may need to walk a very fine line regulatory wise and feel they need to control the flow of information to the public to avoid sensationalism and bias, but I think it's best to allow the public the info.

I guess the next question would be, Are all scientists in Canada owned by the gummint?

Why would you ask a weird question like that?

Well, to read the bit in your OP, you'd think that all scientists were forced into silence by the previous administration.