But what does it say about conservatives that the mere mention of “climate change” causes them to tune out? What does it say about a political party when pointing out established science discredits you in their eyes?
Dooley is essentially saying, Don’t be honest with conservatives about science. They can’t handle it. But if we can’t be honest with them, what’s going to stop them from pursuing another conspiracy theory in the future? Are Republicans really so weak that attaching “freedom” to an idea is the only way for them to take it seriously? We shouldn’t have to change the nature of the debate because one side refuses to acknowledge reality.
EPAimplemented its scientific integrity policy, along with other science-centric agencies, after the Obama administration called for agencies to strengthen internal reviews on science in 2009. The move was in response to the previous administration's rewriting of regulations based on questionable or politically motivated science.
"It just got so out of control during Bush-Cheney that people began recognized it as an issue, so much so that it was one of the first actions Obama took," said Jeff Ruch of Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility, a watchdog group of former government employees and scientists.
Grifo joined the EPA in 2013, charged with implementing its new scientific integrity policy and coordinating with a new scientific integrity committee. While the Office of Inspector General handles investigations into scientific misconduct, Grifo handles matters of scientific integrity.