When You Don’t Like The Answer – Change The Analysis
By: Doug Busselman, Executive Vice President
On the heels of the slight credibility problem know as Climate-Gate (where only the truly worthy data could be used to predict global warming) we now have the command from the Secretary of Agriculture to change the United States Department of Agriculture study that says farmers will be switching from planting food-crops to planting trees. When you don’t get the answer you want – change the study. Do you suppose the next time they will be able to come up with an answer that tells us we’re in for an economic bonanza – “Thank You House of Representatives for passing your legislation for extra taxes for carbon-based energy!”
If not, they might have to revise the study again.
As we’ve seen throughout the 2009 Congressional year, it really doesn’t matter what information or concerns there might be associated with the legislation that’s being considered. If it involves lots of pages and the majority party has decided – after the special deals are all cut – the legislation passes anyway. Rerunning the study at USDA to come up with a better answer really shouldn’t matter, although it will give the government economists something to do beyond measuring the debt going up, spending going through the roof and the private sector going down the flusher.
Yep, this whole “change” thing is working really well – and if it doesn’t quite come up with the numbers that look favorable…somebody is just going to have to redo the figuring.
On the heels of the slight credibility problem know as Climate-Gate (where only the truly worthy data could be used to predict global warming) we now have the command from the Secretary of Agriculture to change the United States Department of Agriculture study that says farmers will be switching from planting food-crops to planting trees. When you don’t get the answer you want – change the study. Do you suppose the next time they will be able to come up with an answer that tells us we’re in for an economic bonanza – “Thank You House of Representatives for passing your legislation for extra taxes for carbon-based energy!”
If not, they might have to revise the study again.
As we’ve seen throughout the 2009 Congressional year, it really doesn’t matter what information or concerns there might be associated with the legislation that’s being considered. If it involves lots of pages and the majority party has decided – after the special deals are all cut – the legislation passes anyway. Rerunning the study at USDA to come up with a better answer really shouldn’t matter, although it will give the government economists something to do beyond measuring the debt going up, spending going through the roof and the private sector going down the flusher.
Yep, this whole “change” thing is working really well – and if it doesn’t quite come up with the numbers that look favorable…somebody is just going to have to redo the figuring.
Posted by Doug Busselman at 12/29/2009 9:16 AM 
Categories: Global Warming
Tags: Benefits of Carbon Trading Climate Change Department of Agriculture
Categories: Global Warming
Tags: Benefits of Carbon Trading Climate Change Department of Agriculture
Comments