Why did a college dropout Bushie try to censor NASA scientists on the big bang?

Question

WASHINGTON, Feb. 8 (UPI) -- A 24-year-old controversial presidential appointee at NASA has resigned his post amid accusations he lied on his resume about graduating from college.

George Deutsch, who told NASA public affairs workers to limit reporters' access to a top climate scientist and ordered the word "theory" be inserted on every mention of the Big Bang, resigned Tuesday, The New York Times reported Wednesday.

The resignation followed Texas A&M University's announcement that Deutsch, although once a student, had not received a degree in journalism as he claimed.

Several NASA scientists and public affairs officials said they had been pressured by Deutsch and other political appointees to limit or slant discussions of topics uncomfortable to the Bush administration.

http://www.upi.com/NewsTrack/Science/2006/02/08/bush_man_resigns_nasa_post_in_scandal/

chicago,

Next time, read the question before you respond. I never said Bush dropped out. I said a Bushie, Bush lover, was the college dropout who tried to censor NASA scientists.

Dizz,

Yes. Hillarious AND humiliating.

gerafaldo,

A college dropout should not get the power to edit the work of scientists. This is but one example. More to come.

He wasn't just taking the scientific reports and placing the word theory after each mention of the word big bang and global warming. He was manipulating sentences in reports to make it sound as if man made global warming was less of a threat and that there was alot more uncertainty then there really was.

Answer 1

That's hilarious! I missed that one!

Answer 2

Actually the question is not slanted evolution and the big bang are SCIENTIFIC theories and in the scientific method's hierarchy are considered to be proven to the point that it is acceptable to use the theory to formulate predicted results. The way the religous right and it's cronies in the current administration are attempting to use the word theory is actually hypothesis in the scientific method. The hypothesis level means it is just an idea, and has not been proven. In everyday english hypothesis and theory are routinely used interchangably but in the scientific method they are not. The religous right have attempted to exploit this common misuse of the word theory to attack scientific findings that threathen their ultra literal interpretation of the bible. As far as the credentials go, political loyalty to Bush and not questioning his ideas has always been the most important thing in securing an appointment, not expertise or skill. The justice department is a prime example of this. The second in command, Monica Goodling, was an attorney with little experience and was a graduate of a Law School that was ranked Fourth Tier (out of four) but was founded by Pat Robertson. There are well over one hundred other attorneys in the Justice department who are also graduates of this same school. This school has not been in existence for that long either, so they did not have very much time to get experience, even assuming they were all graduates of the first class that the school produced as an acredited law school. Their are many many other examples of this type of behavior, especially in the civilians picked to head up the rebuilding of Iraq. The classic example is of course "Brownie" who blew it during Hurricane Katrina.

Answer 3

The Big Ban is a theory and not the only one on the origin of the universe (the Bible story isn't a theory, it's self-contradictory fiction) as opposed to evolution which is actually an observation more than a theory since you can directly observe it in action in things like bacteria that breed quickly.

That said I deplore the way that this American government is attacking science and trying to replace hard evidence and serious research with belief in a literal interpretation of the Bible that makes no sense. What's next, trying to claim that the whole earth moves around the sun thing is just a theory?

Answer 4

Big Bang is a theory look it up.
" The theory of a Hot Big Bang is the most widely accepted hypothesis for the origin of the universe, but it still leaves many questions unanswered"
http://cmb.physics.wisc.edu/tutorial/bigbang.html

So why are you so afraid of the word theory should be the question.

With "many unanswered questions" tells me it isn't a fact.

Deutsch was being accurate and how dare someone be accurate in reporting science.

You are the type that believe all republicans are against stem cell studies when the reality there is only one line of stem cells that have show no promise yet and that there are other sources of that type of stem cells.
That you don't have to destory fetuses to get fetal stem cells.

Yet you had Kerry and Edwards making false claims about 'Reeves was going to walk if they got elected'

The score stands 73 to 0.
http://www.stemcellresearch.org/

Answer 5

Of course it is a THEORY. That does not mean there is no evidense to support it. It just means that it can not be directly observed. The Big Bang has never been disproven by any observation. (Nor has evolution. The same can not be said for creationism or and bible-based propositions.)
That Bush would appoint a college drop-out kid to oversee scientists and skew their reports is the heart of this story. Again, this administration has the "Don't confuse me with the facts" mentality that keeps Americans dumb and misinformed. For those Bush supporters: Are you happy and proud of your president?

Answer 6

obamagedon, this has been replied, on a very undemanding point- all of us comprehend carbon dioxide reasons temperatures to upward push, all of us comprehend we are emitting carbon dioxide. The solutions are there, you in basic terms want to close your eyes. this is relatively nive to think of human beings can not substitute the ecosystem, all and sundry who has ever been to a city can inform you approximately smog or the city warmth island result. you think of those are organic phenomena? strengthen up.. and temperatures have not been falling over the final decade. the two warmest years on checklist are 2006 and 2011, the fad continues to be upwards, however the a million°C substitute that has happended so a techniques is definitely no longer some thing you will experience in each and every day life. Does 40°F experience warmer than 38°F? no. Does the substitute have worldwide implications? particular. Badwolf: this is fully nonsensical, CO2 is CO2 no rely what emits it, I say returned that all of us comprehend that we are emitting it, that doesnt propose that organic CO2, or maybe orbital realignment couldnt have affected climate interior the previous. Whingeing that temperatures have replaced certainly interior the previous does no longer propose that we can not impact them. You understand that we didnt initiate emitting CO2 until the business revolution interior the previous due 18th century? or maybe then, it replaced right into a techniques, a techniques below our emissions have risen to over the previous few a protracted time.

Answer 7

This story is strongly slanted. The Big Bang is a theory, just like evolution, and global warming. There is nothing wrong will calling it as such. If that is the best example of the Bush administration trying to affect NASA research, they do not have much of a case.

Answer 8

It's business as usual for the republicans, try to brainwash the public by manipulating the facts.

Answer 9

The question means a "bushie" as in Bush supporter.
And the answer is b/c the Bush admin is full of idiots and criminals

Answer 10

If you are stupid enough to believe the Big Bang has any basis in science, then you clearly don't understand what the word science means. God help you (literally).

Answer 11

Bush didn't drop out of college and the Big Bang never happened.