As it happens, there is and always has been one mechanism that produces precisely this effect in humans. Today it’s referred to in the medical literature as conversion disorder—that is, the conversion of stress and fear into actual physical illness.
...he has a "natural instinct for science" that informs his understanding of climate change and allows him to see through the political bias that he accused some scientists of holding.
Months after President Trump signed a directive ordering NASA to return astronauts to the moon, the space agency has canceled its only lunar rover currently in development.
Pruitt said the change, long sought by chemical manufacturers and fossil fuel companies, would increase transparency in the agency’s decision-making by requiring all underlying data used in scientific studies to be made publicly available.
Critics ... said the policy shift is designed to restrict the agency from citing peer-reviewed public-health studies that use patient medical records that must be kept confidential under patient privacy laws.
And it's unlikely to change soon, observers say, leaving President Trump without a science adviser as the administration wrestles with a severe outbreak of the flu, lead-poisoned drinking water and record-breaking disasters that many scientists say are sharpened by rising temperatures.
The major unknowns at this point include the when, how, scale of the operation and cost. Also unclear is what exactly NASA would accomplish with such a mission and how it might affect plans for a human mission to Mars.
In some cases ... alternative phrases were suggested. Instead of “science-based,” or “evidence-based,” ... “the suggested phrase is ‘C.D.C. bases its recommendations on science in consideration with community standards and wishes.’’’
The appointment of Myers, a businessman and lawyer, breaks from the recent precedent of scientists leading the agency tasked with a large, complex and technically demanding portfolio.
The DoD has found space to maneuver by separating the argument of climate change from the threats that more extreme sea states, wind and flooding can generate. Essentially, the DoD is moving forward by leaving the semantics of climate change to others.
For scientists, drawing links between warming global temperatures and the ferocity of hurricanes is about as controversial as talking about geology after an earthquake.
But in Washington, where science is increasingly political, the fact that oceans and atmosphere are warming and that the heat is propelling storms into superstorms has become as sensitive as talking about gun control in the wake of a mass shooting.
From Day 1, the White House and its lackeys in certain federal agencies have been waging what amounts to a war on science, appointing people with few scientific credentials to key positions, defunding programs that could lead to a cleaner and safer environment and a healthier population, and, most ominously, censoring scientific inquiry that could inform the public and government policy.
Trump's nomination of his former Iowa campaign manager for the post is raising concern in the scientific community and beyond about the politicization of science policy in the Trump administration.
While Mr. Bridenstine has criticized NASA’s spending on global warming science, he has voiced support for some of the agency’s earth observation missions, particularly for studying extreme weather.
A ProPublica and Texas Tribune investigation found last year that those who have overseen Houston’s flooding issues discounted scientists’ warnings as “anti-development.” In the coming months and years, the city may pay a high price for such shortsightedness.
The National Academy of Sciences has signed off on the draft report, and the authors are awaiting permission from the Trump administration to release it.
Trump has responded to this problem with what Walter Williams calls an “anti-analytic” strategy. The administration’s budget has proposed major cuts to programs of policy-relevant scientific research on climate and the environment
Though there are various records laws that prevent the government from completely purging information gathered by its agencies, the government can take information offline. That means the data is available, but only in one physical location.
Under Mr. Obama, the science division was staffed with nine employees who led the charge on policy issues such as STEM education, biotechnology and crisis response.
...its website would be “undergoing changes” to better represent the new direction the agency is taking, triggering the removal of several agency websites containing detailed climate data and scientific information.
It would prohibit the EPA from writing any regulation that uses science that is not publicly available.
But Democrats, environmentalists and health advocates say ... it would irresponsibly leave the EPA unable to write important regulatory protections, since the agency might not have the ability to release some parts of the scientific data underpinning them.
"The head of the world academy of sciences, which is headquartered in Trieste, Italy, sent a letter saying he is canceling his plans because he is Sudanese and didn't expect to be able to travel"
For nearly a decade, the Stephen Harper-led Conservative government did its darndest to prevent federal scientists from sharing their work with the Canadian public.
The U.S. Department of Interior was ordered to suspend operations of its Twitter accounts after the National Park Service's official account retweeted two posts that were unflattering toward the Trump administration.