On the recordAugust 1, 2017
Climate denial, on the other hand, avoids peer review as if it were Kryptonite, so this call for peer review of the contest between climate science and climate denial is almost comical, except for the evil intent behind it and, of course, the stakes. How very risky and dangerous continuing to get this climate issue wrong is for our country. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record an op-ed written by John Holdren, until recently the President's climate adviser, called ``The perversity of `red-teaming' climate science.'' There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in the Record, as follows: [From bostonglobe.com, July 25, 2017] The Perversity of `Red-Teaming' Climate Science (By John P. Holdren) EPA administrator Scott Pruitt is reportedly giving serious consideration to investing the taxpayers' money in a ``red team-blue team'' effort to determine whether current scientific understandings about climate change are actually right. The idea is that a ``red team'' made up of officials from government agencies with responsibilities related to climate would try to poke holes in mainstream climate science, while a similarly constituted ``blue team'' would have the task of defending the mainstream consensus against this critique. Supposedly, this process would shed new light on what is known and what is not about human influence on the global climate.…





