Nature or Nurture?

In an interesting example of genetics, my Dad just e-mailed me about a report published by the Union of Concerned Scientists. Some highlights:

"A growing number of scientists, policy makers, and technical specialists both inside and outside the government allege that the current Bush administration has suppressed or distorted the scientific analyses of federal agencies to bring these results in line with administration policy. In addition, these experts contend that irregularities in the appointment of scientific advisors and advisory panels are threatening to upset the legally mandated balance of these bodies. The quantity and breadth of these charges warrant further examination, especially given the stature of many of the individuals lodging them. Toward this end,the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) undertook an investigation of many of the allegations made in the mainstream media, in scientific journals, and in overview reports issued from within the federal government (2) and by non-governmental organizations (3). To determine the validity of the allegations, UCS reviewed the public record, obtained internal government documents, and conducted interviews with many of the parties involved (including current and former government officials).

FINDINGS OF THE INVESTIGATION
1.There is a well-established pattern of suppression and distortion of scientific findings by high-ranking Bush administration political appointees across numerous federal agencies. These actions have consequences for human health, public safety, and community well-being.
-snip-
2.There is strong documentation of a wide-ranging effort to manipulate the government ’s scientific advisory system to prevent the appearance of advice that might run counter to the administration’s political agenda. These actions include: appointing underqualified individuals to important advisory roles including childhood lead poisoning prevention and reproductive health; applying political litmus tests that have no bearing on a nominee’s expertise or advisory role; appointing a non-scientist to a senior position in the president’s scientific advisory staff; and dismissing highly
qualified scientific advisors.
3.There is evidence that the administration often imposes restrictions on what government scientists can say or write about “sensitive” topics.
-snip-
4.There is significant evidence that the scope and scale of the manipulation,suppression, and misrepresentation of science by the Bush administration is unprecedented."