Scientific secrecy is a danger to all, editorial, Boston Herald
"The number changes dont greatly affect worldwide averages - but they reveal a disturbing arrogance among scientists in the community of global-warming true believers. ... Science is not supposed to work by secrecy. Stonewalling by NASA will only increase the number and fervor of the skeptics."
Editor's note: I have to wonder NASA hasn't hammered back on this topic. Oh wait, I already know why. Every time something like his pops up - and NASA sits on its hands - the critics are emboldened when the next chance to slap the agency emerges (usually a week later). Indeed, they go out looking for more things to throw at NASA - and it is hard to blame them for doing so since NASA makes itself into such a good target. And when something really bad gets out into the blogosphere/news arena and NASA does manage to complain - no one listens. Or if they do listen they just respond by heaping more upon NASA since they know NASA will just sit there and take it - or try some sort of limp spin control.
Where is the 'strategic' communications we've all been promised? Why isn't anyone using that nifty new Message Construct?
Doesn't this agency have a spine any more? Or has NASA just decided to give up as it turns 50?
Reader note: "Funny you should use that word to describe the new communication strategy!Ian Murphy used that same description on Friday during an interview for the SpaceTaskForce podcast. Check it out at http://www.spacetaskforce.com/2007/08/sft-episode-13.html"