The Boston Globe's online newpaper has an article concerning recent statements from US Representative Peter Welch, D-Vermont:
U.S. Rep. Peter Welch says it was a "stunning personal experience" to hear federal scientists say they had been stymied from talking about climate change.
"There was a story about a scientist who got authorized to speak at a conference. He was prohibited from using the phrase 'global warming.' He was allowed to say 'global,' and he could say 'warming,' but he couldn't put them next to each other. It became a charade," Welch said.
I'm surprised it took Rep. Welch this long to figure it out. Regardless, the entire charade by the White House is sickening. What's worse is how the article ends:
The White House maintains it was trying to bring balance to reports on global warming.
What is there to balance? The vast majority of the scientific community agrees with the evidence. Once again, the problem comes down to ignorance of science. This quote from Paul Ehrlich says it best:
Laypeople frequently assume that in a political dispute the truth must lie somewhere in the middle, and they are often right. In a scientific dispute, though, such an assumption is usually wrong.