From the Ground Up - "TCEQ Chairman Questions Science Behind Climate Issues"

Many proponents of manmade global warming have targeted beef and cattle production as one of the top producers of U.S. greenhouse gas emissions. Some even suggest that consumers observing meatless Mondays will help save the planet. According to numbers from the EPA, cattle production is not a top contributor to greenhouse gas emissions, and dissenters to the concept of manmade global warming maintain that they have been conveniently left out of the discussion. Bryan Shaw is Chairman of the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality.

“I think that we’re going to look back historically at the science behind a lot of the climate issues and we’re going to realize that’s a place where we really started coming off the rails. The decision was made by some people that are probably well intended that the climate issue as they saw the potential coming was so important that they couldn’t just be scientists that were reporting objective data, that they had to become advocates.”

Shaw maintains that for many, this process completely changed the ability to trust the EPA’s adherence to science.

“I would argue that at some point they either became more interested in the funding or more interested in their reputations that they were in a spiral to try to protect. But I guess I can’t speak to their intentions except to say that it at least it was stated as a noble goal.”

Shaw says that throughout the proceedings, attempts were made to silence dissenters and inflate the immediacy and levels of concerns that were there.

“And the biggest concern that I had is that they started to suggest that thing about that the science is settled. No scientist should ever utter those words as a legitimacy for not doing something. The science is settled, there’s not a standard for that, and certainly doesn’t involve taking a poll of your fellow scientists to determine if we’ve done enough.”

Shaw maintains that dissention and continuing to ask questions is at the very foundation of science.

“Here’s my hypothesis. Here’s my research. Here’s my conclusion. If you can find a way to shore it up, or dispel it, welcome that. Whenever people were chastised for even asking the question about how much and and/or if man made gases were the primary cause and/or if it was going to be as catastrophic. That should have set off flags and bells and whistles across the scientific community.”