The sad thing about this announcement of grant money for Puget Sound protection is that the “science” that Richard Brocksmith of the HCCC and others are talking about isn’t real science at all — it almost entirely consists of the same kind of modeling found in the UN Open Standards (being used by the HCCC), the OSU Alternative Futures models, and the Battele nearshore studies — all being applied right here in Kitsap County.
These psudo-science approaches assume unsubstantiated cause-and-effect impacts from anthropogenic activities and often use GIS modeling to apply these assumptions to the landscape. The real goals are: 1) To make the public believe the environment is in grave danger — so the money will continue to flow to the activist community (the real scientists, at least those that remain uncorrupted, see very little of it); and 2) To separate human activity from the majority of the land (see GMA, Vision 2040, and Agenda 21).
The activists have repeated their mantra about human impacts so often that both they and the general public accept them as truth. However, the actual scientific data, when it is available, often tells a far different story (the health of the Sound has actually been dramatically improved since the mid-1960’s under existing controls). But these grant-funded studies will further build the scientific record that is used to support the activist agenda, allowing extensive footnotes and endnotes that appear to support the draconian SMP and GMA land use controls now being applied, and the future tightening of these controls that is being proposed.
By the way, I note that virtually every other sentence in the recent Puget Sound Partnership news releases has the word “science” included — as if saying it will make it so. It isn’t, but the PR goal is to make the public believe it is — and they may likely succeed in inoculating themselves from legitimate peer-review criticism.
So long as the current political leadership is in place, funds will continue to flow to these kind of projects — and not to the legitimate scientific community. And until this leadership is given their walking papers, we will continue to foster a government that feels free to forcibly take away our clearly-stated Constitutional rights as citizens of possession, control, exclusion, enjoyment, and disposition of our own private property.
Real science observes and documents actual site-specific or area-specific harm to the environment, presents an hypotheses of what is causing the harm, and conducts a well-designed study to test the hypothesis — a study that is then presented for legitimate peer-review. This should be the basis for all science that is used to drive regulatory public policy. The public should accept nothing less.
It’s time for a call to action.
Kitsap Alliance Board Member