Here is my report of last Wednesday’s National Academy of Sciences (NAS) public meeting public meeting about EPA’s illegal human experiments.
The background and cause for the meeting has been described in earlier posts — i.e., I discovered and exposed EPA’s secret effort to have the NAS whitewash EPA’s illegal human experiments, which forced the NAS to open up the process and have a public meeting at which my colleagues and I testified.
The people who testified were myself, emergency room physician John Dunn, MD, JD, statistician Stan Young, Phd, epidemiologist James Enstrom and Albert Donnay, MHS.
Links to the testimony are here:
Notes on the meeting:
The public meeting was held via webinar rather than in-person. Why? I don’t know for sure. But one can speculate that a quick (two-and-one-half hour long) afternoon webinar at the end of the summer was any easy way to check the “listened-to-the-public” box.
Most of the NAS committee members appeared to be on the webinar. Although who knows who long they actually stayed on or whether they listened or played solitaire.
The webinar technology (WebEx) was poor. During a good portion of my presentation, for example, there was a terrible echo, probably from folks failing to mute their phones — you had to dial-in to talk while viewing slides on your computer. It wasn’t until part way through Dunn’s presentation that someone (Albert Donnay, I believe) informed the NAS staff that they could mute everyone’s phone via WebEx. That solved much of the sound problem — but I recall hearing Neil Armstrong step onto the moon more clearly than much of this meeting.
The NAS made it difficult for the public to participate. If you wanted to listen in, you had to e-mail the NAS and then NAS staff would set you up with the WebEx software, dial-in number and passwords. No doubt between this hurdle and the poor quality of the sound at the beginning of the meeting (when I was presenting) many people were just turned off out of frustration.
The content of the presentations was superb and quite damning to the EPA and its “science.” Nevertheless, only one NAS Committee member asked questions (two). He was Dr. Robert Phalen of the University of California-Irvine. Hats off to him. The rest of the NAS Committee was entirely silent. Possibly Committee members were too shocked to say anything and needed more time to go through all the material that was presented. Possibly, though, they just wanted the afternoon to end so they could get on with rubber-stamping the whitewash and the rest of their government research-grant dependent lives.
What impact will the meeting have on EPA’s effort to whitewash its crimes? That remains to be seen. By the time we intervened in June, the whitewash (which began a year earlier) was nearly over. No doubt much of the NAS report has already been written. That said, it’s not clear how the NAS Committee can ignore the evidence we presented. Then again, all you need do is look at how Hillary Clinton is able to escape justice. If you are too big to fail/jail, then anything is possible.