Center for the Study of Science

Our modern state claims its environmental and health regulations are based upon “science,” usually in the form of large compendia, such as the period reports of the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. But, what happens if science is being systematically distorted by the incentive structure for advancement in one’s profession?

The Center for the Study of Science is positioned at the nexus between science and policy. Is science a neutral, value-free profession? Can that be the case, in tier-one academia, when one’s success is largely related to the amount of money, most of it public, the employee brings into a university? Are there incentives in Washington, where there is intense competition for federal monies, to exaggerate various problems and issues? What effect does this have upon the scientific literature, which is the modern canon of knowledge? Affirmative answers to these questions may explain the virulent epidemic of withdrawn papers now spreading  through the profession, and the grotesquely distorted policies that result from an organically biased base of modern knowledge. 

Of Special Note

Addendum: Global Climate Change Impacts in the United States

Addendum: Global Climate Change Impacts in the United States

This report summarizes the important science that is missing from Global Climate Change Impacts in the United States, a 2009 document produced by the U.S. Global Change Research Program (USGCRP) that was critical to the Environmental Protection Agency’s December, 2009, “finding of endangerment” from increasing atmospheric carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases.

New Research

Climate Change, Heat Waves, and Adaptation

Our research shows that an increasing frequency of heat events raises public awareness and gives rise to a strong adaptive response–so strong, in fact, that when faced with increasing heat, the general sensitivity of urban populations tends to decline.

The Case against a Carbon Tax

The Case against a Carbon Tax

A vigorous campaign aimed at American policymakers and the general public has tried to create the perception that a federal carbon tax (or similar type of “carbon price”) is a crucial element in the urgently needed response to climate change. Within conservative and libertarian circles, a small but vocal group of academics, analysts, and political officials are claiming that a revenue-neutral carbon tax swap could even deliver a “double dividend” — meaning that the conventional economy would be spurred in addition to any climate benefits. Thist study details several serious problems with these claims.