Readers may recall this story on WUWT:
Surreality: CARB contemplating a “skeptical science” regulation with penalties
I wrote that:
Of course, it’s OK if CARB makes a 340% error of their own while using false data to impose their will on the people of California. And of course it’s OK to publicly flaunt the ugly hubris of the CARB boss Mary Nichols rubbing her glee in the face of the citizens of California that voted for Prop 23. And of course it’s OK to simply demote a CARB “scientist” who lied about his PhD degree obtained from a UPS store rather than fire his fraudulent bureaucratic butt and then stage a cover up about it. But, when a citizen submits some data or opinion to CARB that they may later find questionable? Well, that’s a whole different matter.
It seems sunlight may have helped:
Their listserver message was a bit more descriptive:
From: firstname.lastname@example.org on behalf of email@example.com
Sent: Fri 11/26/2010 1:00 PM
Subject: arbcombo — POSTPONEMENT of Dec. 1 workshop to discuss possible false statement regulation
“The workshop scheduled for December 1st to discuss approaches to prohibit dishonest statements or submittals offered to the Board or its staff has been postponed to accommodate numerous requests for more background information about the purpose of the draft proposed rule. The workshop will be rescheduled after the New Year.
For more information, contact Will Brieger at:
With no determined future date, is it possible this proposed rule may go the way of the dodo? Nah, this is CARB, they are determined to have this rule, public input or not. They just need to schedule a bigger room.