CARB delays proposed "false statements" discussion

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: owner-arbcombo@listserv.arb.ca.gov on behalf of wfell@arb.ca.gov

Sent: Fri 11/26/2010 1:00 PM

To: post-arbcombo@listserv.arb.ca.gov

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:

wbrieger@arb.ca.gov

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.

The climate data they don't want you to find — free, to your inbox.
Join readers who get 5–8 new articles daily — no algorithms, no shadow bans.
0 0 votes
Article Rating
40 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
pwl
November 29, 2010 1:32 pm

“The legal right of the government to lie to the people has always bothered me as it smacks of a lack of integrity by the very people allegedly empowered to have the highest levels of integrity and honesty by the people. The members of the government, in whatever capacity or role they are filling, have a special trust to uphold and when they use deception why are they allowed to get away with it and yet a different standard is applied to the people when they lie? If a defendant in a court case lies at any point while being investigated it’s treated with such great importance that it’s as if the world came to an end… but when the cult members of the cult of government lie it’s for the benefit of the people and lifted up as somehow an honorable trick that was played to get at the truth when in fact it’s no different for it was a lie, a deception, a non-truth, falsified information, a fabrication designed to give false impressions. It’s ironic that some of the best liars are likely working within the government and get rewarded for it.
It seems that the government cult members just can’t help themselves:
“Evidently CARB [California Air Resources Board] is contemplating a regulation that would enable penalties for what would be judged “dishonest statements or submittals” provided to it or “staff.” I think one can safely assume that it is aimed at curtailing challenges to CARB’s agenda that are based on alternative scientific information and interpretations.” – Surreality: CARB contemplating a “skeptical science” regulation with penalties
I found this following article about the limits of when and how the police are “allowed to lie” to suspects and it’s quite shocking… they can almost get away with any thing… I wonder how this applies to those within the framework of the cult of government working as scientists (including university staff or students receiving government grants) are allowed to lie? How far can their fabrications go? What are the limits of lying in science? How many lies make it into peer reviewed papers? How many are caught or punished?



Given that Wolfram provides a mathematical and computer science proof that even simple systems generate complex behavior that renders predictability of systems as complex as weather and climate systems impossible, how can any prediction of climate be taken to be anything except a “dishonest statement”?


….
Read the full article here: http://pathstoknowledge.net/2010/11/29/if-you-want-honest-members-of-the-government-take-away-their-legal-right-to-lie-to-you

Peter Miller
November 29, 2010 1:34 pm

CARB’s proposal would be fine if everyone in CARB (especially the top fat cats) would also accept responsibility – and therefore criminal prosecution – for every false statement they made.
And the chances of that happening?

Baa Humbug
November 29, 2010 2:06 pm

As an onlooker from afar (Australia) I can’t believe this sort of crap is actually happening in America. America for frigg sake. Where are the people? I don’t mean average Joe in the street, I mean the powerful lawyers, corporate types who believe in the liberty, freedom of choice, free speech etc.
It has to stop, or it’s off to hell in a handbasket.

wsbriggs
November 29, 2010 3:36 pm

Just a note of clarification. The battle we wage is one with Statists. It doesn’t matter what color – red, black, white (referring to flags toted by communists, national socialists, fascistii of other stripes) they all plan on dictating what you may do, own, think.
CARB is of course a classic piece of Statism – where are George and Aldus when the future is now?

John from CA
November 29, 2010 3:50 pm

JEM says:
November 29, 2010 at 11:47 am
John from CA – given Brown’s history, I would not expect anything positive to come out of anything he might do with, to, or for CARB.
I might be surprised, certainly I’ve been (negatively) surprised by the outgoing governor, but to mangle Damon Runyan, that’s not the way to bet.
==========
Just “maybe” he’ll grow up and prove us all wrong. I have to hope he wants to prove himself in the face of the past failures and I feel the best course of action is to get the best science and ideas under his nose before the “swine” sell him down the road.
If we attempt to do the right thing — will we regret the moon when we shoot for the stars?
The fun question, define the ultimate goal and the “best” approach.

Zeke the Sneak
November 29, 2010 4:01 pm

“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….The workshop will be rescheduled after the New Year.”
Looks like California has dodged a bullet for the time being.
It does bring back memories of Christmas Past, though. Ah, the mistletoe, the fireside, a little Spanish coffee, the excitement in the eyes of the little ones, the 2,000+ page ObamaCare Bill passed on Christmas Eve…Who could forget when the Administration and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid stuffed our stocking with this?
Senate Passes Healthcare Bill With Christmas Eve Vote

kadaka (KD Knoebel)
November 29, 2010 5:58 pm

From Billy Liar on November 29, 2010 at 11:07 am:

Making a rule about false statements would appear to be a bit of a double-edged weapon in the environmental protection arena, would it not?

Two edges would be expected on a hand-knapped spearhead. And since primitive times, the authority of government comes ultimately from the threat of force, the pointy end of a spear.
The government will tell you what they say is the truth, the government will tell you what an ordinary citizen has said is false, at its discretion. Expect no more, no less. CARB has that down pat. They’ve also demonstrated how well they can handle spears.
Yup, nothing really “enhances the integrity of debate” as when debaters considering presenting what they know to be the truth, realize they are at the risk of fines and/or imprisonment when “the judges” decide it’s not the truth, or perhaps just not the truth they were looking for.
CARB needs a larger space for the hearing? Do they have any leftover Hollywood coliseum sets? They could use one for when they start having hearings with the new rule in place, it’ll do wonders to properly set the mood.
BTW, what is Mary Nichols doing while California’s economy burns?

Grey Lensman
November 29, 2010 7:18 pm

Henry Chance says
Quote
From the big ethanol plant engineering firm. apparently they deny it takes petrol to raise, harvest and brew corn.
Unquote
You mean that they cannot use ethanol to raise, harvest and brew corn?
Whoda thunk it

jae
November 29, 2010 7:47 pm

LOL. Californica has finally become a complete bankrupt joke. I will fight against bailing those morons out of their misery!

Gary Pate
November 29, 2010 11:04 pm

Well Jerry Brown is the [snip] we are left with but since he is still drinking the AGW kool-aid I doubt he would put anyone better in place. He gave the current head of CARB a job his first time around…
At least CARB will kill jobs quickly. The rest of the nation will be able to see the economic damage and avoid the idiocy my state is currently undertaking.

FrankK
November 30, 2010 1:42 am

I’ll bee bark
and be the putty poop er

Henry chance
November 30, 2010 7:47 am

http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/epa-fraud-chevy-volt-nissan-leaf-actually-get-only-23-25-mpg/
Chevy and Nissan electric cars do 23 MPG if we factor in the coal used to generate electric.

Grumpy Old Man
November 30, 2010 9:42 am

The truth shall make you free. Well, will it? Only if you fight for it.

mojo
November 30, 2010 12:04 pm

Y’know, I remember when CARB had real work to do – LA was a smog hell, etc. Nowadays, they seem to be more interested in bailiwick maintenance.

R. Craigen
December 1, 2010 10:02 am

How about prohibiting “dishonest statements” BY (as opposed to TO) them?
How the h#$ do they propose to determine what constitutes a “dishonest” (as opposed to “false”) statement? Is this only a weasel word that permits ANYTHING THEY D#% WELL PLEASE to be prosecutable?