Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
RCEC Email 2.25.03 (a)
RCEC Email 2.25.03 (a)
RCEC Email 2.25.03 (a)
RCEC Email 2.25.03 (a)
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×
Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply

RCEC Email 2.25.03 (a)

130

Published on

Reconstructing Climatic and Environmental Changes" …

Reconstructing Climatic and Environmental Changes"
FOIA
Email 2.25.03 (a)

Published in: News & Politics, Technology
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
130
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
1
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. -4- ARAISJ 1 of 5'h ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ RECORD TYPE: FEDERAL (NOTES MAIL) CREATOR:Frank Maisano <fmaisano@PCGPR.COM> ( Frank Maisano <fmaisano~PCGPR.COM>F UN CREATION DATE/TIME:25-FEB-2003 19:08:52.00 SUBJECT:: Fwd: George Marshall Comments on NAS Report TO:Dana M. Perino ( CN=Dana M. Perino!DU=CEQ/O=EOP(?EOP CEQ I READ :UNKNOWN TEXT: rate: Tue, 25 Feb 2003 18:46:11 -0500 From: "Frank Maisano" <fmaisano@PCGPR. OM> Subject: George Marshall Comments on NAS Report To: "Frank Maisano" <fmaisano@PCGPR.CO I> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: multipart/mixed; boundary=h'Boundary (ID MsGdRf/MZ~lX2Nli19IwJlw)" Friends, Here are comments from the George Mars all Institute, who commented extensively to the NAS. .. .Many of their comments wereincorporated into this report. You may wish to contact Bill O'Keefe c. (202) 251-4625 Best, Frank Maisano c. (202) 297-1502 February 26, 20024 MARSHALL INSTITUTE COMMENDS NATIONAL ACADENIES' CLIMATE SCIENCE REVIEW: Stresses Need to Prioritize Climate Research Today's National Academies report, Planaing Climate and Global Change Research, provides a valuable service br providing a constructive critique of the Administration's draft limate Change Strategic .Plahf. "We join the Academy in commending the Administration for its outreach to the broader scientific community and agree that these efforts indicate a strong interest in developing a plan that is responsive to national needs," Marshall Institute Pre ident William O'Keefe said. The George Marshall Institute also examined the Administration's draft plan in detail. Based on comments submi ted to the Department of Commerce in mid-January, Climate Change Science: Marshall Institute's Review of the Draft Climate Change Scie ce Program Strategic Plan, the Institute lays out its recommendations -or improving the draft Strategic Plan (available at http://www.marshall org). 1 The Academy comments also reinforce tho e made by a majority of the participants at the Workshop convened 1 st December to engage stakeholders in the planning process. In convening that Workshop, Assistant S cretary Mahoney provided a valuable context by indicating that the draft had been designed to file://D:SEARCH_7_9-03_CEQ004-fjii6e003. ceq.txt 8/14/2003
  • 2. Page 2 of 57 prvk icsinadcomn.Hsmaueo scesfrteefr was the extent of change made to the draft. By omitting this context, teAcademy risks a widespread misunderstanding of its review and the Administration's efforts. In the end, the Academy report, as well as others from the scientific community, reaffirm a few basic facts: *Our current state of knowledge is inadequate for distinguishing human impacts from natural variability * Progress in improving our state of kowledge is tied to a commitment and fun-ding to improve our observational data system, and * For models to be more useful, they must be based more on confirmed scientific facts and less on unvalidated hypotheses. The George Marshall Institute (GMI) is a 501(c) (3) non-profit organization founded in 1984 to encourage the use of sound science in making public policy. Decisions and c nclusions about many public policy matters are shaped by advances in science and technology. For that reason, unbiased and scientifically accurate assessments of the significance of these advances for policy are critical. George Marshall Institute 1625 K St, NW Suite 1050 Washington, D.C. 20005 202/296-9655 info~marshall .org - nas2-26rpt. pdf-==========ATTACHMENT 1= ATT CREATION TIME/DATE: 0 00:00:00. 0 TEXT: Unable to convert NSREOPO102:[ATTACH.I34]SREOP01300E6ILJ.001 to ASCII, The following is a HEX DUMP:I 255044462D312E330D25E2E3CFD30D0A31303 2030206F626A0D3C3C200D2F4C696E656172697A 65642031200D2F4F20313131200D2F48205B2(3133383420333234205D200D2F4C203132383233 32200D2F45203939363735200D2F4E203220012F5420313235393533200D3E3E200D656E646F62 2 2 2 2 6A0D20202020202020202020202020 0 O O (2020202020202020202020202020202020202020 3 31 2020202020202020202020202020202020787 65660D313038203238200D30303030303030 O 36203030303030206E0D0A303030303030303 3131203030303030206E0D0A3030303030303132 3438203030303030206E0D0A3030303030303 373038203030303030206E0D0A30303030303032 313230203030303030206E0D0A30303030303(32313531203030303030206E0D0A303030303030 32333132203030303030206E0D0A303030303(3032383536203030303030206E0D0A3030303030 3032383836203030303030206E0D0A30303030303032393237203030303030206E0D0A30303030 303032393739203030303030206E0D0A30303030303033323039203030303030206E0D0A303030 30303033343333203030303030206E0D0A30303030303033393835203030303030206E0D0A3030 3030303036323537203030303030206E0D0A30303030303036323830203030303030206E0D0A30 303030303036353131203030303030206E0D0 3 O0 03030303036393935203030303030206E0D0A 3 30303030303037323032203030303030206E0 0OA30303030303037323638203030303030206E0D 3 3 3 2 6 2 6 0A3030303030333932343820303O O O O O 1 0D0A30303030303636333934203O3O3O3O3O O E 22 3 3 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2 0D0A3030303030363930373 O O O O 0 O )6E0D0A3030303030383530323020303O O O O O 3 3 3 3 3 6E0D0A3030303030383530393920303O O O 206E0D0A3030303030383539353720303030 O O 3 3 62 3 3 303 206E0D0OA3030303030303133383420303O O 30206E0D0A3030303030303136383 O O O O 30206E0D0A747261696C65720D3C3C0D2F536)7A65203133360D2F496E666F20313035203O2O52 200D2F526F6F742031303920302052200D2F5)72657620313235393432200D2F49445B3C363131 62653233363365613663643732623030373661316336353330653434643E3C3031616666316565 file:/D:SEARCH_7_9_O3tCEQ004j21i6e 03_ceq.txt 8/14/2003
  • 3. M crTllhal ~GEORGEC I N S T I T 1U T E February 26, 2002 Contact: Mark Herlong (202/296-9655) MARSHALL INSTITU E COMMVENDS NATIONAL ACADEMIES' CLIMATE SCIENCE REVIEW: Stresses Need to P ioritize Climate Research Today's National Academies re ort, Planning Climate and Global Change Research, provides a valuable service byproviding a constructive critique of the Administration's draft Climate Change Strategic Plan. "We join the Academy in commending the Administration for its outreach to the broader scientific community and agree that these efforts indicate a strong interest in developing a plan that is responsive to national needs," Marshall Institute President William O'Keefe said. The George Marshall Institute also examined the Administration's draft plan in detail. Based on comments submitted Io the Department of Commerce in mid-January, Climate Change Science: MarshallIn titute 's Review oflthe Draft Climate Change Science Program Strategic Plan, the Irstitute lays out its recommendations for improving the draft Strategic Plan (available at ht ://www.marshall.org) The Academy comments also r inforce those made by a majority of the participants at the Workshop convened last December to engage stakeholders in the planning process.
  • 4. In convening that Workshop, A istant Secretary Mahoney provided avaluable context by indicating that the draft had been designed to provoke discussion and the comment. His measure of success for t e effort was the extent of change made to of its draft. By omitting this context, the Aca emy risks a widespread misunderstanding review and the Administration's efforts In the end, the Academy report, as well as others'from the scientific community, reaffirm a few basic facts: * Our current state of knowledge s inadequate for distinguishing human impacts from natural variability, * Progress in improving our state of knowledge is tied to a commitment and funding to improve our observa ional data system, and * For models to be more useful, t ecy must be based more on confirmed scientific facts and less on unvalidated h potheses. in The George Marshall Institute (GMI) i; a 501 (c)(3) non-profit organization founded 1984 to encourage the use of sound sci nce in making public policy. Decisions and conclusions about many public policy natters are shaped by advances in science and technology. For that reason, unbiased and scientifically accurate assessments of the significance of these advances for poli y are critical. George Marshall Institute 1525 KSt, NW Suite 1050 Washington, D.C. 20005 Z02/296-9655 inf (iirniarshall.orQ htp/www.marshafl.org 2

×