BP subpoenas researchers’ emails regarding oil spill work

Scientists warn against “unnecessary intrusions that stifle research.”

Read the whole story

 

[jdale]

If they were honest in their assessments and fair and accurate in their scientific deliberations, then probably nothing at all. Except, they seem to have an intellectual property concern, so perhaps they should have avoided mentioning excess details pertaining to inner workings and functions of proprietary processes and technology in their deliberative communications. Other than that, if they were honest and fair, why should they have done anything differently?

I disagree. Even if they were fair and accurate in reaching their conclusions, it is entirely possible that early drafts and discussions were not entirely accurate. That's part of why there are multiple drafts both of papers and of the conclusions they present, to catch and correct errors.

It seems totally reasonable to me that they should present not just their conclusions but also the raw data. A precedent which has been set in the past and which they complied with here. Other experts can then examine the raw data and, if appropriate, question the conclusions on that basis.

It does not seem reasonable to essentially subject them to post-hoc monitoring, when the aim is basically a fishing expedition (no evidence suggests any wrong-doing) in hopes of catching something that can be used for character assassination in hopes of undermining their scientific conclusions.