The Union of Concerned Scientists rapped the world of “alternative facts” promoted by the President and his allies and called on journalists to hold the White House and Congress accountable for actions that “threaten scientific integrity and science-based policies,” in its report on Donald Trump’s six months in office.

While all modern presidents have politicized science to some extent, USC says the Trump Administration has increased the number of threats to federal scientists.

Union of Concerned Scientists

“The Administration has shown a blatant disregard for scientific facts and evidence, appointing officials with a track record of misrepresenting scientific information, overruling the recommendations of scientists on exposure to toxic pesticides, removing scientific information from agency websites and dismissing independent science advisors,” according to the 35-page “Sidelining Science from Day One” report.

UCS accuses the Trump Administration of creating a chilling environment for government scientists who are afraid to speak certain words such as “climate change.”

For instance, the Centers for Disease Control’s cancellation of “The Climate and Health Summit” that was slated for February led many to fear a future of self-sabotage or self-censorship within federal agencies to avoid conflict from Trump political appointees.

UCS calls on journalists to continue their mission of holding officials accountable for the Administration’s words and actions and to investigate allegations of wrongdoing.

The role of journalism is to seek out truth and objectively report on it when the Trump Administration, “including the President, willingly disregards facts, misrepresents scientific conclusions, plays up uncertainty, vilifies scientists, and otherwise distorts public perceptions of science.”

Journalists must also call out “agencies that place unnecessary barriers on communication between the media and government scientists.”

Science and technology will be instrumental in dealing with the complex challenges facing the US.

“The public deserves independent impartial scientific information, even—or perhaps especially—when that information indicates the need for politically unpopular or inconvenient action,” says the report.