Alaska's escalating war on science should be a grave concern to us all. On climate change, endangered species, predator control, and environmental impacts of industrial development, Alaska now has arguably the most anti-science government anywhere in the nation.

For instance, with virtually no public input, the 2008 legislature appropriated $2 million for an "endangered species conference," for which "conclusions had already been agreed upon," according to an Anchorage Daily News report. The stated objective for the appropriation was to refute federal climate science, particularly the science behind the listing of polar bears as threatened under the federal Endangered Species Act (ESA). In the words of its primary sponsor Rep. John Harris: "You know as well as I do that scientists are like lawyers. ... we want to have the money to hire scientists to answer Interior (department) scientists."

Many asked Gov. Palin to veto this appropriation, but being a non-believer in climate change and species protection herself, she approved it. Palin recently claimed that climate change concerns are based on "snake oil science," questioned "whether we are warming or cooling," and concluded that climate is simply "cyclical" and thus no reason to constrain fossil fuel development and use. If it takes place as envisioned, the state's "conference to nowhere" and public relations campaign to deceive the public will be a laughing stock of the scientific community.

In his Dec. 12 Compass piece, Attorney General Dan Sullivan decries the "misuse" of the ESA "by Outside environmental groups," asserts that protecting endangered species could "lock up Alaska resources and shut down our economy," and announces the administration's policy to fight proposed ESA listings.

Mr. Sullivan neglects to mention that Alaska already has 20 species on the federal threatened and endangered list, without shutting down our economy. As justification for the state's ill-conceived lawsuit against the federal government over the polar bear listing, he states that polar bear populations are "robust and stable."

Not so, says the science.

Of the 19 polar bear populations worldwide, only three are currently listed as stable, none in Alaska. Alaska's polar bear populations in the Chukchi Sea and Southern Beaufort Sea are both now listed as declining, primarily due to loss of sea ice caused by carbon emissions. In fact, despite the Palin/Parnell assertions to the contrary, we learned from documents the state tried to keep secret last year, that the state's own marine mammal scientists agree with the science and rationale behind the federal listing.

On predator control, the state has invoked the "sound science" mantra countless times, but few reputable wildlife scientists agree. Hundreds of scientists and wildlife professionals, the American Society of Mammologists, and the National Research Council have all raised serious concerns over the lack of scientific basis for Alaska's arcane predator control program, but their overtures to state government have been ignored.

And on Cook Inlet beluga whales, Rep. Don Young criticizes federal agencies for producing "false science," and says that "the state should have the science available to (contradict) what comes forth." He and Anchorage Mayor Dan Sullivan will ask the Legislature to appropriate "millions" to conduct studies designed to show that Cook Inlet belugas are fine and in no need of additional protection. Again, these politicians are at odds with the vast body of credible science on belugas.

During the Exxon Valdez oil spill, scores of researchers were hired by Exxon to deliver the results Exxon wanted, and to contradict legitimate government science. These researchers, who came to be known as "biostitutes," are the sort that the Legislature, governor, and some in the congressional delegation will be looking to enlist in their new anti-science crusade.

Alaska deserves better. Science cannot continue to be abused in such a blatantly biased, dishonest fashion. If we are to develop an environmentally sustainable economy, we need to ask the right scientific questions, listen objectively to the answers, and act accordingly.

Let's hope our next governor will be more enlightened on this subject, and put an end to Alaska's shameful war on science.