As a government scientist, James Hansen took a risk. He said there are things the never wanted the American public to hear but he decided to to say them anyway. 

Hansen is head of NASA's top institute studying the and arguably the world's leading researcher on . But this imminent scientist said that the Bush administration restricted who he could talk to and editing what he can said, admitting, “politicians have rewritten the science.

"In my more than three decades in the government I've never witnessed such restrictions on the ability of scientists to communicate with the public," Hansen stated. Restrictions like an e-mail Hansen's institute received from NASA in 2004. "… there is a new review process … ," the e-mail read. "The White House (is) now reviewing all climate related press releases," it continued.

Dozens of federal agencies report science but much of it is edited at the White House before it is sent to Congress and the public. It appears climate science is edited with a heavy hand by Phil Cooney who is not a scientist but a lawyer. He was a lobbyist for the American Petroleum Institute, before going into the White House.

Hard to believe? Well it certainly gives a new meaning to the term, “political science.”

Well now under a court order and four years late, the White House on Thursday produced what it called a science-based "one-stop shop" of specific threats to the United States from man-made global warming.

While the report has no new science in it, it pulls together different U.S. studies and localizes international reports into one comprehensive document required by law. The 271-page report is notable because it is something the Bush administration has fought in the past.

Andrew Weaver, a Canadian climate scientist who was not involved in the effort, called it "a litany of bad news in store for the U.S."

Biologist Thomas Lovejoy, one of the scientists who reviewed the report for the federal government, said: "It basically says the America we've known we can no longer count on. It's a pretty dramatic picture of all kinds of change rippling through natural systems across the country. And all of that has implications for people."

White House associate science director Sharon Hays, in a teleconference with reporters, declined to characterize the findings as bad, but she said it is an issue the administration takes seriously.

Hays said the report, titled "Scientific Assessment of the Effects of Global Change on the United States," was comprehensive and "communicates what the scientists are telling us." It was prepared by the Committee on Environmental and Natural Resources for the National Science and Technology Council.The report was required by a 1990 law that says that every four years the government must produce a comprehensive science assessment of global warming. It had not been done since 2000. Environmental groups got a court order to force the Bush administration to produce the document. Hays said the White House has preferred issuing studies on individual global warming issues, such as an agricultural effects report released Tuesday.

CLIMATE REPORT PREDICTIONS

• Increased heat deaths and deaths from climate-worsened smog. In Los Angeles alone, yearly heat fatalities could increase by more than 1,000 by 2080, and the Midwest and Northeast are most vulnerable to increased heat deaths.
• Worsening water shortages for agriculture and urban users. From California to New York, lack of water will be an issue.
• A need for billions of dollars in more power plants (one major cause of global warming gases) to cool a hotter country. The report says summer cooling will mean Seattle's energy consumption would increase by 146 percent with the warming that could come by the end of the century.
• More death and damage from wildfires, hurricanes and other natural disasters and extreme weather. In the past three decades, wildfire season in the West has increased by 78 days.
• Increased insect infestations and food- and waterborne microbes and diseases. Insect and pathogen outbreaks to the forests are causing $1.5 billion in annual losses.
• A likely increase in health care disparity. "Many of the expected health effects are likely to fall disproportionately on the poor, the elderly, the disabled and the uninsured," the report said.