I have mentioned this before, but came across this article from HA regarding the White House's deference for reports that support their agenda as opposed to scientific, peer-reviewed reports on climate-change:
Pielke doesn’t necessarily refute global-warming concerns, but he notes that the administration is hardly taking a scientific approach to a scientific issue. Instead of focusing on peer-reviewed research, which has become increasingly inconclusive, the White House and Holdren have begun seizing on claims that are not scientifically derived, have not been tested, are out of date, and in many cases are simply false. That doesn’t give any credibility to the science of climate analysis, and instead gives critics the kind of ammunition that makes it look like phrenology.