I've mentioned this before but the National Academies are not a part of the U.S. Government. They are government contractors. The article(s) should be recategorized.--Porthos 12:48, 20 August 2007 (EDT)
- And I have also mentioned they are government chartered and funded. Like the Post Office. Should we also remove them from the same category? Now, the answer is no, but we do appreciate your POV. --şŷŝôρ-₮KṢρёаќǃ 14:26, 20 August 2007 (EDT)
- We also receive funding from private sources. Whoever requests a study is the one who pays for it, be it a private firm or a government agency. I don't work for the government, I don't draw a salary from the government. The label is simply incorrect.--Porthos 14:57, 20 August 2007 (EDT)
For whatever it's worth, when I added the category I was going on a hunch; I'm not bothered at all if I was wrong and it needs correcting. (This is why I encourage people to categorize their articles as they write them *nudge* *wink*) Aziraphale 16:13, 20 August 2007 (EDT) <-blind bat...
- by bringing together committees of experts in all areas of scientific and technological endeavor. These experts serve pro bono
Liberals cite the academies when their findings support wild ideas like global warming is caused by human activity and does more harm than good; see politics of global warming. --Ed Poor Talk 09:56, 21 August 2007 (EDT)