Escalation of Conflict re Climate Change Scientists

 

Standoff over government climate study provokes national uproar by scientists

A top House lawmaker’s confrontation with government researchers over a groundbreaking climate change study is provoking a national backlash from scientists, who say his campaign represents the most serious threat Congress has posed to scientific freedom.

Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Tex.), chairman of the House Committee on Science, Space and Technology, has subpoenaed scientists at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and demanded that they turn over internal e-mails related to their research. Their findings contradicted earlier work showing that global warming had paused, and Smith, a climate change skeptic, has accused them of altering global temperature data and rushing to publish their research in the June issue of the journal Science.
[NOAA chief tells lawmaker: No one will ‘coerce the scientists who work for me’]  So far, NOAA officials have resisted Smith’s demands, and the showdown has escalated. The lawmaker has threatened to subpoena Commerce Secretary Penny Pritzker, while scientists have rallied in solidarity with the researchers.

On Tuesday, seven scientific organizations representing hundreds of thousands of scientists sent an unsparing letter to Smith, warning that his efforts are “establishing a practice of inquests” that will have a chilling effect.

“The repercussions of the committee’s actions could go well beyond climate science, setting a precedent to question other topics such as genetically modified organisms and vaccines that have controversial regulatory and policy implications,” the letter said.

Comment from the Diva:  this conflict is a very serious one for the scientific community, and many of the top scientific organizations have weighed in on it. «

Update:  At least two readers have major disagreements with the report. See their comments on this posting.

This entry was posted in Climate Change. Bookmark the permalink.

5 Responses to Escalation of Conflict re Climate Change Scientists

  1. The hypocrisy of this is truly amazing! Where were these clowns when Rep Grijalva demanded more from 10 reputable scientists who had the temerity to question the “consensus” than Rep Smith did from NOAA, and threatened the 10 with RICO to boot? Where was the thunderous outrage then? Grijalva’s threats were more egregious than Smith’s because the work by Karl, et al. that Smith questions is scientifically suspect – correcting the readings of modern precision instruments back to temperatures of water in buckets – and was paid for by taxpayers. While I can support neither Smith’s fishing expedition nor his demand for records of work in progress, I have to say that the work itself, and the timing and the manner of its release, does have at least a whiff of dead carp.

    Of course Grijalva and Smith were both politically posturing; the scientific community should stand up to both. What a sad commentary on the state of Western civilization that Big Science only speaks up for science and scientists who support Big Government’s political positions.

  2. pjblechman says:

    Claire, Happy Thanksgiving to you! I am very thankful and grateful for your blog! All the best, Peggy

    Sent from my iPad

    >

    • Avagene Moore says:

      Why not show the research and evidence? Why is dissent not allowed? If everything is in order, what is there to fear? I am not a scientist but have learned that anything that states “all” or “none”; “always” or “never”; or “everyone” or “no one” is suspect.

      It takes little effort to find that the scientific community does not agree that the “science is settled.” Many reputable scientists have changed their minds since Al Gore made his big bucks on Global Warming. When the “powers-that-be” fear what further research and testing show and try to shut it up, that is a red flag to me.

      For the sake of space, I submit four links for consideration – there are far too many to reference all but I, for one, cannot dismiss them. There is indeed dissent and many authoritative sources backing it.

      1: From Investor’s Business Daily: The alarmists keep telling us their concern about global warming is all about man’s stewardship of the environment. But we know that’s not true. A United Nations official has now confirmed this. At a news conference last week (Feb 2015) in Brussels, Christiana Figueres, executive secretary of U.N.’s Framework Convention on Climate Change, admitted that the goal of environmental activists is not to save the world from ecological calamity but to destroy capitalism.

      http://news.investors.com/ibd-editorials/021015-738779-climate-change-scare-tool-to-destroy-capitalism.htm#ixzz3rt3vWOqs

      2: 321-page report assembled by The Climate Depot:
      “More Than 1000 International Scientists Dissent Over Man-Made Global Warming Claims.” It names names. It lists reasons for the dissent. Reality is engineered consensus. But when that doesn’t work, “experts” just assert there is a consensus when there isn’t.

      Excerpts from The Climate Report:
      “We’re not scientifically there yet. Despite what you may have heard in the media, there is nothing like a consensus of scientific opinion that this is a problem. Because there is natural variability in the weather, you cannot statistically know for another 150 years.” — UN IPCC’s Tom Tripp, a member of the UN IPCC [Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change] since 2004 and listed as one of the lead authors and serves as the Director of Technical Services & Development for U.S. Magnesium.

      “The dysfunctional nature of the climate sciences is nothing short of a scandal. Science is too important for our society to be misused in the way it has been done within the Climate Science Community.” The global warming establishment “has actively suppressed research results presented by researchers that do not comply with the dogma of the [UN] IPCC.” — Swedish Climatologist Dr. Hans Jelbring of the Paleogeophysics & Geodynamics Unit at Stockholm University.

      “The whole idea of anthropogenic global warming is completely unfounded. There appears to have been money gained by Michael Mann, Al Gore and UN IPCC’s Rajendra Pachauri ….” — South African astrophysicist Hilton Ratcliffe, Astronomical Society of Southern Africa (ASSA) and the Astronomical Society of the Pacific and a Fellow of the British Institute of Physics.

      http://www.climatedepot.com/2014/05/15/no-dissent-allowed-79-year-old-skeptical-climate-scientist-victim-of-witch-hunt-fears-for-his-safety-after-declaring-himself-a-skeptic/

      3. Climate Science: No Dissent Allowed – May 14, 2014, by Patrick J. Michaels and Paul C. Knappenberger http://www.cato.org/blog/climate-science-no-dissent-allowed

      4. Climate Change Consensus, No Dissent Allowed by Debra J. Saunders, 2/24/14
      http://www.sfgate.com/opinion/saunders/article/Climate-change-consensus-no-dissent-allowed-5264142.php

      True believers have been hounding dissenters out of the climate community for years. … Former Delaware climatologist David Legates once told me he warned students that if they had doubts about global warming, “keep your mouth shut.” The grant money goes to the believers.

      It makes you wonder: If climate-change alarmists are so thoughtful and smart and fact-based, why do they deny the existence of serious critics?

      The choice, after all, had them peddling an odd scientific proposition: The experts all agree, and they’re always right. (NOTE the use of ‘all’ and ‘always’ – AM)

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s