Cover image from Government Executive
Let’s be honest here, watching the cage match between the people over at the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and Congresscritter Lamar Smith (R-Texas), Chairman of the House Science, Space and Technology Committee, is morphing into revenge of the climate science nerds. Not only are the people at NOAA NOT complying with the subpoena to surrender the email chains and other communications used to justify the specific data sets NOAA used to tell the world that climate change-global warming-the sky is falling is actually happening, but they’ve now enlisted the support of the American Meteorological Society. From the Washington Post:
Meanwhile, the American Meteorological Society told Smith Wednesday that his subpoena of NOAA correspondence sets a dangerous precedent for interference with independent scientific research.
“Singling out specific research studies, and implicitly questioning the integrity of the researchers conducting those studies, can be viewed as a form of intimidation that could deter scientists from freely carrying out research on important national challenges,” wrote Keith L. Seitter, executive director of the Boston-based scientific group.
He said the congressman’s demand for records “imposes a chilling effect on future communication among scientists, and potentially disrupts NOAA’s critical efforts to protect life and property.”
Wait a second: NOAA’s research is federally funded and Smith heads up the oversight of the way the cash is spent. How can it be intimidation to ask for the communications determining what data to use if the research and the results are truthful and above board? And what chilling effect is involved if the ultimate goal of the science is pursuit of truth. Results that don’t fit a political agenda would chill the political agenda, but not the truth.
We’ll get back to that in a minute. As it happens, the global warming/climate change crowd are sticking together on this one.
Andrew Rosenberg, a fisheries scientist at NOAA during the Clinton administration who is now with the Washington-based Union of Concerned Scientists, summed up the dispute this way:
“This is mostly about climate change. But it is also about a congressman attacking answers he doesn’t like. I sincerely hope that federal scientists don’t have to lawyer up because they’re doing their jobs.”
Uh, not to argue, but if this is about a congressman attacking answers he doesn’t like, and in the end the correspondence and email will bear out the veracity of NOAA’s data, then why the reluctance to give up the cache?
Sorry. This writer has been watching one too many crime dramas that tell a lot about human nature.
Rep. Smith has an idea of what is behind the refusals:
“It was inconvenient for this administration that climate data has clearly showed no warming for the past two decades,” Smith said in a statement. “The American people have every right to be suspicious when NOAA alters data to get the politically correct results they want and then refuses to reveal how those decisions were made. NOAA needs to come clean about why they altered the data to get the results they needed to advance this administration’s extreme climate change agenda. The agency has yet to identify any legal basis for withholding these documents. The committee intends to use all tools at its disposal to undertake its constitutionally-mandated oversight responsibilities.”
Anyone with a modicum of sense is going to guess that there is another “climategate” in all those emails. In fact, all over the comment boards that’s exactly what is being said. Why not turn over all the communications – and the original data including tables of buoy and satellite readings – if the data is accurate. Most of us who are curious about this are not as dumb as the siloed climate scientists think we are.
So much for transparency on that score.
Rep. Smith first requested the communications from the NOAA offices in September. He has sent two subpoenas, with a deadline of today for compliance. So far, the heel digging from NOAA has been pretty substantial. Which leads to the question…just what IS in those emails?
Psst: Rep. Smith, impound the routers. You’ll find it all there.
Related from earlier in the week: Climate Scientists Don’t Know Much About History – The Global Warming Scam Exposed