ClimateScienceWatch |
Promoting integrity in the use of climate science in government |
Climate Science Watch is a nonprofit public interest education and advocacy project dedicated to holding public officials accountable for the integrity and effectiveness with which they use climate science and related research in government policymaking, toward the goal of enabling society to respond effectively to the challenges posed by global warming and climate change. See Details |
Canada’s leading scientists: Evidence calls for going “far beyond” the Kyoto Protocol
Posted on Wednesday, June 07, 2006
The Canadian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society (CMOS) wrapped up its 40th annual Congress on June 1 and issued a strong statement on climate change science and policy. The statement says: “The scientific evidence dictates that in order to stabilize the climate, global reductions in greenhouse gas emissions need to go far beyond those mandated under [the] Kyoto Protocol.” The CMOS is Canada’s leading organization of atmospheric and oceanic scientists, including most of the climate scientists who work for the federal government. Their statement can reasonably be construed as a rejection of the policy of the current Tory leadership.
See Details
NOAA, global warming, and hurricanes: CSW director interview
Posted on Sunday, June 04, 2006
Text from a May 30 live interview with Climate Science Watch director Rick Piltz on the “Earthbeat” public affairs show on WPFW-FM radio in Washington, DC, as part of a program on hurricanes and global warming. Also interviewed was Dr. Judith Curry of Georgia Tech University, who met the following day with Florida Gov. Jeb Bush to discuss the potential implications for Florida of research showing a global increase in hurricane intensity (AP: “Scientists say warming threatening Florida”).
See Details
NOAA censors speech by science experts on endangered salmon
Posted on Sunday, June 04, 2006
The Washington Post reported May 31 that the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration has directed that questions about endangered salmon—which the agency is responsible for protecting—are to be answered only by headquarters, and then only by three officials, all political appointees. Scientists and other agency officials who actually work on the salmon studies aren’t supposed to answer reporters’ questions. In a June 3 editorial, “A Fishy Policy: The Bush administration’s big chill on speech isn’t limited to global warming,” the Post calls NOAA’s justification for the policy “Orwellian” and says: “You’d think the Bush administration would have learned its lesson with James Hansen and global warming. Apparently not.”
NOAA’s misleading internal Congressional briefing points on hurricanes and global warming
Posted on Wednesday, May 31, 2006
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration officials came in for legitimate criticism last year for putting out misleading, incomplete, and one-sided information about the state of scientific research on the connection between global warming and increased hurricane intensity. An internal NOAA document obtained by Climate Science Watch lays out a set of official talking points on “Hurricanes and Climate Change” for use in Congressional testimony and legislative briefings, indicating that the agency’s spinning of this issue continues in 2006.
See Details
Two new studies link increased hurricane intensity to global warming
Posted on Wednesday, May 31, 2006
The New York Times reports May 31 that climate researchers at Purdue University and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology separately have presented new evidence, in forthcoming science publications, supporting the idea that global warming is causing stronger hurricanes. A NOAA meteorologist is quoted as referring to the researchers’ analysis as “theology.” We wonder whether this NOAA meteorologist was the only federal scientist the Times reporter asked for a comment (if so, why?), or whether he was the one the Times was offered by the NOAA Public Affairs operation. (Archived)
See Details
Supreme Court Rules Against Government Whistleblowers
Posted on Monday, May 29, 2006
The Government Accountability Project said in a May 30 statement on the Supreme Court ruling in the case of Garcetti v. Ceballos: Today, the Supreme Court severely limited the rights of government employee whistleblowers to protect the public interest. Through its ruling in Garcetti v. Ceballos, the Court holds that government employees’ job-related speech is not protected by the first amendment, a significant departure from prior law. Public employee truth-tellers are essential to the safety and welfare of our country. Tom Devine, GAP Legal Director, commented “This decision is outrageous. Canceling the doctrine of ‘duty speech’ means that government employees only have an on-the-job right to be ‘yes people,’ parroting false information and enabling illegality.”
See Details
Study author accuses CEI global warming TV ads of misrepresenting science
Posted on Thursday, May 25, 2006
Recently, the Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI) initiated a national television campaign claiming, among other things, that global warming is not causing ice sheets to shrink. Curt Davis, director of the Center for Geospatial Intelligence at the University of Missouri-Columbia, says CEI is misrepresenting his previous research to back their claims. “These television ads are a deliberate effort to confuse and mislead the public about the global warming debate,” Davis said. “They are selectively using only parts of my previous research to support their claims.”
See Details
CEI TV spots continue global warming denial communications strategy
Posted on Thursday, May 25, 2006
The Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI), an anti-regulation advocacy group that has received substantial funding from ExxonMobil, has begun running 60-second TV spots apparently timed as an attempt to counter favorable public response to the new film that centers on Al Gore’s communication of the global warming problem. With this action, CEI continues to act in accord with a long-standing communications strategy, developed by global-warming denial cadre in conjunction with oil industry interests, designed to misrepresent the scientific issues and manufacture an enhanced sense of scientific uncertainty about the global warming problem.
See Details
NOAA predicts 4-6 major Atlantic hurricanes in 2006
Posted on Monday, May 22, 2006
On May 22 the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration announced its forecast that a very active hurricane season is looming in the North Atlantic region. For the six-month 2006 North Atlantic hurricane season beginning June 1, NOAA is predicting 13 to 16 named storms, with eight to 10 becoming hurricanes, of which four to six could become “major” hurricanes of Category 3 strength or higher. The hurricane forecast announcement does not mention research that has linked global warming to increased hurricane intensity.
See Details
“Bush doubts he’ll see Al Gore’s movie”
Posted on Monday, May 22, 2006
Reuters reported on May 22 (copyright 2006 Reuters) (archived):
Former oilman President George W. Bush sounds like a changed man when it comes to urging Americans to end their addiction to oil. But will he see Al Gore’s new movie about global warming?
“Doubt it,” Bush said on Monday when asked by a member of the audience during remarks in Chicago. “An Inconvenient Truth,” the movie by Gore, who lost to Bush in the 2000 presidential election, opens in U.S. theaters this week.
No comment.
Leading climate scientists’ U.S. Supreme Court brief in states’ greenhouse gas lawsuit
Posted on Monday, May 22, 2006
A group of 14 leading climate scientists filed an amici curiae brief on May 15 with the U.S. Supreme Court in support of a petition by Massachusetts, Maine, New Mexico, Oregon, Rhode Island, and the District of Columbia contending that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency should be required to regulate greenhouse gas emissions from motor vehicles under the Clean Air Act. The brief criticizes the Court of Appeals for misrepresenting a key report issued in 2001 by the National Academy of Sciences / National Research Council by selectively citing material in the report “in ways that emphasize uncertainties in the details while neglecting fundamental areas of certainty or consensus, giving the impression that climate science is more uncertain than it actually is.”
See Details
NPOESS weather and climate satellite crisis: Should heads roll at NOAA?
Posted on Thursday, May 18, 2006
An investigative report by the Commerce Department Inspector General is sharply critical of high-level federal management for failing to deal effectively with long delays and major cost overruns in the development and deployment of an essential satellite remote-sensing system under development by NOAA, the Defense Department, and NASA. The National Polar-orbiting Environmental Satellite System (NPOESS) is intended as an operational system to provide state-of-the art data for weather forecasting and climate system monitoring. Some members of Congress are calling for the ouster of NOAA Administrator Lautenbacher in response to the IG’s report.
See Details
Open U.S. Review of IPCC draft report is a good thing—Part 2: Press coverage
Posted on Monday, May 15, 2006
Critics suggested that the federal Climate Change Science Program had posted the government review draft of the IPCC assessment report, Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis, because the Bush administration was seeking to diminish its news value later when the final report is published. While understandable in light of the distrust the administration has engendered in its treatment of climate science, this interpretation—published in the journal Nature and subsequently picked up in other media outlets—is based on a misunderstanding of the open review procedure and its positive value. In addition, Nature and other publications violated the review protocol for the draft report by publishing specific references to the report’s findings.
See Details
Rep. David Wu requests GAO investigation of science manipulation and censorship
Posted on Tuesday, May 09, 2006
The Climate Science Watch blog returns to action:
On May 2, Congressman David Wu (D-OR), ranking member of the Science Subcommittee on
Environment, Technology and Standards, requested a congressional Government Accountability Office investigation into allegations of scientific manipulation and censorship by the administration. The request raises questions about NASA, the Bureau of Land Management, EPA, NOAA, and the U.S. Geological Survey.
See Details
Open U.S. review of IPCC draft report is a good thing, despite criticism—Part 1
Posted on Tuesday, May 09, 2006
After the federal Climate Change Science Program posted on its Web site the government review draft of the IPCC assessment report, “Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis,” critics suggested variously that the Bush administration is making it possible for the review process to be hijacked by special interest groups, and that the administration is posting the report in draft form to defuse its news value when the final report is published. Such concerns are off the mark and are based on a misunderstanding of the review procedure and its value. We should be on the side of an open process with broad-based input to the U.S. Government’s review of this extraordinarily important report. The Climate Change Science Program Office should be commended, not criticized, for making the report readily available for review.
See Details