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 |
Polar Bears, Pt 2: “Habitat loss and inadequate regulatory mechanisms to address sea ice recession”
Posted on Friday, December 29, 2006
In support of its December 27 announcement of a proposed rule under the Endangered Species Act to list the Polar Bear as threatened throughout its range, the Fish and Wildlife Service issued a document for public review and comment. The document uses climate science findings on observed and projected Arctic sea ice loss and its relationship to global warming. The bottom line finding: “We have determined that the polar bear is threatened by habitat loss and inadequate regulatory mechanisms to address sea ice recession.” The proposed rule has made it through the Administration’s process so far without being blocked, bringing the link between climate change impacts and endangered species into a high-profile regulatory proceeding.
See Details
Interior Dept. proposal to list polar bear as threatened due to loss of sea ice
Posted on Thursday, December 28, 2006
The U.S. Department of the Interior announced on December 27 that it is proposing formally to list the polar bear as “threatened” with extinction, because rising Arctic temperature is causing the loss of sea ice, on which polar bears depend for hunting. The proposal, now being published for public review and comment, results from a scientifically based analysis conducted by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. It was announced just in time to meet a deadline stemming from the settlement of a lawsuit brought against the administration by three environmental groups, who challenged Interior’s dilatory response to their initial petition almost 2 years ago.
See Details
Gerald R. Ford: 2 quotes
Posted on Thursday, December 28, 2006
"I believe that truth is the glue that holds government together, not only our government, but civilization itself.”
--Inaugural address, 1974
“I must say to you that the State of the Union is not good.”
--State of the Union message, 1975
Maybe the next president should use these again.
Happy Holidays!
Posted on Sunday, December 24, 2006
Climate Science Watch wishes Happy Holidays and best wishes for the New Year to all our “unique visitors” (to use the terminology of our Web stats software) from all over the United States and many other countries. We’re hopeful in looking forward to 2007 and we intend to carry forward the investigation, communication, and reform advocacy that are at the heart of our government accountability strategy.
10,600 scientists have signed statement condemning Administration political interference in science
Posted on Sunday, December 24, 2006
The Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) announced at the annual meeting of the American Geophysical Union that a statement by Nobel laureates and other leading scientists calling for the restoration of scientific integrity to federal policy making has now been signed by 10,600 scientists from all 50 states. The director of the UCS Scientific Integrity Program called on the new Congress to “enact meaningful reforms so decisions within federal scientific agencies and advisory committees are based on objective and unbiased science.” Climate Science Watch will call the new Congress’ attention to how this principle should be applied to holding the Administration accountable for ensuring the integrity of communication about climate change research.
See Details
Harvard Prof. Daniel Schrag on Senator Inhofe’s “gathering of liars and charlatans”
Posted on Saturday, December 23, 2006
Prof. Schrag testified at the Senate Environment Committee hearing December 6 on climate change and the media. “Then,” he reports, “I watched in horror as Inhofe’s witnesses spouted outrageous claims intended to deceive and distort....But amid the collegiality and decorum that is the tradition in the Senate, no one stood up and called this hearing what it was: a gathering of liars and charlatans, sponsored by those industries who want to protect their profits.” Bravo to Prof. Schrag. Scientists may regard the likes of Sen. Inhofe’s denialist witnesses as charlatans, but how many communicate this forcefully to a wider public?
See Details
24 House members call for new National Climate Impacts Assessment
Posted on Friday, December 22, 2006
On December 11, Rep. Jay Inslee (D-WA), Rep. Wayne Gilchrest (R-MD), and 22 House co-signers sent a letter to William Brennan of NOAA, the Acting Director of the Climate Change Science Program, in which they say: “The failure of the CCSP to produce a National Assessment report within the time frame required by law has made it more difficult for Congress to develop a comprehensive policy response to the challenge of global climate change.” The Members are on the right track here. The National Climate Impacts Assessment is a key issue for oversight of the CCSP in the new Congress, and one we have been raising for some time.
See Details
CSW letter to the Wall Street Journal
Posted on Thursday, December 21, 2006
On December 13 the Wall Street Journal printed our letter critical of their December 4 editorial, “Global Warming Gag Order.” We said: “Your attack on Sens. Snowe and Rockefeller for their letter calling on ExxonMobil to stop supporting groups that obfuscate climate change science is misconceived on some essential points....The senators are not alone in believing it is time for ExxonMobil to stop warring against the leading climate scientists....” The Competitive Enterprise Institute didn’t like our letter.
See Details
ExxonMobil CEO says global warming poses significant potential risks, emissions reductions needed
Posted on Friday, December 08, 2006
There was much business-as-usual in ExxonMobil CEO Rex Tillerson’s recent speech to the Chief Executives Club of Boston, but considering Exxon’s leading role in funding the global warming disinformation campaign for the past eight years, we found it interesting that he now says: “[W]hen it comes to the issue of climate change....the potential risks to society could prove to be significant, so despite the areas of uncertainties that do exist, it is prudent to develop and implement strategies that address the potential risks....Consistent with this approach, we should take steps now to reduce emissions in effective and meaningful ways.”
See Details
Concerns raised about NOAA deputy administrator nominee stall confirmation process
Posted on Tuesday, December 05, 2006
Senate Commerce Committee Chairman Ted Stevens (R-AK) took the nomination of Jane Luxton to be NOAA deputy administrator and possible Climate Change Science Program director off the agenda of a committee hearing today after deciding not to proceed further with the confirmation process this year. This step resulted from intervention by several members of the committee, showing responsiveness to concerns raised about the appropriateness of the nomination. We have criticized this nomination. The committee is wise to step back and, when they take up this matter in 2007, members should consider this position in the context of a serious examination of the important position of Climate Change Science Program director, its place in the overall structure, and how it should be filled.
See Details
Upcoming confirmation vote a threat to the integrity of the Climate Change Science Program
Posted on Monday, December 04, 2006
On December 5 the Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee will hold a hearing on the nomination of corporate lawyer Jane Luxton to the position of Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Oceans and Atmosphere (thus, also the NOAA deputy administrator). If confirmed, Luxton would take the position previously held by Jim Mahoney, who retired last spring. Mahoney was also the director of the U.S. Climate Change Science Program from 2002 until his retirement. We raised concerns about this nomination in our September 26 post and in this morning’s Environment & Energy Daily. Luxton has no apparent professional experience with climate change issues and, unlike all former directors of U.S. climate and global change research, she appears to have no scientific credentials. Nothing personal here, really, but why is she even being considered for a position as director of the U.S. Government program that supports the nation’s scientific effort to understand global climate change and its potential consequences?
See Details