James Delingpole: NOAA attempts to ‘hide the decline’ in Global Warming

Posted: November 1, 2015 by tallbloke in Accountability
Tags: , , ,

Reblogged from Breitbart London

scientist_cartoonThe US government’s main climate research agency has refused a request by House Republicans to release key documents concerning the controversial issue of whether or not there has been a “pause” in global warming.

Despite being a public, taxpayer-funded institution, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) insists that it is under no obligation to provide the research papers, as demanded in a subpoena by Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Texas).

Gosh. What vital information of national secrecy importance could NOAA possibly have to hide?

That question is entirely rhetorical, by the way. The answer is obvious – well known to every one within the climate change research community. And the whole business stinks. When these documents are released, as eventually they surely must be, what will become evident is that this represents the most disgraceful official cover-up by the politicized science establishment since the release of the Climategate emails.

At the root of the issue is the inconvenient truth that there has been no “global warming” since January 1997.

This is clearly shown by the most reliable global temperature dataset – the RSS satellite records – and was even grudgingly acknowledged in the most recent Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Assessment report. While still insisting that there has been a slight warming – an increase, since 1998, of around 0.05 degrees C per decade – the IPCC had in all honesty to admit that this is smaller than the 0.1 degrees C error range for thermometer readings, and consequently statistically insignificant.

But if there has been no “global warming” for nearly 19 years how can alarmist proselytisers like President Obama and John Kerry possibly hope to convince an increasingly skeptical public that this apparently non-existent problem yet remains the most pressing concern of our age?”

Step forward the Obama administration’s helpful friends at NOAA. It’s not supposed to be a politicized institution: its job is to do science, not propaganda. But the memo must have been missed by NOAA scientists Thomas Karl and Thomas Peterson who, in May this year, published a “study” so favourable to the alarmist cause it might just as well have been scripted by Al Gore and Greenpeace, with a royal foreword by the Prince of Wales, and a blessing from Pope Francis.

“Data show no slowdown in recent global warming” declared NOAA’s press release. “The Pause”, in other words, was just the construct of a few warped deniers’ twisted imaginations.

Naturally this new “evidence” was seized on with alacrity by the usual media suspects.

“No Pause in global warming” crowed Scientific American.

“Global warming hasn’t paused, study finds” echoed the Guardian.

But as I reported at the time – in a piece titled “‘Hide the Hiatus!’ How the Climate Alarmists Eliminated the Inconvenient ‘Pause’ in Global Warming” – there was precious little hard science in this swiftly-debunked “study”.

Rather, it was a case of “getting your excuses in early before the UN climate conference in Paris in December.”

Or, as Judy Curry of Georgia Tech put it:

“This short paper is not adequate to explain the very large changes that have been made to the NOAA data set… while I’m sure this latest analysis from NOAA will be regarded as politically useful for the Obama administration [which is currently bent on using executive action to set unilateral emissions limits against the will of Congress], I don’t regard it as a particularly useful contribution to our scientific understanding of what is going on.”

Which is the real reason, of course, that NOAA is so reluctant to respond to Rep Lamar Smith’s subpoena. As will almost certainly become clear, NOAA’s study was a nakedly political artefact not a scientific one.

Alarmist sympathizers such as Rep. Eddie Bernice Johnson (D-Texas) may claim that the subpoena constitutes harassment:

“By issuing this subpoena, you have instigated a constitutional conflict with an inquiry that seems more designed to harass climate scientists than to further any legitimate legislative purpose,” she wrote last week. “This is a serious misuse of congressional oversight powers.”

But this is a standard trick in the climate alarmist playbook. The same excuse was trotted out by Michael Mann when Steve McIntyre tried – unsuccessfully – to ask him to share the raw data he had used to create his infamous “Hockey Stick”; it was also employed by another notorious figure from the Climategate emails – Phil Jones of the Climatic Research Unit at the University of East Anglia – as part of a campaign to present himself as an innocent victim of harassment rather than an FOI-breaching, data-fudging, grant-troughing conspirator in the great global warming scam.

As I revealed in my book Watermelons: How Environmentalists Are Killing The Planet, Destroying The Economy And Stealing Your Children’s Future, the climate change scam has only been able to keep going for so long because of the complicity of the politicized activist-scientists who have hijacked every one of the world’s leading scientific institutions from NASA GISS, NOAA, and the National Academy of Sciences in the US to the Royal Society and the CRU in Britain to CSIRO in Australia. They endorse one another’s scientifically dubious papers (not so much “peer-review” as “pal review”), they recommend one another for awards, they big one another up at fancy all-expenses-paid climate “science” junkets all around the globe.

And the longer they have got away with it, the more shameless they have become. To give you an idea of how unrepentantly biased NOAA’s Thomas Peterson is here – courtesy of Watts Up With That? – is a cartoon he circulated in 2009, while working on the taxpayers’ dime, in which he ridiculed climate skeptics as a bunch of loons.



This has nothing to do with science. This is pure political activism. Rep Lamar Smith is quite right to investigate this grotesque abuse of taxpayers’ money and this flagrant corruption of the scientific method at NOAA. I think we can safely bet, however, that NOAA will find a way of staving off his investigation until after the UN Paris talks are over and that the Obama administration will do everything in its power to support its stonewalling.

“The Pause”, as most alarmists are painfully aware, represents the last nail in the coffin of man-made global warming theory. That’s why they’ll go on fighting so hard to pretend it doesn’t exist.

  1. I’ve been adding stories to the #NOAAgate hashtag all day. I’ve not counted but there must be well over a hundred. And it just keeps growing wings. The latest gag order on NOAA staff appears to me to be the biggest blunder imaginable.

  2. mike thefordprefect says:

    The request for data and methods refused by NOAA:

    Dear Chairman Smith,
    On Tuesday, October 13, you unilaterally issued a subpoena to NOAA Administrator Kathryn Sullivan. This subpoena appears to be furthering a fishing expedition, rather than engaging in focused oversight with a legitimate goal in mind. Unfortunately, this is reflective of much of the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology’s “oversight” work this Congress, and it is a disturbing trend for the legitimacy of this Committee.

    Your October 13 subpoena seeks the following:
    “1. All documents and communications between or among employees of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) referring or relating to the methodology and utilization of Night Marine Air Temperatures to adjust ship and buoy temperature data.
    2. All documents and communications between or among employees of NOAA referring or relating to the use of other global temperature datasets for both NOAA’s in-house dataset improvements and monthly press releases conveying global temperatures to the public.
    3. All documents and communications between or among employees of NOAA referring or relating to the utilization and consideration of satellite bulk atmospheric temperatures for use in global temperature datasets.”
    Prior to this subpoena, the Committee made three written requests for informationl relating to a peer-reviewed study conducted by Thomas Karl, NOAA’s Director of theNational Centers for Environmental Information.
    2 NOAA responded to the Committee’s inquiries by providing the Committee with a briefing on July 16, 2015, responding by letter twice3, and through informal staff communications. Finally, NOAA provided a second briefing to Majority staff (Majority staff did not invite Minority staff to attend) on October 19.
    It is important to note what is and what is not contained in this history of requests and responses. Your requests repeatedly asked for data and methodologies used in the study, and also requested that this information be made publically available. NOAA, through its two response letters, pointed the Committee to publically accessible locations where all of the underlying data and methodologies can be accessed. Moreover, NOAA attempted to explain certain aspects of the methodology about which the Majority was apparently confused.
    However, obtaining all of the data and methods used in this study seemingly was not enough for the Majority. You also demanded internal communications by NOAA scientists regarding their scientific research. NOAA, rightfully, has been reluctant to waste their time and resources, not to mention break confidence with their superb research scientists by responding to this demand….

    So they want the all documents, notes, paper scraps and toilet paper from anyone who breathed the same air as the scientist (well… almost)

    The data they are, they say, being refused is already in their and the publics hands!!!!!!!!!!!!

  3. mike thefordprefect says:

    Now where have I heard such ludicrous demands before:
    We the undersigned citizens and residents of the Commonwealth of Virginia, in coordination with the Environmental Law Center of the American Tradition Institute, …

    Subject Matter

    We seek materials that Dr. Michael Mann produced and/or received while working for the University of Virginia and otherwise while using its facilities and resources, as specifically enumerated in the Attachment. We seek these records from a backup server identified already by the University as part of a related search, as detailed, below.

    15. The scope of this request is to reach any and all data, documents and things in your possession, including those stored or residing on any of the specified or referenced (see FN 1, supra) computers, hard drives, desktops, laptops, file servers, database servers, email servers or other systems where data was transmitted or stored on purpose or as a result of transient use of a system or application in the course of day to day research or product processing work that is owned or contracted for by you or any of your officers, managers, employees, agents, board members, academic departments, divisions, programs, IT department, contractors and other representatives.

    2. As used herein, the words “record”, “records”, “document” or “documents” mean the original and any copies of any written, printed, typed, electronic, or graphic matter of any kind or nature, however produced or reproduced, any book, pamphlet, brochure, periodical, newspaper, letter, correspondence, memoranda, notice, facsimile, e-mail, manual, press release, telegram, report, study, handwritten note, working paper, chart, paper, graph, index, tape, data sheet, data processing card, or any other written, recorded, transcribed, punched, taped, filmed or graphic matter now in your possession, custody or control.

    1. All documents that constitute or are in any way related to correspondence, messages or e-mails sent by Dr. Michael Mann to, or received from, any of the following persons:

  4. tallbloke says:

    I expect the NOAA will change their tune once the majority starts talking about defunding them. They produced REEEEEAALLY expensive junk science this time.

  5. rishrac says:

    I was watching a statics class and one of the things that was brought up and I think it’s true of the current state of climate science, if they can’t reproduce the results it’s pseudo science,it isn’t a legitimate branch of science.

  6. gallopingcamel says:

    The solution seems simple enough. If NOAA does not want to respond to the US government it does not deserve to be supported with government funds.

    It would be wonderful to imagine a US government that could de-fund departments that do more harm than good. Here are just a few of the departments that should be challenged to justify their existence by means of “Zero Based Budgeting” that is the standard method for businesses:

    – Department of Education
    – Department of Energy
    – Department of Agriculture
    – Environmental Protection Agency

    No doubt you savants here can add to this list.

  7. gallopingcamel says:

    Just cast your mind back to a time when US presidents provided real leadership.

    Ronald Reagan fired the air traffic controllers who defied their rules of employment. Reagan was vilified by the “Mainstream Media” but who can doubt that Reagan was right?

    Now tell me why the pygmies at NOAA think they can defy the US Congress with impunity. Could it be that they have been granted a “Get out of Jail Free” card by Barack Obama as Lois Lerner was?

  8. Never let it be said that these self-important taxpayer-funded agencies are capable of even inventing new excuses for their inexcusable patterns of arrogant, bullying behaviour. In addition to lacking integrity and originality, it seems that when push comes to shove, all they can do is … well … recycle!

    And speaking of Obama, as gallopingcamel was above … he must have been working from a very unique dictionary when he made all his glorious promises of ‘transparency and openness’ across the US governmental board, when he was first elected eh?!

    Come to think of it, that “dictionary” may well be the same one on which the IPCC depends!

  9. Paul Vaughan says:

    “Alarmist sympathizers such as Rep. Eddie Bernice Johnson (D-Texas) […] “By issuing this subpoena, you have instigated a constitutional conflict with an inquiry that seems more designed to harass climate scientists than to further any legitimate legislative purpose,” she wrote last week. “This is a serious misuse of congressional oversight powers.””

    She’s completely lost. She has no clue — no clue whatsoever.

    The vandalism done on v3 to arrive at v4 is one of the creepiest things I’ve seen in my life. It’s nearly incomprehensibly creepy …but I can tell you what’s even more creepy: what’s even more creepy is that no one’s calling them out on the systematic IPO bias. Folks: how can you let them get away with something so clear cut?? …without even calling them out on it?? Put the graph up in congress and say W T F !! ???

  10. Climatism says:

    Reblogged this on Climatism and commented:
    It would matter little if Tom Karl were found guilty of scientific fraud tomorrow and exiled to the moon. The UN’s Paris treaty and others like it will continue unhindered. Because ‘Climate Change’ is not about science or data anymore. Rather, it provides the perfect tool to push the UN’s leftist agenda.

  11. Paul Vaughan says:

    @ Climatism (November 2, 2015 at 3:05 pm)

    Powerful religions survive despite insights from Galileo.
    They don’t need to vandalize recorded beauty of nature.

    They’re like a cop caught applying excessive force:

    It’s clear cut folks.

    These characters are viciously beating mother nature beyond recognition …and if they get away with it we’ve all been cowardly innocent bystanders.

    Perhaps Josh will illustrate the graphic reality in a manner that really grips people to make them realize injustice on a visceral level.

    Teaching people isn’t always easy. I hope Josh can help. This is important.

  12. TA says:

    True Believers believe in the infamous, incorrect “Hockey Stick” temperature graph.

    Skeptics do not.

    You can understand why True Believers get so worked up, because the “Hockey Stick” temperature graph makes them think we are currently experiencing atmospheric temperatures that are unprecedented in human history. Even with a pause, we would supposedly be on “shaky” ground.

    What they don’t understand is that the infamous “Hockey Stick” temperature graph is not real. It is fiction. We are *not* experiencing unprecedented heat, it was hotter in the past than it is now, and the world’s weather did not go out of control then, so there is little reason to worry it will go out of control now, when it is much cooler than then (1930’s).

    No unprecedented heat in the atmosphere means no unprecedented weather.

    All the believers in human-caused global warming/climate change are basing their opinions and fears on a fraudulent chart. Garbage in, garbage out.

    You would think if the climate scientists at NOAA really believed in their data, they would be eager to show it to the world, and to demonstrate just how wrong the skeptics are. If they had that kind of data, they would be eager to show it to anyone who wanted to see.

    Refusing to supply the temperature data naturally brings up the question: What do you have to hide?


  13. FTOP says:

    NOAA’s Mission:
    Science, Service, and Stewardship.
    To understand and predict changes in climate, weather, oceans, and coasts,
    To share that knowledge and information with others, and
    To conserve and manage coastal and marine ecosystems and resources.

    I guess Congress doesn’t qualify as those to “share that knowledge and information with”