DOCSLIB.ORG

Redacting the Science of Climate Change

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Redacting the Science of Climate Change RREEDDAACCTTIINNGG TTHHEE SSCCIIEENNCCEE OOFF CCLLIIMMAATTEE CCHHAANNGGEE:: AN INVESTIGATIVE AND SYNTHESIS REPORT By Tarek Maassarani Government Accountability Project With contributions from Jay Dyckman National Coalition Against Censorship MARCH 2007 REDACTING THE SCIENCE OF CLIMATE CHANGE © Government Accountability Project All rights reserved The Government Accountability Project (GAP) is the nation’s leading whistleblower organization. GAP attorneys and organizers assist whistleblowers in taking their evidence of wrongdoing to appropriate government agencies, committees, and officials to investigate, expose, and rectify problems. More information about GAP, as well as the full text of this report, is available online at www.whistleblower.org or may be obtained from: The Government Accountability Project 1612 K Street, NW, Suite 1100 Washington, DC 20006 (202) 408-0034 [email protected] REDACTING THE SCIENCE OF CLIMATE CHANGE ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS A hearty thank you goes out to Richard Ewenstein, Oveta Walker, Kent Mackzum, Athena McMahon, Deanna Lacek, and David Rosen for their hard work and assistance with the investigation. The author would also like to acknowledge Tom Devine, Shelley Walden, Adam Miles, Mary Brumder, and the others at GAP for their support and encouragement, as well as the Union of Concerned Scientists, Greenpeace, Paul Thacker, and Michael Seidman for their help. This report is dedicated to the scientists, government officials and journalists who provided valuable – and often courageous – input. Without them this report would not be possible. The contents of this report are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions held by those who have supported it. REDACTING THE SCIENCE OF CLIMATE CHANGE INDEX OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS ACIA Arctic Climate Impact Assessment FAQ Frequently Asked Questions AOML Atlantic Oceanographic and Meteorological FOIA Freedom of Information Act Laboratory (NOAA) CAR U.S. Climate Action Report FY fiscal year CCRI Climate Change Research Initiative GAO Government Accountability Office CCSP Climate Change Science Program GAP Government Accountability Project CEI Competitive Enterprise Institute GCRA Global Change Research Act CEQ Council on Environmental Quality (EOP) GFDL Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory (NOAA) CIWG Communications Interagency Working GISS Goddard Institute for Space Studies Group (CCSP) (NASA) CMDL Climate Monitoring and Diagnostics GMD Global Monitoring Division (NOAA) Laboratory (NOAA) CSRA Civil Service Reform Act GRL Geophysical Research Letters DAO DOC Administrative Order GSFC Goddard Space Flight Center (NASA) DOC U.S. Department of Commerce HHS Department of Health and Human Services DOD U.S. Department of Defense HRD Hurricane Research Division (NOAA) DOE U.S. Department of Energy IG inspector general DOI U.S. Department of Interior IPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change DOS U.S. State Department IQA Information Quality Act DOT U.S. Department of Transportation NAO NOAA Administrative Order EOP Executive Office of the President NAS National Academy of Sciences EPA Environmental Protection Agency NASA National Aeronautics and Space Administration FACA Federal Advisory Committee Act NCAC National Coalition Against Censorship REDACTING THE SCIENCE OF CLIMATE CHANGE NCAR National Center for Atmospheric Research ORNL Oak Ridge National Laboratory NCDC National Climatic Data Center OSTP Office of Science and Technology Policy (EOP) NEC NOAA Executive Council PAO public affairs office NESDIS National Environmental Satellite, Data and PEER Public Employees for Environmental Information Service (NOAA) Responsibility NHC National Hurricane Center (NOAA) PIO public information officer NIH National Institutes of Health PMEL Pacific Marine Environmental Laboratory (NOAA) NIST National Institute of Standards and Q&A question and answer Technology NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric QFR questions for the record Administration NOS National Ocean Service (NOAA) SAP Synthesis and Assessment Product (CCSP) NRC National Research Council (NAS) SBU sensitive but unclassified NRCS Natural Resources Conservation Service SOCCR State of the Carbon Cycle Report NSB National Science Board UCAR University Corporation for Atmospheric Research NSF National Science Foundation UCS Union of Concerned Scientists NSTC National Science and Technology Council UNFCCC U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change NWS National Weather Service (NOAA) USAID United States Agency for International Development OAR Oceanic and Atmospheric Research (NOAA) USDA U.S. Department of Agriculture OCP Our Changing Planet USFWS U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service OLA Office of Legislative Affairs (NOAA) USGCRP U.S. Global Change Research Program OMB Office of Management and Budget (EOP) USGS United States Geological Survey OPCIA Office of Public, Constituent, and USNA U.S. National Assessment of the Potential Intergovernmental Affairs (NOAA) Consequences of Climate Variability and Change ORD Office of Research and Development (EPA) WPA Whistleblower Protection Act REDACTING THE SCIENCE OF CLIMATE CHANGE REDACTING THE SCIENCE OF CLIMATE CHANGE TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AND SYNTHESIS ..........................................................................................1 INTRODUCTION.........................................................................................................................................4 SCIENTIFIC COMMUNICATIONS WITH THE MEDIA .....................................................................7 NOAA AT THE TURN OF THE MILLENNIUM ............................................................................................ 8 NOAA’S 2004 MEDIA POLICY ............................................................................................................... 10 THE MEDIA STORM ................................................................................................................................14 PIETER TANS ........................................................................................................................................... 23 RONALD STOUFFER................................................................................................................................. 23 TOM DELWORTH .................................................................................................................................... 25 PRESS RELEASES..................................................................................................................................... 27 NASA ...................................................................................................................................................... 32 EPA AND THE DEPARTMENT OF INTERIOR............................................................................................ 37 SCIENTIFIC COMMUNICATIONS WITH CONGRESS.....................................................................41 TESTIMONY AND TALKING POINTS ........................................................................................................ 42 CONGRESSIONAL REPORTS .................................................................................................................... 46 CONGRESSIONAL INVOLVEMENT ........................................................................................................... 61 COMMUNICATIONS WITH THE PUBLIC AND THE SCIENTIFIC COMMUNITY....................64 SCIENTIFIC PUBLICATIONS..................................................................................................................... 64 PRESENTATIONS...................................................................................................................................... 67 ON THE WORLD WIDE WEB................................................................................................................... 69 MISSION STATEMENTS............................................................................................................................ 73 A NOTE ON INTERFERENCE WITH SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH ................................................................... 74 AGENCY MISREPRESENTATION ........................................................................................................76 MEDIA CONTACT FAVORITISM .............................................................................................................. 77 PRESS CONFERENCES AND CONGRESSIONAL HEARINGS ...................................................................... 80 WEBSITES................................................................................................................................................ 81 FACT SHEETS .......................................................................................................................................... 83 THE CHAIN OF COMMAND...................................................................................................................85 RECENT DEVELOPMENTS....................................................................................................................92 NASA ...................................................................................................................................................... 92 NOAA ..................................................................................................................................................... 94 IMPROVEMENTS .....................................................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Political Economy, Media, and Climate Change: Sinews of Modern Life Maxwell T
    Advanced Review Political economy, media, and climate change: sinews of modern life Maxwell T. Boykoff1∗ and Tom Yulsman2 In this 21st century, examining how climate change is described and considered, largely through mass media, is as important as formal climate governance to the long-term success or failure of efforts to confront the challenge. Mass media stitch together formal science and policy with the public sphere. And many dynamic, contested factors contribute to how media outlets portray climate change. This paper addresses contemporary political economics—from greater workloads and reductions in specialist science journalism to digital innovations and new media organizational forms—as they relate to media coverage of climate change. By way of recent studies and indications of these dynamics, we appraise how power flows through culture, politics, and society, to construct coverage, public discourses, and knowledge on climate change. In so doing, we explore how media representations of climate change have changed over time, and particularly how the rise of digital media has reshaped climate coverage. Considerations of climate change, arguably the most heavily politicized scientific issue at the turn of the new millennium, seek to inform and anticipate corollary science issues, such as ongoing concerns for genetically modified organisms, nanotechnology risks, and increased threats to water quantity and quality. The focus on political economy—the ‘sinews’ of modern life—can also then help to inform perceptions and decision making in associated environmental challenges. © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. How to cite this article: WIREs Clim Change 2013. doi: 10.1002/wcc.233 INTRODUCTION and livelihoods—depend directly on our exploitation of carbon-based fuels.2 New York Times journalist John Broder3 wrote that these issues are ‘the sinews The world is going one way, people are going another of modern life’.
    [Show full text]
  • Volume 3: Process Issues Raised by Petitioners
    EPA’s Response to the Petitions to Reconsider the Endangerment and Cause or Contribute Findings for Greenhouse Gases under Section 202(a) of the Clean Air Act Volume 3: Process Issues Raised by Petitioners U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Atmospheric Programs Climate Change Division Washington, D.C. 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 3.0 Process Issues Raised by Petitioners............................................................................................5 3.1 Approaches and Processes Used to Develop the Scientific Support for the Findings............................................................................................................................5 3.1.1 Overview..............................................................................................................5 3.1.2 Issues Regarding Consideration of the CRU E-mails..........................................6 3.1.3 Assessment of Issues Raised in Public Comments and Re-Raised in Petitions for Reconsideration...............................................................................7 3.1.4 Summary............................................................................................................19 3.2 Response to Claims That the Assessments by the USGCRP and NRC Are Not Separate and Independent Assessments.........................................................................20 3.2.1 Overview............................................................................................................20 3.2.2 EPA’s Response to Petitioners’
    [Show full text]
  • History 104 001 Wn 2017 8/7/17, 1557
    HISTORY 104 001 WN 2017 8/7/17, 1557 HISTORY 104 001 WN 2017 Jump to Today ! Edit History 104: History, Science, & Poli!cs in the Anthropocene MW 1-2:30 pm, 1436 Mason Hall The Anthropocene: a new age, in which humans have become a geological force. Its signs are everywhere: warming climate, toxins in food chains, desolate landscapes left by resource extraction. But when did this age begin? The dawn of agriculture? The industrial revolution? The advent of nuclear weapons and the invention of plastic? And how did it unfold? This course offers a historical field guide to the Anthropocene, its planetary transformations, and the raging debates about its origins and manifestations. Learning objec!ves Students will emerge better equipped to understand a variety of historical and contemporary issues surrounding climate change, energy futures, and the politics of science and technology. They will also develop the following skills: Taking a “long view” and applying it to critical thinking about current events Understanding path dependence in problems of energy and environment Critiquing historical writing Making persuasive arguments, both orally and in writing Analytic and synthetic reasoning Thinking about the future “outside the box” Your work Reading: You will be assigned an average of 70-100 pages of reading a week -- sometimes more, sometimes less. Some sessions will also include videos for you to watch in advance of class. In general, our expectation is that you spend 4-6 hours every week on class preparation. You are expected to do all the assigned reading and video watching before each class.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 1 NOTES
    NOTES Chapter 1 1. Emphasis added, quoted from An Inconvenient Truth: A Global Warning, di- rected by David Guggenheim and released by Paramount Classics in 2006. This film was an official selection of the 2006 Sundance Film Festival and the Cannes Film Festival, and won the Academy Award in 2007 for Best Documentary. The printed companion is Al Gore, An Inconvenient Truth: The Planetary Emergency of Global Warming and What We Can Do About It (New York: Rodale, 2006). Al Gore shared the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize with the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) for his leadership on global warming. 2. Bjorn Lomborg, e.g., emphasized the differences between Gore and the IPCC in “Ignore Gore—But Not His Nobel Friends,” The Sunday Telegraph (London) (11 November 2007), 24. On the scientific consensus in the United States, see Jane A. Leggett, Climate Change: Science and Policy Implications, CRS Report for Congress RL33849 (Washington, D.C.: Congressional Research Service, Updated 2 May 2007). On the scientific consensus in the international community, see the widely publi- cized assessments of the IPCC that are introduced below and summarized in later chapters. 3. The Framework Convention and related sources can be accessed at the Gate- way to the UN System’s Work on Climate Change, http://www.un.org/climatechange/ projects.shtml. 317 4. See the UNFCCC’s background information on the Kyoto Protocol, accessed 5 September 2007, at http://unfccc.int/kyoto_protocol/background/items/3145.php. See also Susan R. Fletcher and Larry Parker, Climate Change: The Kyoto Protocol and International Actions, CRS Report for Congress RL 33836 (Washington, D.C.: Congressional Research Service, Updated 8 June 2007).
    [Show full text]
  • Transcript of the Same
    COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES AND ENERGY COMMITTEE "PENNSYLVANIA CO2 AND CLIMATE" ROOM 523 IRVIS OFFICE BUILDING TUESDAY, JUNE 22, 2021 9:03 A.M. BEFORE: HONORABLE DARYL METCALFE, MAJORITY CHAIRMAN HONORABLE GREG VITALI, MINORITY CHAIRMAN HONORABLE MIKE ARMANINI HONORABLE STEPHANIE BOROWICZ HONORABLE DONALD COOK HONORABLE JOSEPH HAMM HONORABLE R. LEE JAMES HONORABLE JOSHUA KAIL HONORABLE TIMOTHY O'NEAL HONORABLE JASON ORTITAY HONORABLE KATHY RAPP HONORABLE TOMMY SANKEY HONORABLE PAUL SCHEMEL HONORABLE PERRY STAMBAUGH HONORABLE ELIZABETH FIEDLER HONORABLE MANUEL GUZMAN HONORABLE JOE HOHENSTEIN HONORABLE MARY ISAACSON HONORABLE RICK KRAJEWSKI HONORABLE DANIELLE FRIEL OTTEN HONORABLE PAM SNYDER Pennsylvania House of Representatives Commonwealth of Pennsylvania 2 1 COMMITTEE STAFF PRESENT: 2 GRIFFIN CARUSO 3 REPUBLICAN RESEARCH ANALYST ALEX SLOAD 4 REPUBLICAN RESEARCH ANALYST PAM NEUGARD 5 REPUBLICAN ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT 6 SARAH IVERSEN 7 DEMOCRATIC EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR BILL JORDAN 8 DEMOCRATIC RESEARCH ANALYST 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 3 1 I N D E X 2 TESTIFIERS 3 * * * 4 GREG WRIGHTSTONE EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT, 5 CO2 COALITION..................................6 6 DR. DAVID LEGATES PROFESSOR OF CLIMATOLOGY 7 UNIVERSITY OF DELAWARE........................15 8 ANDREW MCKEON EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, 9 RGGI, INC.....................................30 10 MARK SZYBIST, ESQ. SENIOR ATTORNEY, 11 NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL.............38 12 FRANZ T. LITZ LITZ ENERGY STRATEGIES LLC....................45 13 DR. PATRICK MICHAELS 14 CLIMATOLOGIST, SENIOR FELLOW, CO2 COALITION.................................69 15 MARC MORANO 16 EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, CLIMATE DEPOT.................................76 17 JOE BASTARDI 18 CHIEF FORECASTER WEATHERBELL ANALYTICS, LLC....................90 19 20 21 SUBMITTED WRITTEN TESTIMONY 22 * * * 23 (See submitted written testimony and handouts online.) 24 25 4 1 P R O C E E D I N G S 2 * * * 3 MAJORITY CHAIRMAN METCALFE: Good 4 morning.
    [Show full text]
  • Do Small-Sample Short-Term Forecasting Tests Yield Valid
    Forecasting global climate change Kesten C. Green University of South Australia and Ehrenberg-Bass Institute, Australia J. Scott Armstrong University of Pennsylvania, U.S.A, and Ehrenberg-Bass Institute, Australia Working Paper - June 2014 This paper was published in Climate Change: The Facts. edited by Alan Moran published by the Institute of Public Affairs, Melbourne, Victoria 3000, Australia Abstract The Golden Rule of Forecasting requires that forecasters be conservative by making proper use of cumulative knowledge and by not going beyond that knowledge. The procedures that have been used to forecast dangerous manmade global warming violate the Golden Rule. Following the scientific method, we investigated competing hypotheses on climate change in an objective way. To do this, we tested the predictive validity of the global warming hypothesis (+0.03C per year with increasing CO2) against a relatively conservative global cooling hypothesis of -0.01C per year, and against the even more conservative simple no-change or persistence hypothesis (0.0C per year). The errors of forecasts from the global warming hypothesis for horizons 11 to 100 years ahead over the period 1851 to 1975 were nearly four times larger than those from the global cooling hypothesis and about eight times larger than those from the persistence hypothesis. Findings from our tests using the latest data and other data covering a period of nearly 2,000 years support the predictive validity of the persistence hypothesis for horizons from one year to centuries ahead. To investigate whether the current alarm over global temperatures is exceptional, we employed the method of structured analogies.
    [Show full text]
  • 2014 Brochure
    iSEE Congress 2014 iSEE Congress 2014 The Institute for Sustainability, Energy, and Environment presents ... The Institute for Sustainability, Energy, and Environment presents ... “Feeding 9 Billion: “Feeding 9 Billion: A Path to Sustainable A Path to Sustainable Agriculture” Agriculture” Sept. 30-Oct. 2, 2014 Sept. 30-Oct. 2, 2014 Alice Campbell Alumni Center, University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign Alice Campbell Alumni Center, University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign Sept. 30-Oct. 2, 2014 WELCOME Rising incomes, growing population, and increasing consciousness about health and wellness are imposing unprece- dented demands for expanding both conventional agricultural production as well as organic and local food production. The Institute for Sustainability, Energy, and Environment has assembled worldwide ag and sustainability experts on the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign campus to highlight the implications of climate change, scarce water resources and growing demand for food, feed, fuel and ecosystem services for sustainable agricultural development. We are excited to present our first iSEE Congress, “Feeding 9 Billion: A Path to Sustainable Agriculture,” which will emphasize the critical role that tech- nology and policy can play in increasing agricultural productivity while reducing environmental degradation. Sessions will address the impact of climate change on crop productivity, land use, and water resources — and the role for new crops and technologies, including biotech and precision agriculture, in increasing productivity while reducing the use of chemical inputs and fossil fuels. The interaction between agriculture and ecosystem services and the importance of the public and private sector in providing the incentives for sustainable agricultural development will be discussed. Speakers will also explore the progress made in improving food security in the developed and developing world and the hurdles that remain due to slow adaptation and acceptance of new technologies.
    [Show full text]
  • NASA and the Environment: Science in a Political Context 313
    NASA and the Environment: Science in a Political Context 313 CHAPTER 16 NASA and the Environment: Science in a Political Context W. Henry Lambright1 he advent of the Space Age has paralleled the rise of the environmental Tmovement. NASA was born in 1958 and Rachel Carson wrote Silent Spring in 1962;that book is generally seen as marking the onset of modern environmentalism.2 NASA has intersected with the environmental movement—a set of values and interest groups concerned about the need to protect our natural setting for the current and future generations—in many ways over the years. How did NASA do so? How did it evolve an environmental mission? What did it do with that mission? What were the consequences for society—and nASA—of its environmental role? To answer these questions, this paper will discuss two of the most important ways NASA and the environmental movement related. First, NASA has had direct impacts through the images of Earth taken by Apollo astronauts as well as by satellites in Earth orbit.Those satellite images and theories about Earth as a system evolved into an organized NASA program, initially called Mission To Planet Earth (MTPE), later the Earth Sciences Program. Second, there was an indirect relation through nASA’s mission from Earth. Comparative planetology came into existence as a new field; learning about other planets stimulated better understanding of Earth. There are many other issues in the nASA–environment relation, such as space debris and the contamination of other planets, but these two themes—earth monitoring and comparative planetology—are especially salient in nASA’s history, present, and likely future.The first theme focused on the use of space-based remote sensing and became the dominant emphasis in nASA’s environmental history.
    [Show full text]
  • On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 5:06 PM, Andrew Revkin < Wrote: > Eek. Will Fix Now. > Are They Also on Youtube Or the Like? No
    From: on behalf of Andrew Dessler To: Andrew Revkin Subject: Re: Dessler / Spencer e-mail debate on cloud feedbacks Date: Thursday, December 30, 2010 6:20:43 PM On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 5:06 PM, Andrew Revkin < wrote: > eek. will fix now. > are they also on youtube or the like? no, they are just on my dept.'s web server. > > > On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 5:54 PM, Andrew Dessler <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> FYI, the links to my videos have changed: >> http://geotest.tamu.edu/userfiles/216/CloudFeedbackLong.m4a (long >> version) or http://geotest.tamu.edu/userfiles/216/CloudFeedbackTalk.m4a >> (short version). the links you have in your post don't work. and >> thanks for your interest. >> >> On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 3:59 PM, Andrew Revkin < wrote: >> > i didn't have time to get in more of this conversation but here's my >> > piece >> > on 'skeptics', peer review, antarctica and clouds. >> > >> > Skeptics" survive peer review and science actually progresses. >> > http://j.mp/AntarcCloud #agw #climate >> > >> > >> > >> > On Wed, Dec 15, 2010 at 11:28 AM, Roy Spencer < >> > wrote: >> >> >> >> Andy: >> >> >> >> Feedbacks and forcings involve *temperature* changes, not abstract >> >> concepts like "El Nino". Thus, your question is a bit of a red >> >> herring. >> >> >> >> What I *AM* saying is that the time-evolving nature of the temperature >> >> and >> >> radiative flux anomalies is consistent with a significant, non-feedback >> >> cloud-induced temperature change. That is what the phase space >> >> analysis >> >> reveals. >> >> >> >> Now, what all of this might mean for how El Nino & La Nina evolve over >> >> time is an interesting question, I agree,...I'm just trying to make >> >> sure we >> >> don't lose sight of the quantitative evidence.
    [Show full text]
  • Investigative Summary Regarding Allegations That NASA Suppressed Climate Change Science and Denied Media Access to Dr
    National Aeronautics and Space Administration Office of Inspector General Investigative Summary Regarding Allegations that NASA Suppressed Climate Change Science and Denied Media Access to Dr. James E. Hansen, a NASA Scientist June 2, 2008 signed ____________________________________ Kevin H. Winters Assistant Inspector General for Investigations TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary.........................................................................................................1 I. Investigative Scope .................................................................................................3 II. Parties in Conflict: NASA’s Climate Science Community and the NASA Headquarters Office of Public Affairs ....................................................................6 III. Statutory Standards Regarding Scientific Suppression and Media Access ............10 IV. Allegations and Instances of Censorship and Suppression.....................................15 V. Allegations and Instances of Improper Denial of Media Access ...........................32 VI. NASA’s Response to Allegations of Suppression, Censorship, and Denial of Media Access..........................................................................................43 VII. Conclusion ..............................................................................................................47 Appendixes A. NASA-wide e-mail requesting information on alleged suppression and censorship of science concerning climate change B. NASA Organizational Chart C. E-mail: “Nov.
    [Show full text]
  • The Paper That Blew It Up
    This post was published to Andy May Petrophysicist at 3:01:27 PM 11/13/2020 The Paper that Blew it Up By Andy May “If you can’t dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with Bull…” W. C. Fields In late February 2015, Willie Soon was accused in a front-page New York Times article by Kert Davies (Gillis & Schwartz, 2015) of failing to disclose conflicts of interest in his academic journal articles. It isn’t mentioned in the Gillis and Schwartz article, but the timing suggests that a Science Bulletin article, “Why Models run hot: results from an irreducibly simple climate model” (Monckton, Soon, Legates, & Briggs, 2015) was Davies’ concern. We will abbreviate this paper as MSLB15. Besides Soon, the other authors of the paper are Christopher Monckton (senior author, Lord Monckton, Viscount of Brenchley), David Legates (Professor of Geography and Climatology, University of Delaware), and William Briggs (Mathematician and statistician, former professor of statistics at Cornell Medical School). In the January 2015 article, the authors “declare that they have no conflict of interest.” MSLB15 was instantly popular and devastating to the climate alarmist cause and to the IPCC Fifth Assessment Report (IPCC, 2013). The IPCC is the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, a research organization set up by the United Nations in 1988. MSLB15 was published online January 8, 2015 and downloaded 22,000 times in less than two months, an outstanding number of downloads. The New York Times article appeared less than two months after MSLB15 hit the internet, it was a “fake news hit job.” The paper caused a stir because it explained that the IPCC’s Fifth Assessment Report or “AR5” reduced its near-term warming projections substantially, but left its long-term, higher, projections alone.
    [Show full text]
  • Avoiding Carbon Myopia: Three Considerations for Policy Makers Concerning Manmade Carbon Dioxide
    Avoiding Carbon Myopia: Three Considerations for Policy Makers Concerning Manmade Carbon Dioxide Willie Soon* and David R. Legates** TOWARDS A GLOBAL CARBON REGULATORY TRADING SCHEME In December 2009, lawmakers and representatives from around the world, along with scientists, numerous journalists, and various celebrities flew to Copenhagen, Denmark. For the most part, their goal was to promote a regulatory scheme aimed at controlling human carbon emissions by declaring the element a tradable commodity and establishing laws and regulations to govern the trade. The proposed regulations were premised on the flawed notion, articulated by the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC),1 that increasing atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2) concentrations will change climate dramatically and thereby cause major ecological and economic damage. While many scientists, including us, have observed some changes in climate, the hypothesized dangerous consequences of rising atmospheric CO2 are too speculative for responsible regulatory policy. In analyzing climate policy, decision makers should be cognizant of three key considerations regarding the impact of projected rises in atmospheric CO2: (1) policy choices likely will have no measurable effect on the occurrence of severe weather; (2) positive effects on ecosystems and biodiversity are likely and should be weighed against the negatives; and (3) carbon trading schemes (such as the one touted in Copenhagen) are unlikely to lead to a reduction in atmospheric CO2. * Dr. Soon is an astrophysicist at the Solar, Stellar and Planetary Sciences Division of the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics. Dr. Soon has written and lectured extensively on issues related to the sun and other stars and climate.
    [Show full text]