Judicial Watch files suit over NOAA climate docs

Kathryn Sullivan, Under Secretary of Commerce for Oceans and Atmosphere and NOAA AdministratorKathryn Sullivan, NOAA Administrator and Under Secretary of Commerce for Oceans and Atmosphere.Government watchdog Judicial Watch has filed suit against the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), seeking documents relating to their methodology and internal communications with regard to climate change.

The group filed a FOIA request for the documents that was turned down. A congressional committee also demanded the documents that were just recently handed over to the committee after the agency initially refused to cooperate.

Judicial Watch is investigating how NOAA collects and disseminates climate data that is used in determining global climate change. NOAA collects data in thousands of ways – from temperature gauges on land and buoys at sea, to satellites orbiting Earth.  Considered the “environmental intelligence agency,” NOAA is the nation’s leading collector of climate data.  In July, Representative Lamar Smith (R-TX) asked NOAA for both data and internal communications related to a controversial climate change study.  After the agency refused to comply with the document request, Smith’s committee issued a subpoena on October 13According to the Science, Space, and Technology Committee:

In June, NOAA widely publicized a study as refuting the nearly two-decade pause in climate change. After three letters requesting all communications from the agency surrounding the role of political appointees in the agency’s scientific process, Chairman Smith issued a subpoena for the information. Smith subsequently sent a letter on December 1st offering to accept documents and communications from NOAA political, policy and non-scientific staff as a first step in satisfying the subpoena requirements.

Information provided to the Committee by whistleblowers appears to show that the study was rushed to publication despite the concerns and objections of a number of NOAA employees.

Judicial Watch sued the agency on December 2 and served the complaint on the agency on December 8.  Less than a week later, on Tuesday, December 15, NOAA finally began to turn over documents to the House committee.  That same day, NOAA called and told Judicial Watch that it would begin searching for documents responsive to Judicial Watch’s FOIA request.

On November 26, Smith published an opinion editorial in The Washington Times, which accused NOAA of tampering with data to help promote global warming alarmism:

NOAA often fails to consider all available data in its determinations and climate change reports to the public. A recent study by NOAA, published in the journal Science, made “adjustments” to historical temperature records and NOAA trumpeted the findings as refuting the nearly two-decade pause in global warming. The study’s authors claimed these adjustments were supposedly based on new data and new methodology. But the study failed to include satellite data.

At issue is the belief that the NOAA and NASA routinely fiddle with air and ocean temperature data to reflect a bigger problem with global warming than is actually present. Methodology is important, but the key will be found in the internal communications at the agency. If there was any funny business with the data, it will be there.

Judicial Watch is likely to get at least some of the documents without a judge’s ruling. But it’s hard to justify withholding documents that shed light on how the agency interprets data, considering that this sort of information is important for other scientists to review and comment on. Across the government, it is becoming increasingly difficult to pry basic information about how the administration gathers, analyzes, and interprets data that justify its extreme position on climate change.

You’d think they had something to hide.

Source

Trackback from your site.

Leave a comment (newest first):

Comments (12)

  • Avatar

    Amber

    |

    “You’d think they had something to hide “. Really ? ” You’d think they were being asked to turn over the nuclear lift off codes instead of weather data and their version of the recalculation of those numbers .
    Why are weather stations located on airport runways ,asphalt parking lots , and beside buildings even allowed to be included in data sets ?

    Reply

  • Avatar

    Amber

    |

    Humans occupy less than 2 % of the earth’s surface and ice occupies more of the earth’s surface than all cities combined.
    Step out of your house in Yellowknife, walk
    100 meters into the tundra and see how much influence your house or the city has on the warming the earth .
    There is a reason that only about 5,000 people live in the Antarctic ,a continent larger than the USA .

    Weather stations in urban centres and otherwise were never set up to calculate the earth’s temperature . So why is NOAA playing with and restating historic readings in the first place ?
    With 71% of the earth covered in water what percentage of weather station
    readings are from non- urban centres and
    water ?

    How could NOAA or anyone else claim to
    actually speak with authority that they know if earth’s temperature if up or down by a degree or two ? The truth is they can’t
    but they purposely mislead the public that they can . Why ?

    Basing

    Reply

  • Avatar

    Ken Gasper

    |

    I wonder what Mr. Beck will say 20 years from now when we are in total crisis because we listened to the deniers till it was too late to take effective counter actions.
    Will they take any responsibility at all or just blame someone or something else.
    Deny till we die.

    Reply

  • Avatar

    JayPee

    |

    Are we visited by an unwise Gaspar ?
    Is he smoking frankinscience ?

    What you call denial is actually realism. As long as you adhere to the religious fervor of the unsubstantiated alarmist, I expect to hear more quackery.

    Twenty years from now everything will be just fine if we could stop wasting resources on alarmist crap.

    Reply

  • Avatar

    Ken

    |

    [quote name=”JayPee”]
    Twenty years from now everything will be just fine if we could stop wasting resources on alarmist crap.[/quote]

    Forced human migration due to climate change…THAT is realism.

    Why does it upset you so much that people want to at least ATTEMPT to apply the brakes before the train hits the wall?

    Don’t you think that is human nature?
    To at least try??

    Or are you so sure of yourself that you are willing to take that chance with others future?

    You spend all this effort to stop the application of the brakes. Why?

    I really would like to understand.

    Reply

  • Avatar

    amirlach

    |

    [quote]Why does it upset you so much that people want to at least ATTEMPT to apply the brakes before the train hits the wall?[/quote] What wall? Every single CAGW Model has been invalidated by observation. It’s a failed hypothesis.

    Ironically the same folks who want to apply the climate brakes. Are full steam ahead towards a real financial cliff.
    [quote]Or are you so sure of yourself that you are willing to take that chance with others future?[/quote] Completely bankrupting and dismantling western industrial society will not stop rising Co2. It will lead to financial collapse and destroy any future our children might have had.
    [quote]You spend all this effort to stop the application of the brakes. Why? [/quote]

    It’s simple really, Man Made Global Warming is not real.

    The true aim of alarmists and the IPCC is to redistribute wealth.
    http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/11/18/ipcc-official-%e2%80%9cclimate-policy-is-redistributing-the-worlds-wealth%e2%80%9d/

    You want to understand? It’s fake, it’s a fraud. Has been since day one.

    Reply

  • Avatar

    JayPee

    |

    What is it that the alarmist crackpots fail to realize that there is no such thing as the chicken little contrived ” greenhouse effect “.

    The very foundation of your alarmism is bogus and nothing but imaginary speculation for which there has been no proof whatsoever.

    Reply

  • Avatar

    Ken

    |

    You have nothing to say but alarmist rhetoric;

    “Completely bankrupting and dismantling western industrial society”
    “destroy any future our children might have”

    What a bunch of baloney.
    While the rest of the world is calmly coming together for a common cause…
    You shout doom and gloom from the hilltops because they want to try. How ironic.

    I will move to a different forum to find my answers. There is nothing to learn here.

    Reply

  • Avatar

    JayPee

    |

    @Ken

    Why does it bother you that there is no ” greenhouse effect ” to found the alarmist dogma ?

    Why do you need to seek a totalitarian future rather than allow human beings the exercise of their G-d given free will ?

    Reply

  • Avatar

    amirlach

    |

    [quote name=”Ken”]You have nothing to say but alarmist rhetoric;

    “Completely bankrupting and dismantling western industrial society”
    “destroy any future our children might have”

    What a bunch of baloney.
    While the rest of the world is calmly coming together for a common cause…
    You shout doom and gloom from the hilltops because they want to try. How ironic.

    I will move to a different forum to find my answers. There is nothing to learn here.[/quote]
    [img]http://www.rugusavay.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/Maurice-Strong-Quotes-1.jpg[/img]
    Baloney? The guy who started the IPCC, his stated goal was to dismantle western industrial society.

    The rest of the world is not calmly coming together. The biggest emitters are building a dozen coal power stations a week.

    Poll after poll show the average person does not care about the chicken little wealth redistribution cause. CAGW ranks dead last in the UN’s own poll.

    The only ones who care are those set to profit from our children’s misery.

    http://data.myworld2015.org/

    Yes Ironic. You alarmists have been shouting doom and gloom from the hilltops for decades. And the climate just will not cooperate with the failed CAGW hypothesis. 😀

    Yep! Best you move on. Your not going to find anything here that supports your self loathing, lying left wing doctrine here. We deal in the data facts and the scientific method.

    Reply

  • Avatar

    Me

    |

    [quote name=”amirlach”][quote name=”Ken”]You have nothing to say but alarmist rhetoric;

    “Completely bankrupting and dismantling western industrial society”
    “destroy any future our children might have”

    What a bunch of baloney.
    While the rest of the world is calmly coming together for a common cause…
    You shout doom and gloom from the hilltops because they want to try. How ironic.

    I will move to a different forum to find my answers. There is nothing to learn here.[/quote]
    [img]http://www.rugusavay.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/Maurice-Strong-Quotes-1.jpg[/img]
    Baloney? The guy who started the IPCC, his stated goal was to dismantle western industrial society.

    The rest of the world is not calmly coming together. The biggest emitters are building a dozen coal power stations a week.

    Poll after poll show the average person does not care about the chicken little wealth redistribution cause. CAGW ranks dead last in the UN’s own poll.

    The only ones who care are those set to profit from our children’s misery.

    http://data.myworld2015.org/

    Yes Ironic. You alarmists have been shouting doom and gloom from the hilltops for decades. And the climate just will not cooperate with the failed CAGW hypothesis. 😀

    Yep! Best you move on. Your not going to find anything here that supports your self loathing, lying left wing doctrine here. We deal in the data facts and the scientific method.[/quote]

    Bravo Zulu! 🙂

    Reply

  • Avatar

    Amber

    |

    Ken ” Forced human migration due to climate change ” . Humans have always migrated due to climate change . So are you saying if nature causes it well that’s OK but when we have humans to blame it’s not ?

    People are living longer lives , the polar bears numbers have rebounded from over hunting ,and climate models are a joke at predicting weather let alone long term climate changes .

    NOAA has betrayed the public trust by stalling and withholding information vital to the USA national interest .

    What have they got to hide ? Land based weather stations were never intended to
    crystal ball the earth’s temperature in the first place . Misleading the public about NOAA’s ability to accurately predict the annual earth’s temperature is a discredit
    to the entire scientific community and an abuse of public trust .

    Spending $$Trillions based on failed climate models and NOAA nonsense is
    a massive misallocation of resources .

    Even Kerry admits returning the USA toa
    cave dweller society will have no discernible
    effect on anything other than cause some real migration as people leave areas only inhabitable because of fossil fuels .

    The migration Ken refers to is from human’s sticking their breaks in other people’s affairs and little or nothing to do with ongoing changes to the earth’s climate .

    Reply

Leave a comment

Loading Disqus Comments ...

No Trackbacks.