A controversial issue is whether there has been a nearly two-decade pause in global warming, as asserted by climate change "agnostics." In June, 2015, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration published a study that claimed that the warming pause was based on a misreading of the data.
According to a NOAA press release, the new study:
finds that the rate of global warming during the last 15 years has been as fast as or faster than that seen during the latter half of the 20th Century. The study refutes the notion that there has been a slowdown or "hiatus" in the rate of global warming in recent years....
"Adding in the last two years of global surface temperature data and other improvements in the quality of the observed record provide evidence that contradict the notion of a hiatus in recent global warming trends," said Thomas R. Karl, L.H.D., Director, NOAA's National Centers for Environmental Information. "Our new analysis suggests that the apparent hiatus may have been largely the result of limitations in past datasets, and that the rate of warming over the first 15 years of this century has, in fact, been as fast or faster than that seen over the last half of the 20th century."
Okay, if that's correct, then show us the evidence. Reveal the data that is the basis for such a conclusion. After all, hiding the data isn't what science is about. True science opens up the evidence for everyone, to replicate, to judge the study's methodology and evaluate the conclusions. To hide the data is, to borrow a phrase from global warming alarmists, "anti-science."
But that's what NOAA did. It refused a request for the data by Congress and by Judicial Watch. Now Judicial Watch has announced that it had to file suit, on Dec. 2. Apparently that was enough for NOAA to give Congress something, but to date, the public has been given nothing.
NOAA supposedly is the last word in the global warming debate, providing the data on which to judge whether temperatures are arising. NOAA gathers the data in "thousands of ways" from a plethora of sources. How those data are collected and compiled is one of several key issues in the global warming debate.
Rep.Lamar Smith (R-TX) had requested the data and internal communications related to the study. Judicial Watch also wants to compare what was said internally and how its information was presented to the public. As Smith's committee said in its subpoena to NOAA:
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.
As Smith wrote in a Nov. 27 op-ed in the The Washington Times:
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.
The last Judicial Watch heard from NOAA, on Dec. 15, was that the agency would "begin searching for documents responsive to Judicial Watch’s FOIA request."
So, who's anti-science now? And why haven't we heard much about this from the media?
Read why Americans need to learn about the nation's most ignored war.
Find out what freelance editorial services I can provide for you.
Want to be notified by email when I post? Type your email address in the box and click the "create subscription" button. My list is completely spam free, and you can opt out at any time.