Harsh Political Reality exposes MSM Alarmism

From the New York Times by Justin Gillis:
New York Times Photo

Harsh Political Reality Slows Climate Studies Despite Extreme Year

At the end of one of the most bizarre weather years in American history, climate research stands at a crossroads.
Scientists say they could, in theory, do a much better job of answering the question “Did global warming have anything to do with it?” after extreme weather events like the drought in Texas and the floods in New England.
and later in the article:
This year, when the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration tried to push through a reorganization that would have provided better climate forecasts to businesses, citizens and local governments,  Republicans in the House blocked it.
The idea had originated in the Bush administration, was strongly endorsed by an outside review panel and would have cost no extra money. But the House Republicans, many of whom reject the overwhelming scientific consensus about the causes of global warming, labeled the plan an attempt by the Obama administration to start a “propaganda” arm on climate.
You can tell that the author is coming from the Alarmist side when he uses phrases such as "reject the overwhelming scientific consensus.."

Jane Lubchenco,  the director of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), said her agency had been deluged with information requests regarding future climate risks.

Ken Schlichte writes:
This article incorrectly suggested that climate change was responsible for this year’s Texas drought.  The rejection of a climate change “propaganda” arm headed by NOAA’s Jane Lubchenco distributing this type of climate change misinformation is appropriate.  The NOAA National Climatic Data Center figures below indicate the following:

  •        The Texas annual temperature trend from 1895 through 2010 was perfectly flat.
  •        The Texas annual temperatures trended downward at a rate of 1.19 degrees F per decade from 1998 through 2010.
The 2011 Texas drought was produced by extreme weather conditions, not by climate change.

Some of the following data are preliminary and have not been quality controlled.
For official data, please contact the NCDC Climate Services and Monitoring Division at ncdc.orders@noaa.gov
Annual 1895 - 2010 Data Values:
Annual 1901 - 2000 Average = 65.04 degF
Annual 1895 - 2010 Trend = 0.00 degF / Decade
Annual Temperature

Some of the following data are preliminary and have not been quality controlled.
For official data, please contact the NCDC Climate Services and Monitoring Division at ncdc.orders@noaa.gov.
Annual 1998 - 2010 Data Values:
Annual 1998 - 2010 Average = 65.78 degF
Annual 1998 - 2010 Trend = -1.19 degF / Decade

Ken Schlichte is an expert forest soil scientist in western Washington.



  1. Some wishful thinking here.
    The original article says: "Many of the individual events in 2011 do have precedents in the historical record. And the nation’s climate has featured other concentrated periods of extreme weather, including severe cold snaps in the early 20th century and devastating droughts and heat waves in the Dust Bowl era of the 1930s.
    But it is unusual, if not unprecedented, for so many extremes to occur in such a short span. The calamities in 2011 included wildfires that scorched millions of acres, extreme flooding in the Upper Midwest and the Mississippi River Valley and heat waves that shattered records in many parts of the country. Abroad, massive floods inundated Australia, the Philippines and large parts of Southeast Asia."


Post a Comment

All serious comments published after moderation.
Comments should be polite, and respect all views.
No bad language. Spam never makes it!