It has been one of those days…first the GISS data train wreck in apparently reusing last months temperatures to make this months “hottest October ever” announcement, now we find that the director of The National Climatic Data Center (NCDC) may not have the goods for the PhD he goes by. He’s about to become the president of the American Meteorological Society. Interesting times – Anthony
Reprinted from NRO’s Planet Gore
Dr. Pepper, Dr. J, Dr. Karl . . . [Chris Horner]
Well, this testimony, submitted to the House of Representatives is strange, what with “Dr. Tom Karl” – now the lead author of the U.S. government’s Climate Change Science Program assessment being prepared to support EPA regulation of carbon dioxide – having never earned an academic Ph.D.
That’s according to North Carolina State University, that is, which is the school from which I found a Karl resume claiming a Ph.D., earned “1977-78”. I first found this on a Johns Hopkins website but, after asking Karl’s employer NOAA to clarify where the “Dr.” title they serially tout was earned, that CV has been taken down (but not before I saved the file, of course). NOAA wouldn’t answer my question, but only sniffed that if I can point to them claiming Karl has a Ph.D. – as opposed to just promoting him as “Dr. Karl” apparently on the basis of a 2002 honorary doctorate of humane letters – I should tell them.
The thing is, I have just received documents under the Freedom of Information Act showing that Mr. Karl is indeed styled as “Dr. Karl” on the express basis of having earned that 1978 NCSU Ph.D., as a proposed “co-investigator” in an application for a million-dollar-plus federal grant. The grant was awarded. No word yet whether the U.S. mail was involved in the process.
I suppose it’s possible that Hopkins just made this up to get the grant, and wasn’t relying on anything Mr. Karl told them. And the same could be true of NOAA, which reviewed the grant application (as evidenced by a letter in the responsive documents), and then received $100,000 from the proceeds of the grant. Maybe they got together to prepare Mr. Karl’s House testimony without his input, too.
Given the apparent seriousness of these revelations, I’ve got some correspondence underway seeking clarification from Hopkins, NOAA, and Karl. But, this is a busy time, what with – have I mentioned this? – a book coming out today. More later.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
This is almost getting to be fun. AWG screw ups are becoming pervasive.
The Benicia Climate Action plan meets this Thursday. Their plan is to “protect climate” through ideas to “reduce GHGs to 25% below 2000 levels” by 2010. They don’t specify GHG emissions, but the total levels of GHGs. I wonder if they realize that anthropogenic GHGs are such a small percentage of the total atmosphere that it is physically impossible for this small town of 28,000 to get the total atmospheric water vapor, CO2 and methane 0.01% below 2010 levels let alone a 25% reduction. Okay, I suppose they meant to say “emissions,” but they didn’t. Even still, the growth in local population and government since 2000 will make it virtually impossible to get 25% below 2000 levels as it means they would have to achieve about a 35% reduction from today’s emissions.
Am I the first? Well now.
AGW has turned out to be a freaking joke, a hoax, a fraud, perpetrated by jokesters, hoaxers, and frauds.
You can fool some of the people, I guess. Personally, I have never been fooled by this particular hoax. I’m not bragging. More like sobbing.
I respect your stated wish, Anthony, not to fight fire with fire. But what about ridicule? Is it okay to ridicule these clowns?
Absolutely pathetic. Al “Che” Gore wants revolution in the name of the Big AGW Hoax. Our new President wants to bankrupt coal-fired power plants. Fake data, fake degrees, fake science, fake everything. How about we cap and trade the alarmists?
Warmer is Better. Fight the Fraud.
This is off topic a bit but can we have some kind of glossary. I’m sure I’m not the only one who isn’t that savvy with all the acronyms used in these articles.
Neil.
Reply: There is a glossary link at the top of the home page. If you would like a particular acronym added, you can request it in the comments section below the glossary. ~Smokey the mod.
What is the relevance of ‘No word yet whether the U.S. mail was involved in the process?’ (For those of us residing outside of the USA).
Lying on resumes, and claiming false degrees is typical behaviour for psychopaths – i.e those lying, manipulative, remorseless parasites.
Ref “Snakes in Suits, When Psychopaths go to work.”
Another embarassing moment for me and my degree (Mat Sci. 95, NCSU)
*sigh*
Maybe I should just tell everyone I went to Clemson….
Fine work. It is good to expose the conmen wherever possible. Faking an academic degree is low indeed, but actually quite what we would expect from the global warming crowd.
Has this gentleman signed the Oregon Petition yet? 😉
What is the relevance of ‘No word yet whether the U.S. mail was involved in the process?’
I believe it becomes a federal offence
Nice to know that in Iran they have high standards of probity. They impeached their Interior Minister (Ali Kordan) for falsely claiming to have an Oxford University degree. Seems to link with this story. Oddly, I doubt that the outcome will be the same. Or do we have standards in public life as high as those in Iran?
Weather is not the same as climate, I know, but all the same…
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/3418125/Ski-resorts-open-early-after-heavy-snow.html
I consider Dr Karl one of the good guys by the rather undemanding standards of climate science. I’ve read quite a few of his papers and he avoids the kind of ritual obesiance to AGW that plagues climate science. You know the kind of thing – paraphrasing ‘We didn’t find any evidence that AGW is affecting whatever it is we studied, but we know it will in the future.’
F. Rasmin: if US mail was involved it would make it a Federal Offense. And that would be quite serious for the person involved assuming the allegations are true.
This is OT and not even climate (it is solar, but not as we discuss it). However, it is consistant with “Commentary on puzzling things in life, nature, science, weather, climate change, technology, and recent news”
Half-life (more or less) from Science News says in part:
One suggestion is that neutrinos might provide a slight push on nuclei since one event happened at night during a solar flare. Continuing:
The comment about the mail: in the USA, there are strict laws about mail fraud (i.e. sending falsified documents by mail). Sometimes, when the authorities can’t nail someone on anything else, they pull out “mail fraud” and prosecute that. The point here is: he received a large federal grant, possibly based on submitting a false CV. If the CV and grant proposal were sent by mail, then…
It’s the same kind of trick used for drug dealers: here’s this unemployed teenager driving a Mercedes. You know where he got the money, but can’t prove it. So you nail him for tax evasion, since he certainly never bothered to declare his income…
Here is a short list:
NCDC Dr. Karl not really a PHD climatologist.
GISS using old data to proclaim hottest October ever.
Jason 2 producing no data.
Sunspecks are now counted as sunspots.
CT problems with Arctic Sea Ice Area.
IPCC projections repeatedly falsified.
Mauna Loa CO2 missteps. First too low, now too high this month?
And all this in just the last year or so. To this observer it seems the inmates are running the asylum. No wonder there are so many sceptics.
Mr B (02:08:16) :
On the top navigation bar, click on the word “Glossary” to get to http://wattsupwiththat.com/glossary/
I try to remember to refresh my recall of the top text every so often because I’ve forgotten it too.
Looks like he has been citing a 2002 NCSU honorary degree recently (in 2006)
http://www.environmentwriter.org/scienceandthenews/bios/tkarl.htm
I would not think anyone would really use Dr. or PhD. if they only had an honorary degree? That seems odd…
Mike D -( 1:42.26)
“You can fool some of the people, I guess.”
What matters in the AGW battle is whether you can fool enough of the people enough of the time.
This one interests me as the Desmogblog claimed my father’s doctorate was faked, and was just an honorary degree. Queen Mary College of London has produced the degree online ( sorry I don’t have the link handy ). There was a defamation proceeding that they claimed they had won against my father which was a lie as it never went to court. One of the many ways that they tie us up in courtrooms. We did not have the money to fight it out. The lawyer my father retained suggested dad use some of his “oil money” to fight. I can tell you as a hard working shmoe, that we have no oil money, or tobacco money, etc. I think you can guess which side of the fence this lawyer was on. My point being, we have to give this gentleman the opportunity to produce his credentials before we act as badly as they do. One of the best things about our side of the debate, is that we haven’t implemented the low tactics of the opposition in the media, even when given the chance. Take the high road.
F Rasmin,
Mail fraud is meaningful because of this:
18 United States Code 63§ 1341. Frauds and swindles
Whoever, having devised or intending to devise any scheme or artifice to defraud, or for obtaining money or property by means of false or fraudulent pretenses, representations, or promises, or to sell, dispose of, loan, exchange, alter, give away, distribute, supply, or furnish or procure for unlawful use any counterfeit or spurious coin, obligation, security, or other article, or anything represented to be or intimated or held out to be such counterfeit or spurious article, for the purpose of executing such scheme or artifice or attempting so to do, places in any post office or authorized depository for mail matter, any matter or thing whatever to be sent or delivered by the Postal Service, or deposits or causes to be deposited any matter or thing whatever to be sent or delivered by any private or commercial interstate carrier, or takes or receives therefrom, any such matter or thing, or knowingly causes to be delivered by mail or such carrier according to the direction thereon, or at the place at which it is directed to be delivered by the person to whom it is addressed, any such matter or thing, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both. If the violation affects a financial institution, such person shall be fined not more than $1,000,000 or imprisoned not more than 30 years, or both.
After getting over the initial shock of this revelation, here’s what I found from Googling…
On Mr. Karl’s education…
http://www.ametsoc.org/amschaps/may03news.html
“Our guest speaker for the night was Mr. Thomas R. Karl, Director of National Climatic Data Center (NCDC). Mr. Karl received his BS degree in meteorology from Northern Illinois University, and his Masters from the University of Wisconsin. He was awarded an honorary Doctorate of Humane Letters by North Carolina State University in 2002. He serves as the Director of the NCDC and as Chair of various climate monitoring and climate change committees.”
However, a simple Google search brings up over *** 500 hits *** referring to him as “Dr. Karl”. Some selected citations are given below.
But more to the point, referring to someone whose reputation has been gained in science/physics as “Dr.” if they did not earn a degree in their field of study is bordering on fraud, in my opinion. And I say this as someone who dedicated four years of his life to earning a PhD in Mechanical Engineering, which involved prelims, coursework, research, paper writing, thesis writing, thesis defense, presentations at conferences etc.
Of course, I suppose it’s never too late for Mr. Karl to return to school to actually earn a PhD…
—
http://www.climatescience.gov/Library/sap/sap3-3/sap3-3prospectus-final.htm
Thomas R. Karl
Thomas R. Karl is the Director of NOAA’s National Climatic Data Center, Program Manager for NOAA’s Climate Observations and Analysis Program, and Director of NOAA’s Climate Change Data and Detection Applied Research Center. Dr. Karl is author of many climatic atlases and has nearly 200 published articles and technical reports in various scientific journals on topics related to changes and variations of a variety of extreme climate and weather events. He has served as Editor of the Journal of Climate and as Lead Author of several scientific assessments completed by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), Chief Editor of the CCSP Product and Synthesis Report 1.1, and served as Co-Chair of the US National Assessment of Climate Variability and Change.
http://oversight.house.gov/story.asp?ID=1653
“A year earlier, when Dr. Thomas Karl, the Director of National Climatic Data Center, appeared before the House Oversight Committee, his testimony was also heavily edited by both White House officials and political appointees at the Commerce Department. He was not allowed to say in his written testimony that “modern climate change is dominated by human influences,” that “we are venturing into the unknown territory with changes in climate,” or that “it is very likely (>95 percent probability) that humans are largely responsible for many of the observed changes in climate.” His assertion that global warming “is playing” a role in increased hurricane intensity became “may play.”
Ed (06:23:03) :
Looks like he has been citing a 2002 NCSU honorary degree recently (in 2006)
http://www.environmentwriter.org/scienceandthenews/bios/tkarl.htm
I would not think anyone would really use Dr. or PhD. if they only had an honorary degree? That seems odd…
According to the vaunted Wikipedia, you use D.H.L. or L.H.D., not “Ph.D.” for this honorary degree.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doctor_of_Humane_Letters
Wikipedia adds that it is awarded “usually to those who have distinguished themselves in areas other than science.”
If that’s an allusion to his promotion of AGW, they got that right! 🙂
The wheels come off just prior to going titsup.
When there is nothing left but lies, you lie and hope that no one sees the change.
It is common knowledge in the climate science community that Karl does not have a PhD. Here is a 1997 bio: http://www.usgcrp.gov/usgcrp/seminars/971105DD.html