From AllGov.com with lots of spin (h/t to reader Dennis)
Judge Orders NASA to Release Climate Change-Related Documents
A climate change denial group once funded by oil giant ExxonMobil (2012 revenues: $453.123 billion) won a legal victory last week over NASA when a federal judge ordered the space agency to turn over more documents related to its 2007 revisions of global temperature data. Release of the information will have no effect on the climate change data that scientists are using to determine the extent of global warming that is occurring.
The controversy started in August 2007, when statistician Stephen McIntyre found an error in NASA’s temperature data sets that he said caused temperatures in the U.S. from the year 2000 onward to be overstated. After posting “his findings on his website ClimateAudit.org,” according to Judge Barbara Rothstein’s decision, McIntyre “emailed them to NASA climate scientists” at the Goddard Institute of Space Studies (GISS), which quickly “revised values in its temperature data set…[and] did not issue a press release announcing or explaining the corrections.”
Sensing a potential scandal, the Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI) submitted three Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests to NASA, two in August 2007 and one in January 2008. After NASA released 2,500 pages of data in response, CEI filed a FOIA lawsuit in federal court in the District of Columbia in 2010.
Among the materials NASA withheld were two electronic directories referred to as the “Steve” and “alternate cleaning” directories, media inquiries about the data corrections, and two email accounts of Dr. Gavin Schmidt, a NASA scientist who teaches at Columbia University and contributes to a blog called RealClimate.org. Although CEI wanted all that and more, Judge Rothstein ordered NASA to release only the “Steve” directory and one of Dr. Schmidt’s email accounts, finding that the other materials either held no responsive documents or fell within a valid FOIA exemption.
Source: http://www.allgov.com/news/controversies/judge-orders-nasa-to-release-climate-change-related-documents-131110?news=851618
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
What does the revenues of Exxon have to do with the article I wonder?
I like the gratuitous association of CEI, the climate denial group with funding from ExxonMobile and making it almostnsound like they were getting $453 billion/year. I bet CEI doesn’t deny there is a climate.
Not a fan of this. Nor a fan of the idea that we need to go to court to get what should be publicly accessible in a functioning democracy of any sort. It’ll be interesting if anything curious shows up, and curious if anything interesting appears.
There has been no statistical warming since those FOIA requests were filed.
Who or what is Allgov.com? Their ‘about us’ page doesn’t really say anything about them, just what they allegedly do. I was dizzy after reading the first paragraph. There was so much spin.
Still don’t get why these public servants believe they are justified in withholding information.
Another Climategate? but this time it is 2.0 or is it 3.0 or 4.0 of 5.0,
Sad it takes big money to get the data that should not be tweaked out of NASA
How about:
“won a legal victory last week over NASA (an organization better known for designing shuttles that blow up and making stuff up about climate change) …”
Who cares?
http://joannenova.com.au/2013/11/australia-says-no-to-un-wish-list-of-billions-will-not-support-socialism-masquerading-as-environmentalism/
They can lie and ran all the want, and if it takes a court order to let those guys know they will be held responsible then I’m all for court orders every time. And I don’t care if its funded by the “alleged” oil companies – what is important is forcing these guys to look over their shoulder ever time they lie. About time in my book. They (the agw side) certainly have been playing by their own rules long enough.
Where would we be without Mr. McIntyre and Mr. Watts? So thanks to both of them for their persistence and due diligence. Amazing individuals indeed.
What do you call these then?
Not sure, but I believe the data held by NASA is public. However the data held by its Partners is not, so you’d have to submit requests to Columbia University or GISS – likely the reason for the rejection by the judge, and also wouldn’t be honored.
Thank you Anthony – good luck Steve.
Well said Grant.
But I fear that in the future the dishonest will learn to NOT name their folders after Steve or Antony.
And then how could a Judge find them as relevant?
Why should the publicly funded NASA handing over data be a problem? No effect on data? Where is the former NASA employee and climate change activist Dr. James Hansen who has been arrested at least two times over his climate activism? It’s all for the grand kiddies. Only Hansen has grand children.
The data is good. Yeah right.
http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2013/09/21/hansen-was-a-naughty-y2k-boy/
http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2012/06/11/why-hansen-had-to-corrupt-the-temperature-record/
http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/hansen-the-climate-chiropractor/
Jimbo says: Great resource big guy. Mind if I take it to use with the green crowd here in Canada when we fight over oil companies, as we do frequently up here?
Now, which of these 2 directories would a smart lawyer be interested in? Ducking and diving, weaving and feigning over public records. Why hide???? Is it THAT interesting??? FOIA, please help.
Gavin Schmitdt should know it’s to get out. You have been someone’s bitch for too long.
What a well crafter piece of propaganda. Hats off. I understood nearly nothing other than evil people are after saint-like scientists.
Take it ALL! If they say there are no links for all the references, tell them that Google is their friend. 😉 [I don’t put links to all to avoid going straight into the spam bin. ]
PS there are many, many other examples of greens taking fossil fuel money and INVESTING TOO! Check it out.
Do I hear hypocricy. There are many, many examples of green, climate change ‘hippos’ too. 🙂
Jimbo says:
November 10, 2013 at 2:41 pm
Excellent point!
When I get smeared my friends I fight fire with fire. It’s the only sensible thing to do. Did I hear Exxon? Have I heard tobacco before? Of course I did so here we go again!
The BBC Pension fund, as at 31 March 2013, had investments in the following tobacco companies:
Altria Group
British American Tobacco
Imperial Tobacco
Reynolds American
—
Al Gore, the climate change campaigner, has been quoted in 1996 by the New York Times saying:
Earlier in the same article the New York Times said:
—
In 2007 the Union of Concerned Scientists issued a report called “ExxonMobil’s Tobacco-like Disinformation Campaign on Global Warming Science”.
The Union of Concerned Scientists has in the past received funding from the Grantham Foundation, which is bankrolled by hedge-fund manager Jeremy Grantham. At the time of the funding the foundation had holdings in tobacco giant Philip Morris. In August of 2011 his fund owned millions of shares in fossil fuel companies such as Exxon Mobil.
—
One of the founders of the wildlife and climate campaigning WWF is Dr. Anton Rupert. The now deceased Dr. Rupert made his fortune from the cigarette manufacturing company called Voorbrand, re-named Rembrandt, now consolidated into Rothmans.
Ref: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/obituaries/1508360/Anton-Rupert.html
I am in the process of trying to do a little climate educating. Currently our discussion is around Hansen’s nuclear energy embrace. Does anyone know if he has any documented ties with the industry? I have just started searching but thought I would ask here, too. 🙂
Jimbo: “What do you call these then?”
You’re getting tangled up on cui bono and cui bozo. Cui bono, ‘who benefits’ is a well known fallacy. But cui bozo, ‘clowns benefit’ is well know as a valid and sound proof of shenanigans.
Here is the Climate Audit post about Hansen’s readjustment of the adjusted temperatures, (which was later followed by a later re-readjustment.) This was the wake-up call for me. Up until this point I had many doubts, but was “undecided.” After this point I became the black sheep of my family, as I became intensely skeptical, was angry at Hansen, and even used rude words like “Fraud.”
2007. Six long years ago. How the time flies!
http://climateaudit.org/2007/08/08/a-new-leaderboard-at-the-us-open/
My comment may have gone into the spam bin, likely because I used the five letter word F-R-A-U-D in the same sentence as the name of a climate scientist. Sorry about that.
Jquip: ‘cui bozo’ would mean ‘who clowns’ surely.