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
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.
Wow – August 2007? Has it been that LONG since that?
Time really flies when we are in denial, doesn’t it?…LOL
it’s been a cool and fun journey – although sometimes I wonder if Steve M thinks so…
I wonder if Steve M ever smiles when he finds some of this stuff?… 🙂
“‘cui bozo’ would mean ‘who clowns’ surely.”
Et tu, andyd?
/eesflay
Enough is enough! Urge your Senators and Representatives to pass legislation requiring all data and email funded by public tax dollars to be made publicly available (state secrets being the exception). The penalty for failing to provide such data and email needs to be mandatory and immediate jail time in a Federal Prison. Mann and Schmidt (and whole bunch of others) deserve jail time for repeatedly refusing to provide taxpayer funded data and correspondence to those who paid for it.
Jquip;
the phrase you need is perhaps “bozo bono”. No relation to Sonny. Maybe.
Anthony
How do you sleep at night? Do solar panels on your home really block satellite heat sinking devices?
NSA and President Obama must be moderating everything you do.
If not for people like you, we would all become government servants.
Keep up the great reporting Anthony,and hope I did not scare you, I am scared just being a realist(they call me a denier) and feel I may be on some sort of deportation list even though I was born in the USA including my parent and their parents. Go back a little further and my Great Great grandmother was True blood American Indian.
Reblogged this on CACA and commented:
A BIG win for Science.
A MASSIVE blow to NASA, the climate alarm industry and perpetrators of scientific fraud.
Real Science Fraud File | CACA
http://climatism.wordpress.com/2013/08/17/real-science-fraud-file/
“Among the materials NASA withheld were two electronic directories ”
I get the impression that the writer does not even know what he’s writing about . He seems to think its like a big, thick e-book or something. Maybe we should says “folders” and he may catch on.
Probably related to Cher.
Isn’t CEI a free market think tank? The article tries to make it look like all CEI does is deny climate change while sucking up the profits of big oil. Wouldn’t it be nice to just once hear of profits in percentages from these left wing propogandists? “ohhhh, look at the shiney big numbers”
Revenues do not equal profit. Why did they not also include capital investment data too? That would have put profit and revenues into perspective. Balanced reporting anyone?
Jimbo says: @ November 10, 2013 at 3:21 pm
When I get smeared my friends I fight fire with fire…..
>>>>>>>>>>>>
Great lists. Thanks
The general public does not understand science much less physics and you get absolutely no where if you try to use science to counter emotional thinking and faith in what IPCC psuedo-scientists say. (After all YOU don’t have a PhD in Climate science and besides you are a Din!er.)
However the public does understand hypocrisy. Add to your lists Enron and BP invented the Global Warming Industry and Shell Oil funded the founding of the Climate Research Unit at East Anglia and watch the light bulbs go on. This is the main reason the Warmists keep smearing skeptics with the ‘Big Oil’ brush and why ‘Big Oil’ occasionally tosses crumbs at skeptics that soon after show up as headlines in articles written by Greenpeace and the MSM.
(Natural gas is the only viable energy source of the three. So follow natural gas.)
There is also the Ged Davis, VP of Shell Oil, e-mail on IPCC storylines and Scenerios:
To add the final nail you have the outcome of all this political maneuvering:
Energy Prices to Soon Skyrocket
So as coal plants are closed the cost of energy will go up by a factor of 10 or more. That is your $200/month bill becomes $2000 a month. This depends on how much is from the much more costly solar and wind energy. See R. Courtney’s comment HERE
Cape Wind project in Nantucket Sound calculated cost per Megawatt $162.72.
Combined Cycle Natural Gas Turbine studied by DOE cost per Megawatt $3.48.
This does not include the cost of the Smart Meters and Smart appliances needed to turn off your electric so power companies can be supply continuous power to government and corporations. (You get the rolling blackouts not them.)
The UK shows the results of their Clean Energy Policy. It is fuel poverty. In the UK ‘Fuel Poverty’ is killing 65 people per day in the winter. Article: Fuel poverty deaths three times higher than government estimates
My links showing Ged Davis’s connections to the IPCC and Shell Oil were stale so I went hunting for an active link. It is rather interesting.
UNFCCC is the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. USA Entry went into force March 21, 1994 per the United Nations. SEE: http://unfccc.int/essential_background/convention/status_of_ratification/items/2631.php
The objective of the treaty is to “stabilize greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere at a level that would prevent dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system”. The treaty itself set no limits on emissions and contains no enforcement mechanisms. This explains the positions of the DOE and EPA on CAGW. Their job now is to change public opinion so those limits can be set and enforcement mechanisms can be put in place. Make you wonder just who the DOE and EPA actually are working for doesn’t it? (The USDA and FDA did the same sort of propaganda footwork for the UN and WTO to make sure that US law is now written to comply with the WTO, OIE and FAO standards.)
The Kyoto Protocol is part of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change and was signed but was not ratified by the USA.
*FCCC Article 6 (education, training, public awareness)
Jquip says: November 10, 2013 at 3:58 pm
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….
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
HUH? Cui bono is a well known investigative technique. The police use it all the time.
cui bozo of course refers to those who benefit from the ‘Useful Idiots’
Let’s see.. CEI is associated with Exxon-Mobil with revenues of $435 Billion, vs NASA an organization funded by the US Federal Government with revenues of $2.7 Trillion. Exxon-Mobil sells products that help people, the US Federal Government taxes people (business don’t really pay taxes, they raise the price of their products to pay the taxes) and subsidizes those who they like.
Conflating ‘rolling blackouts’ with selective control of appliances (e.g. set points of air conditioners, delaying the start of water-heaters during high peak-load periods)?
The broad-brush you paint with does your accuracy ‘factor’ no favors, Gail. Or maybe this will be just more claimed ‘editing’ failure? More apropos to cite the trade-marked hair-on-fire posting style …
Industry and select customers who agree to ‘shed loads’ at the behest of the electric utility during high demands periods are ALREADY a reality. This is a logical extension into another part of the electric market that, so far, does nothing to control loads on the DEMAND side of the equation (excepting forced, total-cutoff BLACKOUTS).
.
_Jim says:
November 11, 2013 at 6:00 am
Conflating ‘rolling blackouts’ with selective control of appliances (e.g. set points of air conditioners, delaying the start of water-heaters during high peak-load periods)?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
No I Am Not.
(Note Smart Meters is first in that sentence.)
I am taking it direct from the Source:
Jquip says:
November 10, 2013 at 3:58 pm
I think cui bozo would rather mean “Who is Bozo?”, a valid, if unenlightening question.
Perhaps I should give you more leeway as your native language may not be English?
I am still not able parse “This does not include the cost of the Smart Meters and Smart appliances needed to turn off your electric so power companies can be supply continuous power to government and corporations.” as you do, de-coupling ‘smart meters’ and ‘turning off your electric [power]’ for the convenience and sake of govt and corporations.
I am beginning to think you do not comprehend half the subjects on which you post (and aside from your own posts now given the above!) leading me to believe Gail’s a ‘cut and paste’ artiste extraordinaire with a hair-on-fire posting style unmatched by any on WUWT.
Hopefully you do not actually fall into the category of Humpty Dumpty wherein: “When I use a word, it means just what I choose it to mean- neither more nor less.”
.
_Jim:
In your post addressed to Gail Combes at November 11, 2013 at 8:25 am you say
I will try to help you.
It is clear that you are only “beginning to think” and that more thinking before posting would benefit you. The problem is your obvious lack of ability at reading comprehension.
When Ms Combes quotes someone verbatim then either
(a) they intended what they wrote
or
(b) they made a mistake
or
(c) Ms Combes quoted them out of context.
In the cases you challenge you do not claim Ms Combes quoted them out of context and she did not.
If you don’t like the information she provides then that is your problem and not hers. So, either provide referenced refutation of the referenced information she provides or accept that there is information you don’t like. In either case, stop whinging at her about it because it makes you look like the answer to cui bozo.
I hope that helps.
Richard
Spin? More like a ride down Mt.Everest in one of these inflatable balls
Which gives me an idea for getting incapacitated climbers down Mt. Everest ! 453 billion in revenue, here I come!
Let us say you had evidenced a local hospital was going fall down which would result in many deaths . Let us say that the authorities refuse to do anything until you show them all your proof. Do you A, refuse saying ‘it’s my data and you can’t have it’ or B throw the lot in their face and keep throwing until they do something?
In the case of AGW we are told that it’s the ‘most important event ever ‘ and that there is ‘no time to lose ‘ and that ‘the science is settled . And yet what do we see but ‘ it’s my data and you can’t have it’ and the liberal application of smoke and mirrors. When surely what is called for it the first approach were much effort is put into making all the data available , indeed forcefully shoving into people’s faces. Therefore, you can see why people get a distinct hint of BS about ‘the cause’
Meanwhile it is not a little ironic that even if the alarmists are right it is their own inability to share the data honestly that is partly reasonable for holding back action on this front and so ‘dooming the planet’
Allgov.com is the brainchild of David Wallechinsky, I believe, who produced the best-selling “Book of Lists” and “The People’s Almanac” in the ’70s. At the time, I thought he was pretty right on. (I don’t see his name associated with AllGov now, but it appears there are several of his kids on the staff.) AllGov is the FIRST site EVER to censor a post of mine — with regard to the CEI story, I questioned their apparent objection to transparency in government.
The press release begins:
“A climate change denial group once funded by oil giant ExxonMobil (2012 revenues: $453.123 billion) …”
Guess we need an addition to “ad hominem,” or “ad hom” for short. Maybe “Ad Corporatum,” or “ad corp” for short??? How about “ad crap” for those using either while ignoring or withholding data??