Enviro and Media Agenda on Extreme Weather – State Climatologist Invited, then Uninvited to Rally

As we’ve previously seen with Professor Bob Carter in “The phenomena of disinvitation and the brotherhood of silence“, the surfacetemperatures.org meeting in Exeter, where the people that raised the issues about metadata and siting  were not invited, but their work was presented and roundly criticized, and now with this example, it has become clear that the warmists really don’t want an opportunity to discuss our views on climate science, but rather an opportunity to diss it, unfettered by “equal time”.

via ICECAP

David R. Legates, Ph.D., C.C.M

Introduction

On Wednesday, August 25, I was invited by Environment America to speak at its September 8 press conference on “Extreme Weather in Delaware”, to promote the release of their new report on the subject at Legislative Hall.  Ms. Hannah Leone was pleased to have me speak because my “knowledge on climate change and weather would be a great asset to the event.”

On Friday, August 27, I was uninvited from the event by Ms. Leone, who noted that “I believe it is in the best interest of the success of our report that you do not participation [sic] in this event” but “as lead climatologist in the state, your opinion would be beneficial to us.” She had earlier indicated to me in a telephone call that she wanted to make sure everyone was on the same page at the event.

I believe that it is in the best interest of the citizens of Delaware that my “knowledge on climate change and weather” is made public, in light of the biases that are potentially inherent in the Environment America report.  I say ‘potentially inherent’ because, although I was promised a copy of the report, even after I was uninvited, I have yet to receive it.  However, Ms. Leone was kind enough to indicate the premise of the report in her first e-mail to me:

On September 8th we will be holding a press conference around our new Environment America Extreme Weather Report that examines the science linking global warming with hurricanes and tropical storms; coastal storms and sea level rise; flooding and extreme rainfall; snowstorms; and drought, wildfire and heat waves.  The report includes snapshot case studies of these extreme weather events that have occurred in the U.S. since 2005, and the damage that they caused, including a case study in Delaware. We do not suggest that these extreme weather events were caused by global warming.  Rather, the point of examining the recent extreme weather events – and the economic losses and other negative impacts they caused – is to document why we need to take action to protect against them, including by reducing emissions of pollutants that are changing our climate.

The contradictions and biases evidenced by my communications with Environment America are fascinating.  Although they willingly admit that “we do not suggest that these extreme weather events were caused by global warming,” they are willing to assert that: (1) average planetary temperatures continue to increase; (2) the frequency and/or intensity of these events are increasing; and (3) reducing ‘climate changing’ CO2 emissions will protect against these events.  I will argue that none of these assertions is true.

Conclusions

As a Delaware Native who has lived in this State for almost forty years, I care very much about the Diamond State and its ecology.  I too am concerned that we act as good stewards of our environment.  As a scientist, I have spent my entire professional career studying weather and climate and trying to understand climate change processes.  I am therefore outraged when I see outright misstatements of fact being used for political gain.  My concern is that there has been no significant increase in extreme weather – just an increase in its coverage with a more global media and an increase in its hype due to the political ramifications that climate change can have.

Environment America’s claim that the alleged increase in extreme weather events can be alleviated by taking action to reduce emissions of carbon dioxide is unfounded.  These events have not been increasing in either frequency or intensity and they are clearly not linked to increasing concentrations of carbon dioxide.  Limiting carbon dioxide emissions will have no effect at all on the frequency or intensity of these events.  Unfortunately the negative ramifications of attempting to limit such emissions will be far too real.  Our best solution is to make the public more aware of these dangers, provide more timely detection and dissemination of potential extreme weather hazards (in which the National Weather Service and several State agencies have been actively engaged), and encourage people to stop building in hazardous locations, thereby putting the existing population more at risk.

See detailed analysis of all the weather threats claimed by Environment America and other environmental groups, psuedoscientists and mainstream media alarmists here.

It is clear these groups and their media messengers are uninterested in facts or the truth just in communicating the scare message that they think will bring their movement to success. This is just another example of the blatant hypocrisy that the public must be made aware of.