Top Secret NOFORN Restricted Access Climate Model Results

Guest Post by Willis Eschenbach

Y’know, some of these climate games are getting kind of boring. I’m tired of people who are paid with my taxes hiding their data, results, and findings. Case in point, the “Community Earth System Model” of the University Center for Atmospheric Research (UCAR).  They describe their model as:

The Community Earth System Model (CESM) is a fully-coupled, global climate model that provides state-of-the-art computer simulations of the Earth’s past, present, and future climate states.

Figure 1. The forcings and major flows in the CACM1.0 model. Source

OK, fine. This new CESM model is the successor to the CCSM3.0 climate model. People always tout the fact that the CESM code is open source, so you can investigate their results. I wanted to find out more about the CCSM3.0 model, in particular the forcings used in the AR4 simulations of the 20th century. What could go wrong?

Well, the first thing to go wrong is that you have to register to read their data. I don’t like that, but I can live with it. But then I find out that I can’t just register—I need to be approved by the good folks at UCAR to even view their holy climate results, we wouldn’t want just anyone reading them I guess …

About 95% of the UCAR funding comes from my taxes, and I need their approval to see their results??? C’mon, fools, this is not secret Al-Qaeda documents or the floor plan to Fort Knox, it’s just your stupid model results. Why are you making it hard to access?

Having no option, I applied to get access to the repository where they store the sacred results and forcings of the model runs. I figured OK, I can play their games. So I applied for the lowest level of access, read-only.

But this being climate science, today it got worse, viz:

  • From: XXX <XXX@cgd.ucar.edu>
  • Subject: Your request for access to the CESM repository was declined.
  • Date: May 6, 2011 12:49:13 PM PDT
  • Your request for access to the CESM repository was declined.You still have access to all public releases of CESM. Go to http://www.cesm.ucar.edu/models/ for access to the public model releases.
  • Title:
  • First Name: Willis
  • Middle initial:
  • Last name: Eschenbach
  • Account name: XXX
  • My position: climate researcher
  • Primary working group: Climate Change and Assessment
  • Relevant working groups: Atmosphere Model:Climate Variability:
  • Type of access: Level-1: Read-only
  • Summary of work: Analyzing the relationship of forcing to output of cesm models
  • List of CESM collaborators: None
  • Start date: Now
  • End date: 2 years after starting
  • Submission date: 5/6/2011
  • Acceptance status: Declined
  • Password issued: no
  • Remarks on status: please use released cesm1 code base

Oooooh, that angrified my blood mightily, and I waxed wroth. I am ashamed to say that I generally disturbed the peace of the neighborhood with my voluble speculations on the species and personal habits of their ancestors, and with my loud suggestions that the good folks of UCAR should perform anatomically improbable forms of sexual auto-congress …

And Judith Curry and other people wonder why the public doesn’t trust climate scientists, and why their message is so widely disbelieved? In general, the public rightly assumes that people who hide something … have something to hide. Bozo logic, I know, but strangely, people believe it.

I can’t tell you how tired I am of this petty, provincial, and anti-scientific ‘you have to say the secret password before I’ll show you my results’ point of view. I have linked to this post in my response to the charming UCAR fellow … we’ll see how it plays out. Yeah, I know I should have written to them to straighten it out before posting, and if this were my first rodeo I would have done that. At this point, I’ve been stuffed around by this kind of nonsense too many times, I’m tired of being Mr. Nice Guy.

And more to the point, there is absolutely no reason for them to restrict access in the first place. It is non-secret, non-sensitive public data paid for by public money, and the public should have full and unfettered access to read it any time, without preconditions.

w.

[UPDATED May 7, ’11] If anyone else would like to join in the hunt, what I am looking for are the numbers underlying the graphics shown on this page. Month-by-month global values for the forcing variables. I’d prefer if they were in GISS style, where all of the forcings are expressed in W/m2, but raw concentrations (e.g. ppmv) are fine too.

[UPDATED May 8, ’11] Well, the powers that be have decided to let me in, and I’ve found what I need. My thanks to Steven Mosher and Derecho64 for the assistance. I’ll post up the results in Excel form once I convert them (the ozone data alone is almost 2 GBytes).

0 0 votes
Article Rating

Discover more from Watts Up With That?

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

119 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
May 6, 2011 3:28 pm

Now lets be fair willis.
There are TWO versions of the model.
1. The public release which I got access to in 10 seconds.
2. the DEVELOPMENT version.
To get the development version you have to fill out the form that you did.
But here is what they say.
“Access to developmental versions of CESM and its component models can be requested by filling out an online form. (Access is restricted to only CESM developers and close collaborators.)”
The point is rather simple. You have code that is in the process of being worked on. You dont want access to that because it may change. You want released code.
Input data is available from the public access version.
Since you dont intend to do any code development or collaborate closely with them, it seems reasonable that they would not give you access to Beta code.

May 6, 2011 3:30 pm

got access to the data in 15 seconds using the public 1.0 release registration.

Robert A
May 6, 2011 3:31 pm

That is where you have gone wrong:
Studies show that you have no right to your money in the first place. It is theirs.
By what right, then, do you claim viewing rights over the product of funds that were never really yours to begin with?
This has been recognized as an accident of process. Someday soon your paycheck will be sent in directly as a move to streamline and make government more efficient in this last desperate effort to save the planet.
Their mission is one of supreme importance that overrides everything. If the planet dies and you’re not paying, you’ll regret it. Maybe not today, maybe not tomorrow, but soon and for the rest of your life.
They’ve got a job to do too. Where they’re going you can’t follow. I’m no good at being noble, but it’s easy to see that the problems of one little person doesn’t amount to a hill of beans in this crazy world. Someday you’ll understand that.

James Sexton
May 6, 2011 3:44 pm

“It is non-secret, non-sensitive public data paid for by public money, and the public should have full and unfettered access to read it any time, without preconditions.”
==================================================
Amen.

rbateman
May 6, 2011 3:50 pm

Did you try “Open Sesame”?
Naw, just add them to the list of budget items to get pruned off the money tree.
Here ya go, Mr. Boehner, these fellers are known to bite the hand that feeds them.

Theo Goodwin
May 6, 2011 3:54 pm

Has Josh done a cartoon of climate scientists, UN dudes, and similar filth feeding at the public trough? If not, he should do one. Show us some REAL HOGS, Josh, please.

Tim W.
May 6, 2011 3:56 pm

Well done Mosher. Ball is in your court Willis.
Never attribute to malice…and all that

BrianP
May 6, 2011 4:01 pm

In my experence noforn means it doesn’t work and we don’t want any one to know

May 6, 2011 4:02 pm

you want forcing data? for Ar5?
http://www.pik-potsdam.de/~mmalte/rcps/index.htm#Download
see the xls file 20c3m

PaulH
May 6, 2011 4:03 pm

It looks like S. Mosher cracked the defence perimeter. Good work!

Jim
May 6, 2011 4:12 pm

Write you Congressperson everyone!!

Keith
May 6, 2011 4:12 pm

Willis:
Send a note to Senator James Inhofe’s, Congressman Joe Barton’s, and Congressman Dana Rohrabacher’s office’s requesting support. It may take a little time but federal-supported program offices respond very quickly when they receive an inquiry from Congress and/or the Senate. This is particularly true when funding is on the line like it is now. I would do this whether UCAR responds or not. Those approving program funding need to know how taxpayer supported programs respond to taxpayer’s requests for information.
Keith

May 6, 2011 4:14 pm

the version willis was denied access to is the DEV version.
so, if you want the released code, you can get the release 1.0
if you want input data.. two options.
1. go to rev 1 SVN and run the programs for downloading data. there is a TERABYTE
of data for all the models.
2. if you want atmospheric forcings, see the excel file I linked to. That gives you
all the historical forcings for atmosphere models.

Latitude
May 6, 2011 4:14 pm

If it’s so easy, why did Willis get this return email…………
Subject: Your request for access to the CESM repository was declined.

charlie
May 6, 2011 4:24 pm

If it is released under an open source license such as GPL it HAS to be made available. Those are the legal terms of the GPL

chris b
May 6, 2011 4:29 pm

steven mosher says:
May 6, 2011 at 3:08 pm
…………..
I saw this bit of info on the last line of the page I was directed to by the last link Steve Mosher posted.
“CCSM4 1° Last Glacial Maximum 1499-1900 simulation
Case Name: b40.lgm21ka.1deg.003
Data Release Date: 6/20/11 (Full)”
I’d love to see the “data” for the last Glacial Maximum that will be released on June 20th, 2011. Are model projections considered data, or simply projections that are totally dependent on the inputs of the projector? I suppose they could be using a tree ring thermometer the accuracy of which is so good that the world is willing to spend many trillions of dollars based on their ancient readings. LOL
When I see the words Climate Model I see wasted tax money.

Alex
May 6, 2011 5:34 pm

the code is publicly available as demonstrated by the links in steven mosher posts, for once they have done nothing wrong.

May 6, 2011 5:45 pm

Why would they deny access to the development code? This is public money and it is public policy that will be changed as a result of the code and the data.
Is it possible that there is big money riding on this in other senses? More grants etc.?

Speed
May 6, 2011 5:51 pm

As a young student I was amazed that I could walk into the main library, visit the reference section and read detailed results of the US Census going back centuries. Volumes and volumes and shelves and shelves of data. Data down to the city block. I could see when my house (or any other house in the country) was built and detailed demographic information on the people who had lived there. I didn’t even need a library card.

James of the West
May 6, 2011 6:15 pm

Why couldnt the person rejecting Willis request explain it a little bit like Steve Mosher?
Then Willis might have been satisfied and not been inspired to this unfortunate article. I hope Willis has read Steves comments. If it were me I’d be apologising to the folk at UCAR for accusations but berating them for not explaining their decision which would have avoided all of this. I spose looking on the brightside we can all learn a valuable lesson here, both sides.

Verified by MonsterInsights