Looks like another GISS miss, more than a few people are getting fed up with Jim Hansen and Gavin Schmidt and their climate shenanigans. Some very prominent NASA voices speak out in a scathing letter to current NASA administrator Charles Bolden, Jr.. When Chris Kraft, the man who presided over NASA’s finest hour, and the engineering miracle of saving Apollo 13 speaks, people listen. UPDATE: I’ve added a poll at the end of this story.
See also: The Right Stuff: what the NASA astronauts say about global warming
Former NASA scientists, astronauts admonish agency on climate change position
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Contact: Blanquita Cullum 703-307-9510 bqview at mac.com
Joint letter to NASA Administrator blasts agency’s policy of ignoring empirical evidence
HOUSTON, TX – April 10, 2012.
49 former NASA scientists and astronauts sent a letter to NASA Administrator Charles Bolden last week admonishing the agency for it’s role in advocating a high degree of certainty that man-made CO2 is a major cause of climate change while neglecting empirical evidence that calls the theory into question.
The group, which includes seven Apollo astronauts and two former directors of NASA’s Johnson Space Center in Houston, are dismayed over the failure of NASA, and specifically the Goddard Institute For Space Studies (GISS), to make an objective assessment of all available scientific data on climate change. They charge that NASA is relying too heavily on complex climate models that have proven scientifically inadequate in predicting climate only one or two decades in advance.
H. Leighton Steward, chairman of the non-profit Plants Need CO2, noted that many of the former NASA scientists harbored doubts about the significance of the C02-climate change theory and have concerns over NASA’s advocacy on the issue. While making presentations in late 2011 to many of the signatories of the letter, Steward realized that the NASA scientists should make their concerns known to NASA and the GISS.
“These American heroes – the astronauts that took to space and the scientists and engineers that put them there – are simply stating their concern over NASA’s extreme advocacy for an unproven theory,” said Leighton Steward. “There’s a concern that if it turns out that CO2 is not a major cause of climate change, NASA will have put the reputation of NASA, NASA’s current and former employees, and even the very reputation of science itself at risk of public ridicule and distrust.”
Select excerpts from the letter:
- “The unbridled advocacy of CO2 being the major cause of climate change is unbecoming of NASA’s history of making an objective assessment of all available scientific data prior to making decisions or public statements.”
- “We believe the claims by NASA and GISS, that man-made carbon dioxide is having a catastrophic impact on global climate change are not substantiated.”
- “We request that NASA refrain from including unproven and unsupported remarks in its future releases and websites on this subject.”
The full text of the letter:
March 28, 2012
The Honorable Charles Bolden, Jr.
NASA Administrator
NASA Headquarters
Washington, D.C. 20546-0001
Dear Charlie,
We, the undersigned, respectfully request that NASA and the Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) refrain from including unproven remarks in public releases and websites. We believe the claims by NASA and GISS, that man-made carbon dioxide is having a catastrophic impact on global climate change are not substantiated, especially when considering thousands of years of empirical data. With hundreds of well-known climate scientists and tens of thousands of other scientists publicly declaring their disbelief in the catastrophic forecasts, coming particularly from the GISS leadership, it is clear that the science is NOT settled.
The unbridled advocacy of CO2 being the major cause of climate change is unbecoming of NASA’s history of making an objective assessment of all available scientific data prior to making decisions or public statements.
As former NASA employees, we feel that NASA’s advocacy of an extreme position, prior to a thorough study of the possible overwhelming impact of natural climate drivers is inappropriate. We request that NASA refrain from including unproven and unsupported remarks in its future releases and websites on this subject. At risk is damage to the exemplary reputation of NASA, NASA’s current or former scientists and employees, and even the reputation of science itself.
For additional information regarding the science behind our concern, we recommend that you contact Harrison Schmitt or Walter Cunningham, or others they can recommend to you.
Thank you for considering this request.
Sincerely,
(Attached signatures)
CC: Mr. John Grunsfeld, Associate Administrator for Science
CC: Ass Mr. Chris Scolese, Director, Goddard Space Flight Center
Ref: Letter to NASA Administrator Charles Bolden, dated 3-26-12, regarding a request for NASA to refrain from making unsubstantiated claims that human produced CO2 is having a catastrophic impact on climate change.
/s/ Jack Barneburg, Jack – JSC, Space Shuttle Structures, Engineering Directorate, 34 years
/s/ Larry Bell – JSC, Mgr. Crew Systems Div., Engineering Directorate, 32 years
/s/ Dr. Donald Bogard – JSC, Principal Investigator, Science Directorate, 41 years
/s/ Jerry C. Bostick – JSC, Principal Investigator, Science Directorate, 23 years
/s/ Dr. Phillip K. Chapman – JSC, Scientist – astronaut, 5 years
/s/ Michael F. Collins, JSC, Chief, Flight Design and Dynamics Division, MOD, 41 years
/s/ Dr. Kenneth Cox – JSC, Chief Flight Dynamics Div., Engr. Directorate, 40 years
/s/ Walter Cunningham – JSC, Astronaut, Apollo 7, 8 years
/s/ Dr. Donald M. Curry – JSC, Mgr. Shuttle Leading Edge, Thermal Protection Sys., Engr. Dir., 44 years
/s/ Leroy Day – Hdq. Deputy Director, Space Shuttle Program, 19 years
/s/ Dr. Henry P. Decell, Jr. – JSC, Chief, Theory & Analysis Office, 5 years
/s/Charles F. Deiterich – JSC, Mgr., Flight Operations Integration, MOD, 30 years
/s/ Dr. Harold Doiron – JSC, Chairman, Shuttle Pogo Prevention Panel, 16 years
/s/ Charles Duke – JSC, Astronaut, Apollo 16, 10 years
/s/ Anita Gale
/s/ Grace Germany – JSC, Program Analyst, 35 years
/s/ Ed Gibson – JSC, Astronaut Skylab 4, 14 years
/s/ Richard Gordon – JSC, Astronaut, Gemini Xi, Apollo 12, 9 years
/s/ Gerald C. Griffin – JSC, Apollo Flight Director, and Director of Johnson Space Center, 22 years
/s/ Thomas M. Grubbs – JSC, Chief, Aircraft Maintenance and Engineering Branch, 31 years
/s/ Thomas J. Harmon
/s/ David W. Heath – JSC, Reentry Specialist, MOD, 30 years
/s/ Miguel A. Hernandez, Jr. – JSC, Flight crew training and operations, 3 years
/s/ James R. Roundtree – JSC Branch Chief, 26 years
/s/ Enoch Jones – JSC, Mgr. SE&I, Shuttle Program Office, 26 years
/s/ Dr. Joseph Kerwin – JSC, Astronaut, Skylab 2, Director of Space and Life Sciences, 22 years
/s/ Jack Knight – JSC, Chief, Advanced Operations and Development Division, MOD, 40 years
/s/ Dr. Christopher C. Kraft – JSC, Apollo Flight Director and Director of Johnson Space Center, 24 years
/s/ Paul C. Kramer – JSC, Ass.t for Planning Aeroscience and Flight Mechanics Div., Egr. Dir., 34 years
/s/ Alex (Skip) Larsen
/s/ Dr. Lubert Leger – JSC, Ass’t. Chief Materials Division, Engr. Directorate, 30 years
/s/ Dr. Humbolt C. Mandell – JSC, Mgr. Shuttle Program Control and Advance Programs, 40 years
/s/ Donald K. McCutchen – JSC, Project Engineer – Space Shuttle and ISS Program Offices, 33 years
/s/ Thomas L. (Tom) Moser – Hdq. Dep. Assoc. Admin. & Director, Space Station Program, 28 years
/s/ Dr. George Mueller – Hdq., Assoc. Adm., Office of Space Flight, 6 years
/s/ Tom Ohesorge
/s/ James Peacock – JSC, Apollo and Shuttle Program Office, 21 years
/s/ Richard McFarland – JSC, Mgr. Motion Simulators, 28 years
/s/ Joseph E. Rogers – JSC, Chief, Structures and Dynamics Branch, Engr. Directorate,40 years
/s/ Bernard J. Rosenbaum – JSC, Chief Engineer, Propulsion and Power Division, Engr. Dir., 48 years
/s/ Dr. Harrison (Jack) Schmitt – JSC, Astronaut Apollo 17, 10 years
/s/ Gerard C. Shows – JSC, Asst. Manager, Quality Assurance, 30 years
/s/ Kenneth Suit – JSC, Ass’t Mgr., Systems Integration, Space Shuttle, 37 years
/s/ Robert F. Thompson – JSC, Program Manager, Space Shuttle, 44 years/s/ Frank Van Renesselaer – Hdq., Mgr. Shuttle Solid Rocket Boosters, 15 years
/s/ Dr. James Visentine – JSC Materials Branch, Engineering Directorate, 30 years
/s/ Manfred (Dutch) von Ehrenfried – JSC, Flight Controller; Mercury, Gemini & Apollo, MOD, 10 years
/s/ George Weisskopf – JSC, Avionics Systems Division, Engineering Dir., 40 years
/s/ Al Worden – JSC, Astronaut, Apollo 15, 9 years
/s/ Thomas (Tom) Wysmuller – JSC, Meteorologist, 5 years
===============================================================
hat tip to to Bob Ferguson, SPPI
UPDATE: I’ve added this poll:
rhea3 says:
“I’ve read many, many reports in which the climate models don’t accord with the observed results… because the observed results are worse. Many reports in which climatologists– you know, the ones who’ve made a career of studying climate– say that what they’re seeing is what was predicted for five, ten, or twenty years from now, but it’s happening already. I truly hope you people are right, and climate change isn’t serious. But the evidence is against you.”
Rhea, you haven’t actually been following any of this, because the data has made it clear that the alarmists’ predictions have not been coming true. There is no proof whatsoever that manmade climate change is occurring. I’m not condemning you, however. I understand it must be difficult coming to terms with the fact that your religion has just been made up by people trying to tax the hell out of you.
“If meteorologists said that there was a 90% chance of a class-4 hurricane striking your city in the next three days, would you sit there and say there was no point in doing anything until they were 100% sure it was coming within the hour?” The logical fallacy in such statements are so blatantly obvious it’s a wonder such people can hold down a job. If this is the logic of “climate science,” count me out.
NASA’s decline which Michael J. Bentley outlined was punctuated by the Challenger disaster. Richard Feynman was part of the investigative team brought in from outside of NASA and his comments were relegated to an appendix for political reasons.
Feyman’s closing sentence:
AGW Isn’t true yet. It might be but we don’t care. Because at his point in time it most certainly is not. NASA does have credibility which can dissappear once it becomes a cover for abuse. We’ve been abused and the architects of the climate of suppresion should go. Science has no place for such……Um….Goebells, Goering: quickly, what’s the bloody word i’m trying to think of here???
Dave Wendt says:
April 10, 2012 at 7:06 pm
rhea3 says:
April 10, 2012 at 6:04 pm
“Many reports in which climatologists– you know, the ones who’ve made a career of studying climate– say that what they’re seeing is what was predicted for five, ten, or twenty years from now, but it’s happening already.
I truly hope you people are right, and climate change isn’t serious. But the evidence is against you.
If meteorologists said that there was a 90% chance of a class-4 hurricane striking your city in the next three days, would you sit there and say there was no point in doing anything until they were 100% sure it was coming within the hour?”
______________________________________________________________________________
If some moron with no track record of being right, and no scientific bases to say that, like the idiot who said twice that the world would end last year, said that a cat 4 hurricane was coming, no I would not listen to him. Hansen has no scientific bases for saying the things he does. Nor did I listen to the morons who said that Y2K would be a big deal. Hansen is alarmist, he is no where near being a meteorologist. Meteorologists use science, not voodoo.
We have a great advantage in predicting hurricanes. We have satellites, some of which were launched by some of the same people who signed the letter. We can see in real time where the hurricanes are. All we have with the like of Hansen are computer models. Models that don’t reflect the known reality. It is as if meteorologists had to rely on satellite photos that showed hurricanes being thousands of miles from where they really were. Would you believe them, just because they were “experts.” I hope not.
Gail Combs says:
April 10, 2012 at 6:45 pm
Hansen needs a cell padded or otherwise.
And a heart felt thank you to the signers of this letter.
—————————————————————–
Yes Gail. Well said. Imagine how betrayed they feel. How the Amateurs have destroyed their legacy. What a shame it has to come to this but kudos to them!!
So Lazyteenager, what you are saying is, based on the evidence, that increasing CO2 is the cause of NO increase in hurricanes, NO increase in tornadoes, NO increase in temps over the past decade, NO increase in extreme weather events, and more. Right?
@rhea3
Even if this CO2 thing were to be true, do you honestly believe we can do anything about it?
I strongly doubt chocking to death human society for an unproven theory is very rational.
Are you aware that poverty, desease & hunger are a cause to revolution, war… And I’m quite sure this is not just a theory!
Also have you heard that it is possible that a very big meteorite can fall out of the sky & create such a catastrophe that the CO2 thing is nothing to compare? Still we do not put immense ressource at solving the meteorite problem. Here againt this is not just a theory but a question of when it will happen.
In fact there are multitudes of cataclysmic events that can happen, do we need to run like headless chicken? The Earth has seen many events & will see many others…
Don’t you believe there exist temperature regulation mechanisms within Earth’s atmosphere based on the water cycle. If the Earth system were such an unstable system how can it resist a multitude of perturbations & keep climate “compatible” w/t human life? How can minuscules human contribution of CO2 vs major natural source can impact to cataclysmic proportion a system w/t such robustness? What to do w/t the next glaciation? They are cyclic you know & we’re due for the next one. Ice age are good exemple of a nasty hysteresis effect, it push the regulation system at its limit then bang. Does CO2 push us away or closer to the limit of regulation?
You are right to care for the future, but please consider the whole problem & don’t just take for granted speculation coming from peoples that ask for tax money, but will refuse to show the details of their calculations & data, use deception & lie to validate their dogma. Remember that their version change constantly to fit the theory: Hotter than normal = CO2, its colder than normal = CO2 again…
On a more speculative level, do you think humans were created to “serve” planet Earth or in fact the planet’s goal was to give birth to humanity, like if the universe was striving to make itself conscious thru us? Very weird question indeed.
When I was a graduate student at Columbia University in the ear4ly 1970’s an article was published in Science (July 1971, 138-141) whose title was “Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide and Aerosols:.Effects of Large Increases on Global Climate” which calculated the effect of CO2 and
aerisols on global temperature. The conclusion was that we were probably heading for an ice age. Although he was not an author on the paper, the person who performed many of the calculations was none other than James Hansen. (Ref. 16. J. E. Hansen, personal communication. We are indebted to Dr. Hansen for making these Mie scattering calculations for us),
rhea3 says: April 10, 2012 at 6:04 pm
“I truly hope you people are right, and climate change isn’t serious. But the evidence is against you”
Evidence would be measured data from nature.
Computer model output is not measured data from nature.
Show me the data from nature that falsifies the null hypothesis on climate changes.
OR
Show me any directly measured data from nature that supports the conjecture that carbon dioxide is causing catastrophic global warming.
I know that there is lots of actual data that specifically contradicts the predictions of the conjecture that carbon dioxide is causing catastrophic global warming.
Got any supporting data?
You realize, of course, that whatever you do to him will cause him to be declared a martyr (both by himself and his followers). The last time he was told to follow proper procedures for a federal employee speaking in public he immediately responded by traveling around the world declaring he was being repressed. Sort of like the peasants in the Monty Python sketch.
Gee, what to do?
1- FIre him.
2- Destroy his hat.
3- Prescribe him a high colonic hourly for a month–he’s so full of it, he needs thorough cleansing.
4- Remove his ill-gained profits, as it is immoral to gain from lying.
5- Have him apologize and explain the real science publicly, three times a day—once each on TV, radio and newspaper—UNTIL the EPA reverses its ruling against CO2
6- Finally, let him keep whatever is left and retire.
Maybe the poll at the end of this story can be amended with an additional answer:
Arrest James Hansen for fraud and misappropriation of public funds.
joeldshore says: April 10, 2012 at 6:41 pm
“True skeptics would be asking to find out more about their qualifications”
Written like a true warmist:
“Thar she blows, Man the wiki, Ready the Ad hominem, Fire at Willis”…
Actually we don’t care who says:
“If the measurements from nature conflict with the prediction made by the idea then the idea is wrong”
We just would like more people to say it.
Richard says:
“This will go nowhere. Saw one meteorologist, lots of engineers (not scientists), some directors and astronauts. At least some lists put out in the past had actual scientists in them, even if they weren’t climate scientists.”
Um, Richard, I hate to break this to you, but… an engineer is a scientist. Most astronauts and the directors had advanced engineering degrees, making them scientists as well. They do not need to be climate scientists to know that climatologists have not been honest.
The seriously wonderful thing about this letter is that people in the right places are standing up and saying “Enough is enough.” This is a letter to NASA. It’s not a letter to the world (although I’m sure it will become one) and it’s not trying to stop all of the nonsense out there with an instant fix.
It’s a piece in place, an important piece in place. As more and more people come forward, more and more again will come forward. These wonderful people don’t have to bring the glabal warming scam to an instant halt for this letter to be a success. It is a success in its own right, right now.
I do expect more and more organizations to follow this example, not overnight but it will come. The disatisfaction is already out there behind closed doors. These people are saying “No, we will not be put forward as part of your consensus. We will not put up with this nonsense any longer.”
I might just open a bottle of champagne tonight. No. Make that two. 🙂
Pamela Gray says:
“So Lazyteenager, what you are saying is, based on the evidence, that increasing CO2 is the cause of NO increase in hurricanes, NO increase in tornadoes, NO increase in temps over the past decade, NO increase in extreme weather events, and more. Right?”
Lazyteenager would be correct. The most severe storms of the century were in the ’30s and ’40s, when the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere was a lot less than it is today. Therefore, there is no known correlation between CO2 and severe storms. In addition, the total power output of the human race is 16TW a year. The minimum strength of a hurricane is about 50TW. It would require four straight years of all the energy production created by mankind, concentrated in a single locale and with none being radiated into space or contributed to any other storm, to produce a single hurricane. Based on that alone it shouldn’t be hard to figure out that unless CO2 is a miraculous perpetual motion machine, it has had zero effect on our climate.
Hansen has never formally debated any skeptic in front of an audience. He needs to cease his stupid public relations appearances at protests and debate someone of substance like Lindzen or Monckton.
Unfortunately, there’s one thing that prevents him from doing that: He’s an intellectual coward.
NASA has two stowaways on board, and it needs to jettison them.
This is my favorite Alarmist prediction:
“The frightening models we didn’t even dare to talk about before are now proving to be true,” Fortier told CanWest News Service, referring to computer models that take into account the thinning of the sea ice and the warming from the albedo effect – the Earth is absorbing more energy as the sea ice melts.
According to these models, there will be no sea ice left in the summer in the Arctic Ocean somewhere between 2010 and 2015.
“And it’s probably going to happen even faster than that,” said Fortier, who leads an international team of researchers in the Arctic looking for clues to climate change.
The Arctic, considered to be the barometer of global climate change, is warming faster than expected and this could cause global average temperatures to rise still more.
Fortier stressed that 90,000 square metres of sea ice melted in 2007, a spectacular figure that was expected to be seen in only 15 to 20 years.
“The most unbelievable thing is the total absence of ice in straits where you never thought you would ever be able to navigate. The changes are not progressive anymore, they are dramatic,” he said.
The great melting, uncovering vast stretches of the Arctic Ocean, will open up the Northwest Passage as a shortcut to Asia, something explorers have been dreaming about since Christopher Columbus reached America.
“In the near future, the Arctic (Ocean) will play … the same role the Mediterranean Sea played in the antiquity. So it’s very important that Canada gains control on this huge region,” he added.
http://www.canada.com/topics/news/national/story.html?id=c76d05dd-2864-43b2-a2e3-82e0a8ca05d5&k=53683
Zeke says:
April 10, 2012 at 7:23 pm
“May I suggest landing a live astronaut on Venus instead? The mission should have the finest scientific payload for observation of Venus’ abundant lightning and 900F terrain, and of course, the astronaut should come home safely – not fried, poisoned, squashed or corroded. It might be a much easier task for them.”
There goes the old Venus canard again, Zeke, one would have expected better from you. Venus has no hydrological cycle, a much thicker atmosphere and more insolation… Please explain why Mars is so cold. It has 95% CO2 in the atmosphere.
anotherfred says:
April 10, 2012 at 8:07 pm
This is my favorite Alarmist prediction:
Fortier stressed that 90,000 square metres of sea ice melted in 2007, a spectacular figure that was expected to be seen in only 15 to 20 years.
Yes! A spectacular figure! But the alarmist author should try converting 90,000 square meters into square kilometers to see how very insignificant the result really is.
Well said ladies and gentlemen
Reblogged this on In Defense Of Liberty and commented:
NASA Moon Astronauts and Engineers come out against NASA’s stance on Climate Change…
49 former NASA scientists and astronauts sent a letter to NASA Administrator Charles Bolden last week admonishing the agency for it’s role in advocating a high degree of certainty that man-made CO2 is a major cause of climate change while neglecting empirical evidence that calls the theory into question.
And this “empirical evidence that calls the theory into question” is getting stronger with each passing month. Today the RSS numbers for March came out. The anomaly was 0.075. When combined with the numbers from January and February, -0.058 and -0.120, the average is -0.034. Naturally it will not stay this low, but if it did, then 2012 would rank 26th warmest. (2011 was 12th warmest on RSS at 0.147.)
See the graph below and note the following:
1. This last La Nina is NOT the warmest La Nina in the last 16 years.
2. The flat line (slope = -0.000125181 per year) extends for a period of 15 years and 5 months since November 1996.
3. The flat line starts and ends with a La Nina so there was no cherry picking here.
4. CO2 went up steadily while the temperatures stayed flat.
http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/rss/from:1995/plot/rss/from:1996.83/trend/plot/esrl-co2/from:1996.83/normalise