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:
DirkH:
There is more lightning on Venus than on earth. “The confirming measurements of the electrical discharges were made with data obtained by the Venus Express magnetometer instrument provided by the Space Research Institute in Graz, Austria. The measurements were taken once a day for two minutes, during a period when the spacecraft was closest to Venus.”
It is the equivalent of finding lightning in smog. http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/news/news.cfm?release=2007-137
And with the tenuous atmosphere on Mars, here is some interesting weather:
12-Mile-High Martian Dust Devil Caught In Act
“A Martian dust devil roughly 12 miles high (20 kilometers) was captured whirling its way along the Amazonis Planitia region of Northern Mars on March 14. It was imaged by the High Resolution Imaging Science Experiment (HiRISE) camera on NASA’s Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter. Despite its height, the plume is little more than three-quarters of a football field wide (70 yards, or 70 meters).” A12 mile high twister is not bad for 1% of earth’s atmosphere to produce. Unfortunately NASA hasn’t been interested in what power input could be responsible for this powerful weather on the closest rocky bodies – and what the implications for our own weather are. Instead it has been carefully ignored and we’re stuck with ignorance and Hansen’s AGW.
RE: the poll
Methinks that keeping Hansen on would be the best plan, but cut his funding and move GISS to NOAA (but not Hansen as I wouldn’t wish him on anyone). Firing him would make him a martyr – rarely a good thing unless the martyr gets eaten by lions and canonized. I would rather see him fade into obscurity.
Now this is not the end. It is not even the beginning of the end. But it is, perhaps, the end of the beginning.
– Sir Winston Churchill, November 1942
For myself I am an optimist – it does not seem to be much use being anything else.
– Sir Winston Churchill, November 9, 1954
NASA offered us all a story of settled science but now their own seasoned veterans have declined!
When I add up the signatories’ tree rings I find this letter has 1124 years of NASA experience behind it.
Try hiding that decline!
Zeke says:
April 10, 2012 at 9:18 pm
“Unfortunately NASA hasn’t been interested in what power input could be responsible for this powerful weather on the closest rocky bodies – and what the implications for our own weather are. Instead it has been carefully ignored and we’re stuck with ignorance and Hansen’s AGW.”
Ok… I misunderstood you. I thought you wanted to imply that Venus’ hot atmosphere were proof of CO2 induced warming…
To mangle an aphorism: “The scientist proposes, the engineer disposes.”
Or as I view it, scientists think they know what makes the world tick, engineers build the watch.
See related discussion at the NASA Alumni League symposium that was held at JSC a few months ago. It looks like they still don’t have all of the presentations posted, but some of them are on their web site now. See links for minutes of the September 12, 2011 and October 28, 2011 meetings at:
http://www.nal-jsc.org/recent_nal-jsc_activities.html
Symposium description at:
http://www.nal-jsc.org/NALClimateChangeSympFlyer092011.doc
I sorta think this could be significant.
Maybe this group can convince NASA to disband their group of NASA-fools
that are spending our taxes to spew this global warming garbage to grade school kids in all 57 states.
“I’ve read many, many reports in which the climate models don’t accord with the observed results… because the observed results are worse.”
I don’t know what to make of this. The climate models are wrong, so we are all DOOMED?
A simple mathematical model
2+2=?
2+2=3 A skeptic would say the model is WRONG. A warmist would say that the extra number is hiding in the deep ocean,or it is due to phase change, etc,.
2+2=5 A skeptic would say the model is WRONG. A warmist would say that we are all DOOMED and it is worse than we thought , our children will hate us and our grandchildren will die. Going past 4 will be the end of the world.
I might be totally off base here, but then again I am not a climate scientist.
Translation into All-American English:
Dear Charlie
You lot still at NASA are behaving like a bunch of hug-a-polar-bear Greenpeace wussies imbued with religious fanaticism and totally rejecting skeptical scientific procedures.
If you’d behaved like this on the Apollo missions, Russia would have got to the moon first and all our astronauts would be dead.
Yours Respectfully
XXXXX
Well quite fantastic.
What these scientists, engineers and support staff achieved was superb. They and their colleagues in other space agencies have expanded our knowledge of space and the results of their endeavours have positive practical applications in our lives. Which I am just about to prove.
Please receive this message sent from my mobile phone which will travel to you via satellite at the speed of light.
Who would anyone believe out of Professor Hansen and our Gav,I’d go with the professionals.
It’s on its way and by the time I turn my phone of you got it:-)
“An embarrassing image for NASA”?
You should replace NASA with USA, look at the condition of the Cop…can’t seem to find anything right in that photo.
Nah. The letter doesn’t mean a thing. Those guys all spent way too much time counting backwards to zero.
/sarc
Earlier I asked about the “thousands of years of empirical data” that showed C02 does not cause climate change. I haven’t received a reply. All I got was a paleo record which showed that it does!
I also asked for the names of the “hundreds of well-known climate scientists” who don’t believe in AGW. I haven’t received this either. Maybe they don’t exist!!
Reblogged this on JustMEinT's General Blog and commented:
Seems some former NASA engineers, scientists and astronauts think that climate models done with computers don’t stand up against the empiricle evidence! WOW!!!! I am thrilled to read this.
I wonder when we can expect Hansen to start claiming he is being repressed again.
I have been looking for a text of the letter rather than have to cut and paste.
Can anyone point me to a link please/
Was it yesterday that hansen said that the skeptics are winning? Was he already privy to this letter?
last I checked, no one was debating what CO was doing to the environment, as it is a very toxic gas. Perhaps you misplaced your comment as this may belong on a hysteria site like Schmidt’s.
Actually that is false. Research Maxime Faget. Find out what NASA does to REAL scientists who speak out.
Phil C, Monty,
You’re on the Internet. When someone makes a claim you haven’t heard before, you should at least try to look for the answer before exposing your ignorance. Here’s a few links to help you out:
http://climatedepot.com/a/9035/SPECIAL-REPORT-More-Than-1000-International-Scientists-Dissent-Over-ManMade-Global-Warming-Claims–Challenge-UN-IPCC–Gore
http://www.petitionproject.org/
Of course, much depends on your definition of ‘climate scientist’. Do you want to include railroad
engineer Pachuri? What about that PhD in Environmental Science, Phil Jones?
Personally I accept that Climate Science is a multidisciplinary field, involving geologists, statisticians, meteorologists, computer scientists, physicists and others. And I accept that when people in these fields comment on the errors of the climate modellers, then the commentators are acting as climate scientists. I further accept that they are generally more expert in these fields than the soi-disant ‘climate scientists’.
Hi Anthony, It would be fantastic if this post could be sent to the organisers of the Edinburgh Science Festival in Edinburgh, Scotland, where this charlatan is going to be presented with the ‘Edinburgh Medal’ for his ‘outstanding’ work on the environment!
Monty … go back up … http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/04/10/hansen-and-schmidt-of-nasa-giss-under-fire-engineers-scientists-astronauts-ask-nasa-administration-to-look-at-emprical-evidence-rather-than-climate-models/#comment-952284
And check out http://www.climatedepot.com/a/9035/SPECIAL-REPORT-More-Than-1000-International-Scientists-Dissent-Over-ManMade-Global-Warming-Claims–Challenge-UN-IPCC–Gore … be sure to click the link to the full PDF report at the end.
They’re tellin’ me the world is warmin’ up
And my minivan’s part of the cause
And the science is settled so it’s time for big change
To our economy and our laws
Well if the science is settled then tell me why their
Computer models can’t agree
And why the world’s cooled down for the past several years
While they’re hidin’ their data from me
Despite their erudition
And academic pedigree
The Best and the Brightest look instead
Like a box of dim bulbs to me
They’d put us in the soup lines over
Parts-per-billion probabilities
The Best and the Brightest look instead
Like a box of dim bulbs to me …
… Like a box of dim bulbs to me
(Link to MP3 … http://dl.dropbox.com/u/66454848/Dim%20Bulbs.mp3 )
Leo Morgan says:
April 11, 2012 at 4:51 am
Leo – the way is works in science today is that you “become” a “climate scientist” as soon as the first grant money checks clear. It doesn’t matter what you were doing before – if NSF, DOE, NASA, NOAA et al. say you are a “climate scientist,” and all of your IPCC buddies say you are a “climate scientist,” heck you ARE one. You can probably even get a nice certificate somewhere online saying you are an “official climate scientist”!!