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:
Its hit Mainstream
http://washingtonexaminer.com/politics/washington-secrets/2012/04/astronauts-condemn-nasa%E2%80%99s-global-warming-endorsement/469366
@Monty
Confused? I’m not surprised.
The scam is dissolving before your eyes.
Confusing when a whole belief system (dare I say religion?) falls apart.
Even dear Jimmy (see his Edinburgh speech) realizes the jig is up – the skeptics are winning (have won?)
It was a difficult choice, especially as there was no button for:
“Fire him and then prosecute him”.
I chose firing.
-Bad News
Neo says:
April 10, 2012 at 10:45 am
He blamed sceptics who are opposed to major social and economic changes to reduce greenhouse gas emissions for employing “tremendous resources” to undermine the scientific evidence.
I wonder just how he defines “tremendous resources”
This is alarmist language.
“tremendous resources” means “the internet”
“to undermine the scientific evidence” – means to point flawed data adjustments, or simply saying model data is no real data
and so on…
We should build-up a dictionary to be able to communicate with alarmists. Maybe this is the whole issue? Somebody said it is communication…/sarc
Now seriously, this is great stuff and it shows that slowly people start to put things right.
John Bills said:
Schmidt responds:
“…This is pure politics. As former employees of NASA they should know full well that NASA doesn’t take official positions on scientific issues…”
I’ll agree with Gavin. All this discussion of CAGW is pur politics.
But his statement that NASA doesn’t take official positions on scientific issues is bull.
By allowing James Hansen, NASA scientist, head of GISS, to make the statements he does, they ARE making an “official” statement – if we didn’t agree with him, we’d tell him to cool it.
What other Government employee can protest in front of the White House and not get fired? James Hansen, NASA scientist, head of GISS can.
Hansen, we’ve got a problem.
It’s true that a few of the astronauts have been speaking out, but when administrative types get into the act, it gets more serious.
Hansen, we’ve got a problem.
“Sad really that billions have been spent and 30 years wasted on this reckless charade into a dead alley.” very true, and now many scientists seeing their budget going to climate science are finally starting to clue in and tell the truth, too bad the money is spend, and they will still be out of a job.
How the press will cover this…
They won’t.
The key to good propaganda is not what you say, but what you do not say.
An of course NASA will look at the many billions of dollars they get to say that CAGW is true, along with the pressure of bureaucrats who see this as a golden opportunity to get billions, even trillions more, and be able to control everything everyone does everywhere, plus the prestige they get from telling themselves that they are “saving the planet”, plus the loss of face they would get if they admit that they have been wrong all along, against this “request”.
Seems like an easy choice to me.
Let him retire, no.He has enough clear cut ethical violations, confilcts of intrest and arrests, he should have been fired with cause a long time ago.
As a retired NASA Project Manager/Project Scientist, I agree with the letter.
FWIW, my field was multi-disciplinary Engineering Science. My career involved extensive research projects on Earth, on the Shuttle, and on Space Station. This has been a good fit for understanding the issues related to testing the AGW hypothesis/hypothesized effects — and understanding how NASA culture might impact its findings.
Hansen
Mann
Keep hitting at the weak points
oh.. dont forget
Gleik
Trenberth
Gore
Lonnie
Wait…
Schmitd
Jones
Viner
damn. so many weak points, so little time
John Bills says:
April 10, 2012 at 12:37 pm
(Gavin) Schmidt responds: […Gavin’s tiresome, grandstanding comments follow, which need not be repeated…]
OK – an analogy. Let’s suppose there was an employee of a big agricultural company that did corn seed and farming research. They did their job reasonably competently. But they also used their position in seed research to coauthor journal articles on how corn farming is actually really bad for the environment, that agra-business leaders who advocated corn farming were corrupt and should be tried for “crimes against humanity,” and that people should really stop eating corn products altogether. They even collaborated with like-minded researchers from other countries under the UN funded group Intergovernmental Panel on Corn Cultivation (IPCC), releasing several scathing reports for policy makers detailing the scientific “proof” of the evils of corn farming. Eventually, they went as far as to say that future generations would be irrevocably harmed if corn farming wasn’t banned NOW, and participated in marches, protests, and political events (sometimes even being arrested for their actions). All of these activities, by the way, were done “as a private citizen not representing their employer” – and of course, we all enjoy our free speech rights in this country (except if you’re trying to submit a scientific article to the corn journals, which are overrun by anti-corn zealots who will squash any dissent from the party line).
Now, a large group of corn farmers, who know that corn farming is safe because they’ve been doing it for ages, write a letter to the company asking for the rogue employee to be fired (or at least retired). How should the company respond?
I’m amazed that the poll shows that Hansen has 18 supporters here.
Comical Jimmy’s ‘We are winning’ sounds more like Comical Ali’s ‘We are winning’.
Theme Song of the 6th Weather Radar Conference, MIT, March, 1957
More data, more data
Right now and not later
Our storms are distressing
Our problems are pressing
We can brook no delay
For theorists to play.
Let us repair
To the principle sublime
Measure everything, everywhere
All the time
For data are solid,
Though dull and though stolid,
Consider their aptness
Their matter-of-factness
Theory is confusion
A snare and delusion,
A dastardly dare,
A culpable crime.
Measure everything, everywhere,
All the time.
No need to be weary
Of the mysteries of theory.
We only must look
At the data we took.
Immediately inspired,
Grasp the answers required.
What are so rare,
As reason and rhyme?
Measure everything, everywhere,
All the time.
More data, more data,
From pole to equator;
We’ll gain our salvation
Through mass mensuration.
Thence flows our might,
Our sweetness, our light.
Our spirits full fair, our souls sublime:
Measure everything, everywhere,
All the time.
L’Envoi
It shall come to pass, even in our days,
That ignorance shall vanish and doubt disappear.
Then shall men survey with tranquil gaze
The ordered elements shorn of all fear.
Thus to omniscience shall we climb,
Measuring everything, everywhere, all the time.
http://www.meteor.iastate.edu/~jdduda/portfolio/HistoryPPT.pdf
I voted for sending him out the door. However, seeing that this is NASA we are talking about, there should be a follow up question on what altitude to put him out the door at. I vote for 422400 feet.
A url to the press release can be found here: http://www.plantsneedco2.org/default.aspx?act=Newsletter.aspx&newsletterid=53
I thank the authors of the letter for their weighty votes for realignment of GISS with objective science. Hansen is an escalating liability for the failing pseudo-scientific ideology of CAGWists.
John
See a major effort by Google to snuffle this one.
REPLY: Slashdot has already deleted the story I submitted to them, never had that happen before. – Anthony
I am disappointed that Gene Kranz’s name is not among the forty nine signers. He has just as much weight as Kraft, IMO.
First up – WOW! Sat down this morning with my cup of coffee and time at WUWT. A few shouts for joy later, an almost spilled coffee (it’s alright, I caught it) and one moggy that’s looking at me strangely, I have settled down and can reread and reread. And reread.
This is WONDERFUL!
Next… Sorry, Anthony, I am not happy with your poll. All the options are too nice. Where’s the option for an arrest? Where’s the option for making this guy go back and do his homework properly and bring out a nice big fat apology. There’s not even an option for kicking him out without the gold watch. Give us some meat, would you? Please?
🙂
Still waiting for the ‘thousands of years of empirical data’ that shows C02 doesn’t have the effect we know it does, and the list of ‘hundreds of well-known climate scientists’ who don’t believe in AGW.
Looks like I might have a long wait!
Isn’t it time that NASA stopped moonlighting in the murkey politics of climate “science” and went back to their day job of exploring space?
Reblogged this on Climate Ponderings.