OSTP rules Holdren’s video released by the White House was “personal opinion” and therefore not subject to Data Quality Act.
Back in January, in the midst of one incredibly cold winter, John Holdren, Director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy, posted a short video on the agency’s website entitled The Polar Vortex Explained in 2 Minutes. In that video, Holdren claimed that a “growing body of evidence suggests that the kind of extreme cold being experienced by much of the United States as we speak is a pattern that we can expect to see with increasing frequency as global warming continues.” In short, global warming was responsible for colder winters.
This, of course, would be yet another step towards galactic nonverifiability—If global warming is responsible for everything, it can be never be tested empirically.
But as a number of climate scientists soon pointed out, Holdren’s claim of a growing body of evidence on this issue was simply false. In fact, from September 2013 on, three peer-reviewed studies appeared debunking the notion that polar warming had led to an increase in what are known as winter blocking episodes—situations where extremely low temperatures become locked in for exceptionally long periods of time. That was why, in April, we filed a formal request for correction with OSTP under what’s known as the federal Data Quality Act.
After we filed our petition , by the way, yet a fourth study appeared disputing the global warming/polar vortex connection.
Yesterday, shortly before OSTP’s 90-day deadline for responding to correction requests, we received the agency’s denial (see below). OSTP claims that Holdren was simply expressing his “personal opinion” rather than any “comprehensive review of the scientific literature”.
On its face, this response is shovel-ready nonsense. Holdren, and others at OSTP who parroted his claim, at no point suggested that they were speaking personally rather than as agency employees. To the contrary, they employed both the agency’s resources and stature to disseminate the polar vortex claim.
More importantly, the specific contention—of a “growing body of evidence”—can be tested by any kindergartner. Four recent studies on this issue all contradict the global warming/polar vortex connection, more than countering the older studies that support Holdren—that at least balances, and more likely outweighs, whatever Holdren was relying on. And the notion that the body of evidence supporting him is growing is nonsense.
If Holdren were selling pizza, the FTC would’ve been all over him long ago.
See the response: 229015759-OSTP-IQA-Response (PDF)
Now watch his video:
On the plus side, Holdren’s “personal opinion video” issued by the White House only has 230,662 views as of this writing. From an outreach perspective, it’s a big flop for the White House.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
philjourdan
June 11, 2014 at 4:28 am
‘And of course Obama is totally unaware of the situation.’
That’s because he hasn’t read it in the newspapers yet.
Perhaps John was making an extended twitter, twit, tweet or whatever they call it? The following definition sounds like the forerunner of the modern mode of soundbiting each other.
per·son·al-o·pin·ion tel·egram [pur-suh-nl-uh-pin-yuhn]
noun
1.
a type of domestic telegram sent at the lowest rate with a minimum charge for 20 words or less to elected federal or state officials on a subject of national or regional interest.
2.
the service offering such a telegram.
Presumably, zero Tax Dollars were spent in the dissemination of a ‘personal opinion’?
John Holdren may have every right to use government time and money for presenting his personal opinion. After all he is one of the people who own the government.
I know, I know… way back in the old days we were told in school that “We The People” own the government. “We” control it and tell it what to do. The government serves us! That, at least is what I was taught in school, but I am having a hard time finding evidence for that still being true.
“The only hope for the world is to make sure there is not another United States. We can’t let other countries have the same number of cars, the amount of industrialization, we have in the US.” – Michael Oppenheimer, Environmental Defense Fund
I wonder if that is what Obama meant when he said we’d have to “eat our peas.” Interestingly, I thought that man, was supposed to work for us. If an employee is not doing what the employer had in mind, has deliberately deceived that employer, well then it’s time to fire that employee. And the US Constitution provides for that remedy.
1. Enunciate the claim, using assertion from authority.
2. Disperse the claim quickly, via the MSM
3. Defer/refuse FOI requests for data from pesky scientists.
Case closed. Sheeple have swallowed the bait.
Perhaps Holdren will bake his pizzas with global warming if he could conveniently remove the polar vortex from it.
Basically if you can classify a lie as a personal opinion, then its OK…..I did not have … with that woman….
Why don’t you ask to post an “opposing” personal opinion video on the government web site?
More personal opinion…..
“It seems, however, that a competing effect has dominated the situation since 1940. This is the reduced transparency of the atmosphere to incoming light as a result of urban air pollution (smoke, aerosols), agricultural air pollution (dust), and volcanic ash. This screening phenomenon is said to be responsible for the present world cooling trend—a total of about .2°C in the world mean surface temperature over the past quarter century. This number seems small until it is realized that a decrease of only 4°C would probably be sufficient to start another ice age. Moreover, other effects besides simple screening by air pollution threaten to move us in the same direction. In particular, a mere one percent increase in low cloud cover would decrease the surface temperature by .8°C. We may be in the process of providing just such a cloud increase, and more, by adding man-made condensation nuclei to the atmosphere in the form of jet exhausts and other suitable pollutants. A final push in the cooling direction comes from man-made changes in the direct reflectivity of the earth’s surface (albedo) through urbanization, deforestation, and the enlargement of deserts.
The effects of a new ice age on agriculture and the supportability of large human populations scarcely need elaboration here. Even more dramatic results are possible, however; for instance, a sudden outward slumping in the Antarctic ice cap, induced by added weight, could generate a tidal wave of proportions unprecedented in recorded history.”
From: Global ecology : readings toward a rational strategy for man / edited by John P. Holdren, Paul R. Ehrlich
Perhaps the next time Holdren holds forth in a TV interview, say, the interviewer will have the nous to ask him: ‘Is this an OSTP opinion, or John Holdren’s personal opinion?’
He should be done for misuse of tax-payer-funded facilities.
Propaganda is a beast. There is little one can do about it except let it run around amuck until it gets tired and dies a natural death.
If something has an effect on polar vortex, the sun, because the vortex is situated completely in the stratosphere and depends on the amount and distribution of ozone (temperature gradient in the stratosphere).
The really fascinating aspect of this duplicitous video is that Digital Promise (the K-12 digital learning push coming from the feds) reports to Holdren’s OSTP and Digital Promise and its associated League of Innovative Schools are all about changing what students believe and value and how (or whether) they think. It ties in perfectly as does this video not only with Holdren’s career work but also with Paul Ehrlich’s, as this explained. http://www.invisibleserfscollar.com/digital-promise-and-21st-century-skills-as-the-long-sought-rapid-change-of-minds-for-the-future/
It’s not a personal video if it is designed to be picked up by the K-12 educators and administrators already working with OSTP. Take a look at the link in that post on how practitioners and policy makers should be working together to innovate and tell us again how this is a personal video. To me that video is about transforming and creating culture–a culture that believes in catastrophic AGW.
Scott says:
June 11, 2014 at 6:44 am
Basically if you can classify a lie as a personal opinion, then its OK…..I did not have … with that woman….
——————————–
Didn’t he also say something like, “it depends on what the definition of “is” is.”?
“Remember….If you believe it…then it’s not a lie”……George Castanza
Other than the subject of the film, the most distressing thing about this video is the awful green screening… I would hope my tax dollars could make something slightly more polished for the cost I’m sure we paid.
The key here is the two-minute length. It should be viewed on the same level as grocery store music and messaging to manipulate the shoppers.
“Remember….If you believe it…then it’s not a lie”……George Castanza
If Holdren “believes” there is “growing evidence” he is totally incompetent to hold the position he does and should resign. If he’s does not believe it he is lying and should resign.
Take your pick.
Holdren is a politician. He opened his mouth and spoke words. Therefore I know none of those words were facts. How do I know that anything coming from a politician’s mouth is a nonfact? I looked for a fact in a politician and found none. Instead I found spin, propaganda, opinion, and money, representing the entire components of a politician, which can easily be calculated:
[(s + p)o]m = politician.
where s = spin, p = propaganda, o = opinion, and m = money
I think all this is missing the point. Follow the money! If he was posting a personal opinion as a private citizen, let’s see who and how this was payed for. This was obviously an official response, paid for by taxpayers, they have painted themselves into a corner. The suit should seek the financials and go for the throat!
Time for a FOIA, which I bet will confirm that agency money was used for the video.
Could “A growing body of evidence” ~= “a boner of evidence”?
So if he was really just basically saying he has a boner for the idea, I think that would be more an expression of personal opinion that anything else. Good call OSTP.
And yeah, glad I could class this discussion up a little.
You just can’t make this shit up! Lord, what a sad comment on how low the US political scene and our overall culture/intelligence level has sunk when one realizes that somewhere around 50+or-% of our voting citizens buy this stuff.
On the question of whether he believes what he is saying look 0:40 onwards:
“…a pattern we can expect to see with increasing frequenctly as global warming continuesANDthe reason is ……”
note how quickly he cuts in on the false statement. That is a sign that he uncomfortable with what he has just said.
Just after that he breaks eye contact with the viewer by closing his eyes : 0:46 , another reflex of a lier.
Immediately after opening he eyes his eyebrows shoot up into a momentary, innocent, wide-eyed “honest guv’ , I’m not lying ” expression.
This man would not do well on a polygraph test.