Uh, oh. U.S. Lawmakers Expand Probe Of Hiatus-Denying NOAA Study

Back in the summer of 2015, I sent Dr. Tom Peterson of NOAA/NCEI a private email saying that I’d lost my trust in him as an unbiased scientist and that this Karl et al. “pause buster” paper (of which Peterson did most of the work since Karl is just an administrator) would be his “Waterloo”.

It seems that with the publication of a paper (In Nature no less) saying Karl et al. is wrong by some big names in climate science last week (including Mann of all people) and now this, my prediction is coming closer to reality.

Did White House Collude With NOAA Over Temperature Adjustments?


Republicans in the US House of Representatives are expanding their request for documents related to a major climate study by the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). In a 22 February letter to NOAA, Congressman Lamar Smith, the Texas Republican who leads the House science committee, expressed disappoint with the “slow pace and limited scope” of NOAA’s response to his initial request. “The speed with which NOAA has conducted these searches and produced documents creates the perception that the Agency is deliberately attempting to impede and hinder the Committee’s oversight,” he wrote. Smith is now asking that NOAA provide his committee documents from other agency officials and offices, including chief scientist Richard Spinrad. Smith has asked the agency to deliver all documents by 29 February. — Jeff Tolleson, Nature, 26 February 2016

The study of the warming hiatus is cutting-edge climate science not the “settled science” of the greenhouse effect and mankind’s input of greenhouse gasses into the atmosphere. The hiatus is good for science. It tells us about natural climate variability of which our knowledge is still very limited. It holds valuable scientific information and in climate science, with it huge political and economic implications, we need all the information we can get. There are over 40 explanations for the warming hiatus proposed by scientists from small volcanoes, ocean movements, effects in the stratosphere, data gathering problems and many more. They can’t all be right, [but] they are all a valuable contribution to a scientific mystery. It shows us that the real science is not settled. And another thing. About those sceptics who are seeking to deny and undermine climate science. It was the sceptics, not the scientists, who discovered the hiatus, this so-called biggest problem in climate science. –David Whitehouse, The Spectator, 25 February 2016

Were any Obama administration officials communicating with NOAA prior to issuing press releases? The House Committee’s investigation should provide insight into the following questions that deserve answers. To what extent did internal discussions occur about the more questionable choices made in adjusting the ocean temperature data? Was any concern raised about the discrepancies of the new ocean temperature data set and NOAA’s other ocean temperature data set (OISST) that shows no warming since 2003? Were any Obama administration officials communicating with NOAA about these statements prior to issuing press releases? Was the release of the land and ocean temperature data sets, which were documented in papers previously published, delayed to follow Karl’s June press release? –Judith Curry, Fox News, 5 November 2015

h/t to The GWPF.

208 thoughts on “Uh, oh. U.S. Lawmakers Expand Probe Of Hiatus-Denying NOAA Study

  1. Oh dear, more hard drive crashes, unrecoverable emails, and general FOIA stonewall tactics are on the way.

    • You beat me to it. The current administration has gotten all this down to a science. A real science, unlike climate science.

      • ….Joel, I think Lucifer would be embarrassed by your comparison to Obama and his administration! Please have pity !

      • Yes, and the advice/instructions not to appear before Congress is also now part of the standard instruction set.

      • Marcus, remember Saul Alinsky’s dedication for “Rules for Radicals”:
        “Lest we forget at least an over-the-shoulder acknowledgment to the very first radical: from all our legends, mythology, and history… the first radical known to man who rebelled against the establishment and did it so effectively that he at least won his own kingdom — Lucifer.”
        Alinsky was BHO’s mentor and employer.

        “Obama learned his lesson well. I am proud to see that my father’s model for organizing is being applied successfully beyond local community organizing to affect the Democratic campaign in 2008. It is a fine tribute to Saul Alinsky as we approach his 100th birthday.” –Letter from L. DAVID ALINSKY, son of Neo-Marxist Saul Alinsky

        (Also recall that Hillary wrote her Masters thesis on Alinsky, so you can expect more of the same if THAT devil is elected.)

      • … George Daddis, as I said, Lucifer would be embarrassed by being compared to Obama !! Obama is the apex of evil !

      • Marcus

        February 29, 2016 at 12:09 pm

        … George Daddis, as I said, Lucifer would be embarrassed by being compared to Obama !! Obama is the apex of evil !

        Pres B.O. is one of the “Children of a lesser POD” (Politically Oriented Demon)

    • RG, not this time. NOAA has been from the under a preservation of documents notice from the beginning of the oversight review, andmunder subpeona since November.
      Let rephrase. It could happen given this administration, but then the perps go jail. Evidence destruction and contempt of congress are both criminal offenses.

    • Don’t forget one of their most popular strategies; “We deleted the raw data and now only possess our ‘value added’ data.”

      • I suspect there are several agencies and individuals who will be able to make the original data available.

    • With this administration, you don’t need to “lose” federal emails or have hard drive crashes. Hillary used her own server to bypass the government watchdogs on emails, and as far as I can tell, the head of the EPA did, the head of the IRS did, and it appears even Holder did. It would not be surprising to find out the White House staff is using outside email as well as NOAA, so those emails would not be in backups. But if they used official federal emails, then there are dozens of copies in backups. I am not at all sure how many years of backups are maintained, but I am sure that any actual “official” email is never lost. Of course, just because it isn’t lost doesn’t mean it can be found, does it?

      • It is also common, at the moment, for Federal and State administrations to have someone acting/communicating on their behalf, but not actually in their employ.

      • Years of backups can be deleted. The IRS systematically deleted their backups AFTER they were asked by Congress to retain them. Because no one has been punished for those illegal actions, expect them to be repeated by other government departments that come under investigation.

    • ” Adjusting ” data, purchased with the taxpayer’s money, is tantamount to lying to the Federal Government; a crime for which a number of prominent public figures have spent time in Federal prisons; including for example Martha Stewart.


  2. Rep. Smith has stated publicly that more than one whistleblower has come forth from within NOAA. So he knows fairly precisely what to look for in corroborating evidence. NOAA contempt of congress (failing to respond to a properly issued subpoena) suggests NOAA knows it also.
    The Fyfe paper saying Karl is wrong just pours gasoline on the fire. Mann as surprising Fyfe co-author suggests (to paraphrase Obi Wan Kenobi in Star Wars IV) there is a great disturbance in the warmunist farce.

    • “Rep. Smith has stated publicly that more than one whistleblower has come forth from within NOAA”

      As they say in law, never ask a question you don’t have an answer to.

      This could get quite bloody, metaphorically. The Other Side only thinks they are as smart as they appear to be.

      • As they say in law, never ask a question you don’t have an answer to.

        I believe it is “never ask a question you do not know the answer to”.

      • GTL:

        All good politicians know, “Never ask a question unless you know the answer you will get from the questioned”.


      • “”””””….. As they say in law, never ask a question you don’t have an answer to. …..”””””

        mebbe: never ask a question to which you do not already know the answer. So as to not irritate Sir Winston Churchill.


      • “mebbe: never ask a question to which you do not already know the answer. So as to not irritate Sir Winston Churchill.”

        You mean the Sir Winston Churchill who said of the preposition “rule”: “That is something up with which I will not put”?

        THAT Sir Winston Churchill?

      • .. CaligulaJones/………Nice try idiot !!…George Bernard Shaw

        “That is something up with which I will not put!” –George Bernard Shaw
        I always heard this attributed to Winston Churchill. The story goes that some stuffy lady “corrected” his grammar, and he replied, “That is the sort of arrant pedantry up with which I will not put!”

      • “Marcus February 29, 2016 at 12:25 pm
        .. CaligulaJones/………Nice try idiot !!…George Bernard Shaw”

        Thanks. Believe it or not, I am that kind of pedant, and I actually had written “don’t ask a question to which you don’t have the answer”, which would have headed all this off. Look, I’ve done it again…

      • I think the ‘never’ is overstatement. If your target thinks you know the answer, they may give it lest they get caught out. They may also give other good information leading to answers. Another tactic is to make a statement of belief and let others correct it for you. There are several ways to skin the cat. Just don’t tell the SPCA.

      • It is somewhat of a grade B Greek tragedy. Obviously the investigators have the help of whistleblowers. Blowers don’t blow unless they have something worthwhile to blow about.

        On the surface it’s not complicated. Systematic fudgery of the raw data is likely easy to show. What they really want is the deliberative documentation that the scientists colluded with high levels politicos who are then tied to NGOs.

        The tragedy takes a sad turn because even if they showed that collusion was the case, the voting public would yawn away because climate change is a low voter interest item. Imagine the dull thud if the height of a scandal translated into … the WH took guidance and was influenced by environmental NGOS … shocked …. not.

        It certainly wouldn’t shock a voting public to know the above is true and they certainly wouldn’t be shocked to know that scientists cheated. That horse of shock and dismay has left the barn.

        It’s a presidential year. That’s all that matters to the majority investigators. They know what they know and they probably know alot. The question becomes … how many votes will they gain to make a big stink out of what they know or will they actually lose votes for making a stir over an issue that is not a big deal for the public at large.

        Decisions …. decisions.

        And let’s not forget this is the same Congress that extended green energy rebates another 5 years.

      • It is really hard to predict a priori which scandal will attract interest. For an old one, who would have guessed that a “third rate burglary” would lead to the Watergate scandal and a presidential resignation. AGW data cooking could work as a scandal, if and only if pressed.

      • Ya never know but there is past history to gauge the scandal effect.

        Climategate is a good barometer. Caught red handed. A fair amount of hand flailing and ended up a bump in the road.

        Hmmmm, perhaps there is grant money in devising a scandalometer.

  3. Agree. Particularly amazing since the government imposes VERY strict requirements on businesses regarding document retention. Every email, doc, text, etc has very well defined guidelines for retention, unless you WORK for the government.

  4. Very amusing to note that the Fyfe paper with the usual suspects (Mann, Santer, et al), who normally NEVER refer to the satellite data, grudgingly include it here (because it provides the best support for their defense of the pause).

  5. Waterloo is an apt metaphor. Given the Russian’s firing off regular deadly hits at AGW over the past decade, I think that Napolean’s Retreat from Russia in 1812 is also fitting…

    “1812 Overture” — Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky


    You can hear the sub-theme of the Russian national anthem, partially translated into the English hymn, “God the Omnipotent,” playing firmly, at regular, steady, intervals, underguirding the main theme. Truth, thanks to God, in the end, wins, every time.

    Lol — Colonel Buffett is sounding “RETREEEEEEEET!”

    AGW is OVER.



    And heroes of science (and, thus freedom) like Anthony Watts and the surface temperature stations volunteers MADE IT HAPPEN! Data is what k1lled AGW in the end. WAY TO GO, ANTHONY WATTS! :)

    (and Steven McIntyre…. and Dr. Bob Carter…. and Dr. Soon…. and Dr. Hal Lewis…. and Dr. Salby…. and the moderators of WUWT….. and many, many others….)

    It took decades to rid Great Britain (and, later, the U.S.A.) of slavery and not all the warriors for freedom lived to see the triumph, but truth, in the end, WON.

    • ..Janice, you are a never ending fountain of impressive knowledge ..BUT, ……it is spelt ” Reeeeetreeeeat ” ! ( notice that funny little ” A ” in there ? )….Ho boy, now I’m going to get it !! LOL

      • Great and comment-enhancing observation (no mere projection, there :) ), CB.



      • Janice Moore says:
        February 29, 2016 at 11:43 am


        Two of the politicians for whom I have the greatest respect are Tommy Douglas and Ron Paul. I believe that nobody is always right and nobody is always wrong. Both Tommy and Ron were right a lot of the time about things I really cared about. I was raised in the social gospel and I still cleave to it. That makes me a commie in many people’s eyes.

      • MarkW says:
        February 29, 2016 at 1:40 pm

        The social gospel is just an excuse to steal other people’s money while feeling good about it.

        QED :-)

    • Anybody know for sure if the official title of that work is: ” This Year 1812. ” ??

      Dunno why that sticks in my mind.


    • Janice, thank you for posting that excellent and stirring video of Tchaikovsky’s Overture 1812! This piece is very ingeniously put together, and it never fails to give a fine effect when well played. I last heard it live at an outdoor concert at Fort Monroe at the southeast end of Hampton, VA, played by (I think) the Army Band, with real cannons blasting away at the appropriate times. The paintings in the video were magnificent, too. The one with Napoleon in the snow, with his horse trudging slowly along, is a very evocative picture of a dream gone deeply awry, with the Russian winter doing to his troops pretty much what it did to Hitler’s a century and a third later. Right now, the Russian winter (and our own, as well) is bearing down on the AGW juggernaut; I wonder how long it will take them to come to a stop.

      • Mr. Ware, you are so very welcome. Glad you enjoyed that. The creator of that video did fine job, indeed. Your essay on it is a worthwhile read in itself.

        When. Well…. the AGWer troopers are now off (have been for quite a few years, now) on the distant frontiers, pushed into making a desperate last stand in the Arctic one year…. a feeble sniper attack on the satellites another year…. hither and thither they scurry, schlepping their antiquated weapons with them, printing a few lurid propaganda flyers (fave colors: earth-on-fire red and Venus orange) when they can get a few bucks from hocking one of their old kayaks or something … . Some will never give up…. how long was it until the last Imperial Japanese soldier was finally captured? Brainwashing can be de-programmed, most people see the truth and quietly just fade into the shadows, but it doesn’t end well for everyone.

      • As a war historian buff, Hitlers greatest mistake was attacking Russia when he did !! If he had waited, as his generals suggested, he would have had and kept all of continental Europe and probably Britain too ! IMHO…

      • Hitlers greatest mistake was attacking Russia when he did
        the great irony is that he attacked on the same day of the year that Napoleon did.

      • Hitlers greatest mistake was attacking Russia when he did

        IMHO Hitler’s greatest mistake was declaring war on America.

        The U.S. felt it had its hands full with Japan. We didn’t need a second war. But when it happened, we didn’t have any choice. Hitler’s blunder made all the difference. Russia was supplied, and the rest is history…

    • Hey Janice!

      And yet we have this in media yesterday:


      So our beautiful (but now very wet) State of Washington will lead the charge (pun very much intended)…on ‘carbon’ via a tax!!!!

      We need to find a way to ‘kill’ this kind of stupidity along with AGW……I am about to go into the legislative websites and put my 2 cents worth in via comments, that we do not need this kind of legislation here – or anywhere!

      Are you with me? Here’s an example of what I deposited last year, I ‘m looking to update the language and submit anew:

      ‘Should this legislation be enacted: What is the plan, when future, reproduced
      scientific evidence proves that carbon dioxide is not the driver of catastrophic
      climate change, as is the premise for this legislation? The science is not
      currently settled on this scientific point, and enacting such punitive taxation
      based upon non-conclusive evidence (in fact there is no evidence of anomalous
      climate catastrophe in the observable weather record – such catastrophe exists
      in model projections only) is disingenuous and not in the best service of the
      constituency of the State of Washington. I challenge all legislators to review
      the CONS for this action, as well as what is heard without end, the PROS of
      Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming. I assure you, that you all will be
      enlightened that the science is not complete on this point, and any action to
      combat a “problem” that in all available real-world observations does not in
      fact exist will be a part of all of your future legacies.’

      Any help in updates would be appreciated!



  6. If NOAA continues to dig it its heals, what are the recourses for Congress? Sending in federal Marshalls?

    • Failure to comply fully and timely with the oversight committee subpoena is contempt of congress. That is a federal criminal offense punishable by 1 year in prison plus a substantial fine for each offense. The Oversight committee can demand that the Justice Department prosecute the offense. Justice has no leeway if Congress (or maybe just the committee, since itmis their subpoena) votes a contempt finding. Karl and Peterson (and whoever else) go to jail.

      • “As a war historian buff, Hitlers greatest mistake was attacking Russia when he did!! If he had waited, as his generals suggested, he would have had and kept all of continental Europe and probably Britain too ! IMHO…”

        I too am somewhat of a historian buff. I would like to read your source re this opinion. Can you direct me? Thanks.

    • I do not think there is a recourse. Federal prosecutions go through several layers of crooks and radical leftist, any and all of which Obama can override. And, who has ultimate authority over federal marshals? The same.

      • While all of that is true, if the house can widely publicize the malfeasance and get some public backing to cause a few of the more sane Dems to go along, they can defund any part of the government that is not in compliance with congressional orders. The problem is they all want to be invited to the cool dinner parties so they don’t want to rock the boat.

  7. At NOAA;”But, but those rules are for the little people..”

    I have been considering one of the defensive questions;
    “Why would scientists lie?”
    “It makes no sense”
    The reliance on government funding is the most logic answer.

    If we have allowed our governments to become Kleptocracies, then lying is the norm within the bureaus.
    For governance by thieves for thieves must lie.
    “We are from the government,we are here to help you”
    If the marks ever realize they are being systemically robbed, then the government gets reset.
    parasites are repressed, tough times for freeloaders all round.

    This systemic dishonesty spreads to everyone who is dependent on government, for the way to succeed is to go along to get along.
    And what the hell, it is not their money.

    Look around, how many people are aware of the fact money is a unit of trade?
    Representing their time and energy?

    Now I wish Congressman Smith every success, but the bureaucrats will try to run the clock, hoping for a change of power in congress or alternate employment opportunities.
    I have noticed a long tradition of rogues and fools being pensioned off so they can avoid accountability.
    Good enough for government I guess.

    • “Why would scientists lie?”
      “It makes no sense”

      Confirmation bias + government funding = scientists that lie

      Also, there can be a very fine line between lying and sort of nudging the model assumptions in the “correct” direction. (and lets be honest here, the graphs showing temperature records are 50% raw data, 50% models)

  8. Isn’t this worth just a mention in headline news somewhere? It should be “leaked” to some creditable news outlet. That is, if one can be found!

  9. It’s interesting how most tech/science sites (arstechnica comes to mind) are spinning this. To them, it’s about anti-science/flat Earth Republicans trying to stifle the work of noble govt paid scientists

    • Smart counter. They do have the upper hand in the propaganda wave annnnnd Congress did reauthorize 5 years worth of subsidies for the green e market.

      Have to strangle the source of reward to execute an effective attack. Congress won’t do this, so I don’t trust them.

    • The lovely irony is that El Nino may reduce Christopher Monkton’s calculation to less than 15 years for a while until La Nina kicks in to put us back on even keel.

      • Extend it far enough out, and the hiatus will be even longer than 18 years because there will be no discernible trend upwards. We can expect the occasional El Nino to be a mere “bump in the road” as time goes by.

  10. “Were any Obama administration officials communicating with NOAA about these statements prior to issuing press releases? ”

    Declaration of Executive Privilege in 3…2…1…

  11. I foresee a lot of organizations and publications like “Nature” and “National Geographic” using the defense, “We trusted NASA/NOAA and they lied to us” as a way to attempt to maintain some credibility. However, if these publications and other organizations had actually analyzed the NOAA and NASA temperature adjustments USING the scientific method they purport to uphold, they would not have been “fooled”. But make no mistake…they were not fooled. They were willing accomplices and are now looking for a way out.

  12. …Oh oh, the proverbial Sheet is about to hit the fan !. And the stink of the warmist crowd pigging out at the taxpayers trough will be overwhelming !…IMHO…

  13. Anthony, should this be ” expressed disappointment “?…

    ” Texas Republican who leads the House science committee, expressed disappoint with the “slow pace and limited scope” of NOAA’s response to his initial request. ”

    Sorry if I.m being facetious…

  14. The same White House that had intelligence report doctored to reduce the ISIS threat could and would easily have temperature data doctored to increase the GW threat.

    • And the unemployment rate, the GDP (which just increased for no apparent reason), and the number of illegals in the US at present. The 11 million number for illegal aliens in the US comes from the Bush era. And, it has stayed constant for all those years even while a million or more illegals enter the US each year. The Obama Administration does magic with numbers.

  15. As Michael said in Godfather 3,

    “All my life I kept trying to go up in society. Where everything higher up was legal. But the higher I go, the crookeder it becomes. Where the hell does it end?”

  16. Pay close attention to Curry’s questions in her 5 Nov Fox News interview. IIRC, when she first blogged about the Smith inquiry at CE, she said she had been hearing stuff through her climate science grapevine that led her to believe the Oversight Committee inquiry was proper, and not just politics.. This was before Rep. Smith publicly disclosed that he had whistleblowers from within NOAA.
    I suspect her list of questions is a fair reflection on what Smith heard from whistleblowers.
    And the only way I can imagine folks like Santer and Mann co-authoring the Fyfe paper is that they heard it through the grapevine also, and are officially distancing themselves from NOAA.

      • His colleagues aren’t exactly falling over themselves to stand by their boy vis a vis the Steyn lawsuit, are they?

    • astute observation as usual ristvan. i hope this is the situation, with mann being involved in the rebuttal i am waiting for a double whammy coming from some angle.

    • …Go to Cnet.com and download a simple program called ” PeerBlock “,..It stops other websites from using your computer for their needs ( torrent files )..If you also have a problem with ads, download AdbBlock Plus from Cnet..Totally free and virus checked.. If you are using Windows 10, then your computer is being used, by Windows, to download OTHER peoples Windows 10 !

    • There are a lot of people here who are pretty good on this issue. Go through the drill.
      Browser add-ons
      Likely somebody will know.

      • ..Anthony ,Firefox works fine IF you use Adblocker Plus and sometimes PeerBlock…AND daily upgrade/check your Adobe flash driver !.. Your webpage is attached to many other sites (NASA, NOAA, etc…), that tie up computer ram.. ! In my opinion, Google Chrome is spyware, same as Windows 10 ! Too much unauthorized data collection UNLESS you know how to turn it off ! But, that is just my opinion, as a novice computer programmer…C’est la vie

      • I use Chrome and an ad-blocker and all works very well now. The ads used to slow down my machine a tremendous amount and also used up my monthly data allowance in a week! All runs very smoothly now and no interruption at all.

      • I also use Chrome, and had ot install adblocker, Otheriwse the WUWT tabs would use up so much CPU I would have to close the browser. Since Adblocker, no more problems.

      • Firefox “no problemo” with me, I use with linux.

        I guess with any browser you have to be a bit savy with the add-ons and plugins to give yourself a decent browsing experience. Say if you like the site and want the owner to have some ads revenu from the many scripts, ok switch “noscripts” or “adblock” temporary off (say for a minute or so) and he’ll have some extra income from that – but soon turn them on again so you can start some decent browsing (evil grinn…)

  17. This scandal is probably going to the same place that Hilary’s emails are going…indefinite delay and creative incompetence in actually producing documents. AG Lynch will press charges on the fifth of never.

    • TH, I don’t think so. Three off the record reports that Comey has expanded the Clinton server investigation from violation of national security laws to political corruption, specifically interactions and payments by foreign entities and Clinton Foundation duringnher time in office at State. That only makes sense if Comey has the private emails also because the server was not wiped.

      We already know there was classified info on the server because of the State releases. Clintons ‘but not at the time’ arguement fails for the subset comprising back channel reports of communications between foreign government officials and US embassy staff. That is automatically deemed classified by long standing executive order, in order to protect those back channels. The one that comes readily to mind is the UK ambassador reporting on a conversation concerning yhe Middle East situation with the UK’s foreign minister.

      Separately, Fox interviewed (maybe a month ago) a former federal prosecutor who knows FBI director Comey well.Says he is upstanding and will follow the evidence and law wherever it leads. Says if the administration tries to interfere, or change/supress his conclusions, he would resign and go public with the reasons why. IMO this general situation is also the reason Obama has not endorsed Clinton, and has been mum about the national security thing. Also maybe why Biden is now expressing regrets at deciding not to run against her.

      • I am old enough to rember the details on Wategate. The big scandal, if it really ever hits, will be Comey resigning when Loretta Lynch refuses to indict, rather like the Saturday Night Massacre in Watergate. I do not think Lynch will ever press charges.

      • …Tom Halla, that is what elections are for ! President Cruz will make it a priority, so the FBI will wait to ask for charges to be laid ! We know Obama/Lynch will not do so !

      • TH: Hmm … So maybe Holder resigned resigned rather than tell Obama that he wouldn’t indict her. (?)

      • The only way she can be pardoned is if she does not get elected. A pardon carries with it an admission of guilt, and for that, she could still be impeached, she just wouldn’t be elegible for criminal charges. Obama is stuck, and Hillary’s only option is to ride it out and hope for the best.

      • Yes, the FBI is controlled by Obama. Obama can fire, or have fired, Comey anytime. And he can order the Dept of Justice to do anything he wants and they will happily comply. Remember who is Attorney General and where and whom she served in the White House.

      • Leonard,

        No, politically Obama CAN’T fire Comey, because the FBI will dump the whole file on Congress and the charges for impeachment will make Watergate look like a cheap break-in. Yes, Comey would leave, but Obama and a whole lot of people at Justice would follow him, and then get frog-marched off to club fed.

      • Okay! Mr. D. had his chance, so I’ll say it:

        “Naaaaay!” :)

        And that henchwoman in the Benghazi reckless homicide (at best) of Ambassador Stephens, et. al. will NOT be POTUS (short of God allowing demons to get her in… and He may, as he did, imo, with Barack Hussein … but, many people are praying!!). Yup, she’s that personally and professionally distasteful to the average American (even to the Democrats — and there aren’t enough yella dog dems left, now… hahahaha).
        That is, only cheating will get her in. Possible, but, hoping…

  18. AW: In the UK we have the ability to charge someone with Contempt of Parliament if a witness to a Parliamentary committee does not carry out the instructions of said committee. Is there such a thing in the US Congress? If so, why aren’t a few people in NOAA being threatened with prison time?

    • …” Contempt of Congress is the act of obstructing the work of the United States Congress or one of its committees. Historically, the bribery of a senator or representative was considered contempt of Congress. In modern times, contempt of Congress has generally applied to the refusal to comply with a subpoena issued by a Congressional committee or subcommittee—usually seeking to compel either testimony or the production of documents. “

      • Thanks, Marcus. But can a felon in contempt be sent to prison by the committee? (Rather like contempt of court)

      • Interesting historical fact. There are actually jail cells in the basement of the Capital that were used in the distant past to house those found in contempt of Congress. The Sergeant at Arms has the keys and can apprehend any witness so bound by the committee.

        Of course it hasn’t been done since the late 1800’s

    • HP, see upthread. Yes we have an equivalent. It is called contempt of congress, and is criminal subject to imprisonment. My understanding is that once voted ‘found’ as such (not sure, I think maybe by Smith’s oversight committee since it issued the subpoena) Justice has no discretion not to prosecute the contempt crime. A separation of powers thing in the US constitution. I have not researched all the legal details.

      • Ristvan, the problem is that the Attorney General, currently Loretta Lynch, must actually press the charges. As Ms Lynch is decidedly partisan, the charges will go nowhere.

      • TH, that may be true. But a former federal prosecutor who knows Comey well said on narional television news that if that happened, Comey would resign and go public with the reasons. Someone pointed out upthread this possible scenario is reminiscent of the ‘Saturday Night Massacre’ during the Watergate scandel.

      • Tom Halla, if Lynch does not prosecute in a timely manner, then SHE can be charged with contempt of Congress ! That will not matter if Cruz is elected ! She will be gone !

  19. Transcript of interview with Karl:

    Paul: Karl – there is a dead human in our house!
    Karl: Ho – hey – how did he get here?
    Paul: Karl – what did you do?
    Karl: Me – dah – duh – I didn’t do this!
    Paul: Explain what happened Karl!
    Karl: I’ve never seen him before in my life!
    Paul: Why did you kill this person, Karl?
    Karl: I do not kill people – that is my least favourite thing to do.

  20. For years, I’ve been calling for government data fabricators to go to jail. Maybe, at last, that will happen.

    • If Cruz is elected President, Many will be facing jail time ! Trump is simply a liberal impostor, just research his past history !

      • Marcus, excellent point.
        I have not see such an irrational mob of worshipers for a savior since the 2008 election of Obama.
        The only difference is that the exuberance is on the Republican side. this time.
        I expect the same disappointment after the election if Trump is elected

  21. Are we sure that Karl is a real person and not just a Richard Windsor-type creation with a curriculum vitae?

  22. During the last 8 years objective climate data has become an endangered species while the alarmist climate establishment has had the suppott of the President and the Democratic party, possibly because it fits in with the left-wing agenda of control,

    A change in the Presiency may, I repeat may, result in much harder scrutiny of the climate establishment and the EPA

  23. Peterson really felt that he was untouchable, then. Now, not so much.

    Anthony gets the last laugh.
    October 28, 2015:

    “Wow, just wow. I told Dr. Tom Peterson in an email this summer that their highly questionable paper that adjusted SST’s of the past to erase the “pause” was going to become “their waterloo”, and Peterson’s response was to give the email to wackadoodle climate blogger Miriam O’Brien (aka Sou Bundanga) so she could tout it with the usual invective spin that she loves to do. How “professional” of Peterson, who made the issue political payback with that action.”


  24. OOPS.

    Could reassignments, resignations, retirements and a big U-Turn be in store for NOAA?

    NOAA may really need an Arc or some hasty-pudding commandments to get out of this one!


    Ha ha

    • …Yes, but their cherries are better than Bob’s cherries because their cherries come from Calipornia !! ( no, that is not a spelling mistake ) LOL

  25. So what’s going on with Mikey here? Only three serious possibilities come to mind. a) He got royally thrown under a bus by the pseudoscience establishment over legal support in the form of amicus briefs for his court cases and is now desperately trying to claw back a bit of respectability whilst kicking a few others under the bus in his place. b) He knows cooling is coming and is now trying to highlight natural variability so he can later claim ‘well it’s still warming overall but of course there’s some short term natural weather variability temporarily obscuring the signal’. c) He’s started doing actual climate science. Nah – just kidding about (c) – there’s only two possibilities. But which is true?

  26. For those who were interested upthread in the contempt of congress enforcement issue, I have spent some time researching this in depth. Fun for a semi-retired non-practicing lawyer to brush up on an obscure corner of the law. Even went to the computer to input this long comment.

    The relevant criminal Contempt of Congress statue is 2USC192, enacted in 1938. Expressly covers subpoenaed failure to appear at a hearing and testify (although right to invoke the 5th amendment remains if one does appear, as Lois Lerner did in the IRS matter) or failure to produce subpoenaed documents.

    The best single (shortish) legal enforcement guide is from the Congressional Research Office, ‘Congress’s Contempt Power and the Enforcement of Congressional Subpoenas:
    http://www.fas.org.sgp/crs/misc/RL34114.pdf. Written in 2014 by two CRS lawyers, with links to a much longer and more comprehensive CRS legal analysis. Laymen can understand it. Following a non-legalese summary.

    Essentially, there are three ways Congress can enforce a subpoena that is in contempt (as the NOAA situation now if requested stuff is not produced by close of business today, Feb 29, 2016 per congressional subpoena and follow up letters. These correspond to the three fundamental branches of government. Only requirement for any of the three is that the subpoena be lawful; i.e. relate to the matters for which the Congressional Committee or Subcommittee has been given jurisdiction by Congress. Article 1 section 5.2 says Congress gets to make its own rules. Here, the lawful requirement is clearly met. Smith’s Congressional Science Oversight Subcommittee has express oversight of NOAA, NASA, and NSF. Subpoena is lawful.
    1. ‘Inherent’, relying on its own constitutional authority as conveyed by Article 1 section 8.18. And, for those interested in subtle legal analysis, in case the section’s first clause does not grant it by implied self reference to section 8, the second clause of 8.18 plus 7.1 (revenue, taxation, budgets) surely does in light of 5.2 and the meaning of oversight. Congress just orders its marshall at arms (and the capital police) to effect the arrest and imprisonment of the contemptors. Unusual but not unprecedented. Upheld in Anderson v. Dunn (1818) and McGrain v. Daugherty by SCOTUS. Challengeable from prison by writ of habeas corpus, limited to two questions:
    a. Within relevant Congressional jurisdiction? (yes)
    b. Congress proceedings complied with minimum due process standards. Here, yes. Smith has given NOAA months to comply, subpoena is based in part on whistleblowers from inside NOAA (not a fishing expedition), and is limited in scope (Karl paper communications).
    2. ‘Executive’, referring the matter to Justice. Justice does not make an independent contempt of Congress judgement. No problems if not an executive branch inquiry. The usual process. Federal marshals just go and arrest.
    Separation of powers issues arise if the issue is executive branch contempt, as here. There is case law precedent for Justice lawfully not acting if the President invokes executive privilege, but not otherwise. (Imagine Obama invoking exec privilege over Karl! And the Republicans making political hay, because the exec privilege legal definition is ‘when disclosure would adversely impact executive branch operations’. Adversely impact climate fudging operations????)
    3. ‘Judicial’, referring the matter to the federal courts, in effect transferring the subpoena so contempt of congress becomes contempt of court. The federal judiciary has well established contempt arrest and imprisonment powers. Disadvantage is slow, which is why (2) is the normal enforcement process.

    Under the present administration circumstances, (2) may be dicey. Maybe Rep. Smith is thinking try (2) if NOAA does not comply, and at the first hint of Justice procrastination use process (1) in an election year. Big political splash. Karl, Peterson, and others (NOAA head) arrested by the Capital Police for contempt of congress. Especially since Smith already knows from whistleblowers what sorts of malfeasance he will likely find email proof of. Smith looks to be playing a good game of hardball.
    Obama and NOAA rock, meet Congressional hard place. And also WUWT plus its readers.

    • Ristvan, nice precis on the relevant law. But I still think the current Republican leadership will cave–they are not nicknamed the “surrender caucus” for nothing

      • TH, votes count. And on this matter, I do not think Rep. Smith will cave. He has whistleblowers, and the political shark in him smells blood. I hope.

      • Depends on how useful a drama take down with be to the presidential sweepskates. CAGW is low on voter interest and could be perceived as a petty attack by the neanderthal GOP.

        Don’t get me wrong. A fight to create transparency is a good fight, but they may not launch the missile if they perceive the target doesn’t have enough value.

        Politics is war …. right ?

  27. But how can this be?
    Leonardo told us all in his Oscar speech that

    A world that we collectively felt in 2015 was the hottest year in recorded history. Our production team needed to go to the southern tip of this planet just to be able to find snow; climate change is real, and it’s happening right now. It is the most urgent threat facing our entire species and we need to work together and stop procrastinating.

    • Good actors are by definition not good scientists. They are good at faking (acting) a pseudo reality. DiCaprio is merely exhibit A of a great many. He would have died in days had he actually been placed in the shoes of the mountain man he portrayed in Revenant. PR value for low information voters, maybe high, maybe not. Truth value, zero for sure. Hypocrasy value (boats, planes) infinite.

      • There are very few civilians who have the same understanding that this guy has of climate change. Leo’s a wonk. He’s putting his ass on the line

        says Mark Ruffalo, who has just combined forces with DiCaprio on the Solutions Project, a group of scientists and stars hoping to move America toward full-renewable-energy use.

    • He’s not very well informed. You can find snow in Hawaii. Google it. See pictures. Leo is a silly boy.

  28. If Mann is in there then the unravelling process has started. It’s every Mann for himself. There will be lots of finger pointing. Conspirators tend to eat their own because no one can be trusted any more.

    • That’s an astute Goodfellas analogy and consistent with my scenario (a) above. Since we are obliged to pay for this circus then it is as well to extract the maximum entertainment along the way.

  29. Can’t NOAA just stick to, “The dog ate our homework.”? It has an established track record and is rather more credible.

  30. In my 50 plus years as an Engineer, I have never met any engineer or scientist, who had a great idea, who was not eager (within the Company or a client) to take all measures with enthusiasm to sell and convince his/her peers and management that the idea or concept is worthy of further consideration by the Corporation. There is always somebody that will try to knock the idea down and they need all the information to overcome their concerns that may be ligament and worthy of consideration.
    In my experience, I have fortunately had the opportunity to make a presentation to management in an effort to get their support for proceeding with implementation of an idea. If successful the personal reward is significant if not always immediately personally profitable.
    Given the personal reward, it is difficult to understand those who are not willing to defend their “accomplishment” with vigor and complete disclosure of all calculations, data and other relevant information.
    It does raise suspicion of a cover up.

  31. “And another thing. About those sceptics who are seeking to deny and undermine climate science. It was the sceptics, not the scientists, who discovered the hiatus, this so-called biggest problem in climate science. ”

    Science is a method not the opinion of licensed government officials. As sceptism is a huge part of the method, I object to this idea that there are two groups that are mutally exclusive

  32. “climate change is real, and it’s happening right now”


    Nothing “climate” happens “right now”, by the definition of Climate which itself is rather poetic and kind of just forms itself into whatever you need at the time.


  33. I would rather know the truth and be wrong than to be grubered into thinking I was right. Public opinion is being manipulated, but nowadays, some are lying, outright, IMO, because they are protected in the media, IMO.

Comments are closed.