Guest essay by Eric Worrall
Gavin Schmidt, director of the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies, has “warned” President-elect Donald Trump not to interfere with their climate activities. Schmidt maintains the GISS global temperature series, arguably the most adjusted of all the global temperature products.
‘Global warming doesn’t care about the election’: Nasa scientist warns Donald Trump over interference
Senior Nasa scientist suggests he could resign if Donald Trump tries to skew climate change research results.
A senior Nasa scientist has told Donald Trump he is wrong if he thinks climate change is not happening and warned the President-elect that government scientists are “not going to stand” for any interference with their work.
Mr Trump has described global warming as a “hoax” perpetrated by China, vowed to unratify the landmark Paris Agreement and appointed a renowned climate-change denier to a senior environmental position in his transition team.
The science community and environmental campaigners in the US have already begun efforts to persuade Mr Trump that climate change is actually real before he takes office next year.
Dr Gavin Schmidt, the director of Nasa’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies, signalled they would have allies among the federal science agencies.
…
In an interview with The Independent, Dr Schmidt, who was born in London, said: “The point is simple: the climate is changing and you can try to deny it, you can appoint people who don’t care about it into positions of power, but regardless nature has the last vote on this.
…
Asked if he would resign if the Trump administration adopted the most extreme form of climate change denial, Dr Schmidt said this was “an interesting question”. It would not cause him to quit “in and of itself”, he said.
“Government science and things generally go on regardless of the political views of the people at the top,” Dr Schmidt said. “The issue would be if you were being asked to skew your results in any way or asked not to talk about your results. Those would be much more serious issues.”
…
But he added: “Trump is obviously unique. It’s not just the same as Bush again.”
…
President-elect Donald Trump has already stated that he intends to refocus NASA on its original mission of space exploration.
“I will free NASA from the restriction of serving primarily as a logistics agency for low Earth orbit activity… Instead we will refocus its mission on space exploration.”
The needless duplication of climate work between multiple federal agencies has been noted before – in 2015, Lamar Smith (R-Texas), Chairman of the House Science, Space, and Technology Committee, introduced a bill calling on NASA to spend more of their time and effort exploring space.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
“Dr Schmidt said. ‘The issue would be if you were being asked to skew your results in any way….’.”
I’m holding my sides. I think I may have hurt myself.
I guess there’s no issue if you did it without being asked!
Cut the funding and they’ll all go away. If their research is legitimate I’m sure they’ll find private investors to “fight the good fight”.
that is the good test , if they really are out to ‘save the planet ‘ will they carry on after the glory and the cash is no longer there , or fade away because the planet in the end does not need saving ?
Soros et al can carry the can for a while instead of the taxpayer.
You will believe in our tripe or else!! We will not stand for your disbelief. Really???
I think we shouldn’t be too harsh with these guys. However clever you are it is hard to grapple with opposing points of view when your continued employment depends on your not grappling with it. Besides he is a mathematician, a humble modeller, and may not have the experience to evaluate real world data
Never really understood why NASA was doing climate anyway. I guess in today’s world its a way to snag funding. Looks like the Data Massager In Chief is going out fighting.
yarpos —
In the public mind NASA had a sky high reputation. Climate fraud has hid behind that reputation right from the beginner. That is why NASA was brought into doing climate. It was the perfect front for the coming intended fraud.
Eugene WR Gallun
Gavin Schmidt is use to bullying people. He may not get a chance to resign.
Oh and if he has destroyed any records he might as well cover himself with jelly cause he’s toast. No one is going to spend any effort to protect him, they will all be making their deals.
Also the progressives are still looking for a sacrificial lamb, since he is really not one of them, he can be thrown to the wolves.
Cagw was President Obama’s legacy in waiting. None of the progressives are going to tie themselves to his ego. Once the facts start bubbling out everyone will be pointing fingers saying well he (Gavin Schmidt, or spin the wheel) was the expert I never dreamed he would deceive or mislead me. Oh dear!
michael
Mike
Maybe Gavin can get Bull to represent him.
Gavin Schmidt should read up on Reagan vs Air Controllers.
stuartiynne — you pegged it exactly — Eugene WR Gallun
+1776
Ding Dong the witch is dead!
Trump doesn’t understand much about climate science but Obama had it exactly wrong for 8 years and Trump is going in the opposite direction.
The climate munchkins are celebrating their freedom.
Which old witch, the climate witch(-:
Nobody can know everything. The trick is to surround yourself with trustworthy people who know the things that you don’t.
Yes, but you must be able to understand what those trustworthy people tell you, or else you won’t be able to determine if they are trustworthy or not.
Blindly relying on others to tell you what you don’t know is… not good.
” “The point is simple: the climate is changing and you can try to deny it, you can appoint people who don’t care about it into positions of power, but regardless nature has the last vote on this.”
Mr. Schmidt, could you explain to me, when was the climate NOT changing ?
Asked if he would resign if the Trump administration adopted the most extreme form of climate change denial,
he answered , not has long has the gravy train keeps rolling and to be frank I would have a hard time getting a job anywhere else . No I am looking to count down the clock to retirement, and walk away with fat pension and to do that after doing virtual nothing that was any use to anyone else but my own ego .
Proud to say that not a single comment I have ever made on RealClimate™ has made it through moderation. Not even in the “borehole”. Not one.
My own record in this regard is sullied by one very innocuous comment that was posted…out of maybe fifty. My notion is the moderators have to read them.
For them the debate is over, the science settled. All they are willing to do is commiserate with the choir boys on that site.
” Schmidt maintains the GISS global temperature series, arguably the most adjusted of all the global temperature products.”
This is not true. The only adjustment that GISS applies is the UHI adjustment, based on satellite observed night lights..
GHCN adjusts met station data, but GHCN is a NOAA subdivision, not GISS/NASA.
GISS simply use met station and SST data as they come, delivered by NOAA..
So you’re saying that GISS further manipulates the already manipulated ‘data’ as they come from NOAA … that’s manipulation by an order of magnitude, no wonder they can’t be trusted. So Schmukzie really is just the last crook in the congo line of ‘climate’ shysters.
Yes, GISS cool the temperature trend of the real world, to that of a fictive non-urban world..
GISS V RSS (5 year averages matched at 1981)
And you say GISS is cooling the real data .. seriously , you have to be JOKING.
roflmao..
There are so many places where the real data is cooling , but GISS and the other mal-adjusters have changed it to warming. Its a FRAUD and a FARCE.
You can ignore all those.. but it only make you look like a propaganda fool.
Here’s a shocker:
The above link makes the point that even 2.7% may be an overestimate.
The vast majority of the world is non-urban and the vast majority of the climate happens in non-urban areas. It is a problem, then, if climate data over represents urban areas. It is also a problem that vast areas of the planet have no surface stations and are represented by estimated data.
commieBob —
Only 2.7% of the earth is urban. Thankyou for calling OR on that. I was going to call him an idiot but didn’t have the data on hand to back it up.
Eugene WR Gallun
PS — Maybe OR is counting all the floating cities that cover our oceans, do you think?
O R
November 17, 2016 at 2:18 am
YHGTBSM!
GISS is so corrupt that their algorithm for UHI adjustment actually makes the “data” series hotter rather than cooler.
On Trump’s first day, he should shut down the criminal enterprises of GISS and NCAR, effective immediately. And banish all NOAA leadership drones who can’t be fired to Alaska, Siberia not being available. Better yet, the South Pole.
commieBob,
I’m glad to hear that the effect is so small globally (but still on the conservative side). However, in densely populated European countries, typically 10% of the total area is considered urban.
And yes, it is important to restrict the influence of urban met stations to urban areas only, when making large scale/global averages.
The need for near complete global station coverage is somewhat exaggerated. The global warming signal is easily picked up by very few stations.
I did this exercise i while ago. If UAH only were allowed to retrieve satellite readings from 18 points, equally spread worldwide, few people would notice the difference when it comes to global change..
https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B_dL1shkWewadExwM3VOaVJBUU0
“The global warming signal is easily picked up by very few stations.”
If you choose those stations carefully.
Do make sure they are urban stations, though or at least have a strong urban signal.
Actually, let’s choose the SoPol region as one of those measurements shall we.
and just to check
Here is Japan from 1950-1990 the 40 year of strong development
There was a slight step mid 1990’s then this
And just for good measure . lets choose the NoPol region this century before the current El Nino.
Yep.. warming signals everywhere.. NOT !!!
Now, I bet you will choose a point heavily influenced by either urban or El Nino effects.
Because everyone knows that urban and El Nino and AMO/PD effects are the ONLY warming in the whole satellite record.
Actually.. that’s a thing about the satellite data.. urban effects are basically gone, because, unlike GISS it isn’t HIGHLY BIASED towards urban measurements, but also measure way more than 50% of the surface.
Fabrication of data is not required like in GISS.
To AndyG55, the guy who can’t find a straw in a haystack….
Here is some “trend-dropping” from the North Pole region, 80N-90N, 1997-2016:
Plain averages for what is found in the zone, missing gridcells ignored…
Satellites
RSS 3.3 TLT 0,7 C/decade
UAH 5.6 TLT 0.7 C/decade
Surface
Gistemp loti 0.9 C C/decade
Cowtan & WAY 1.4 C/decade
CRUTEM4.5 1.5 C/decade
GHCN/CAMS 0.9 C/ decade
Reanalyses 2m temp
MERRA2 0.9 C/decade
NCEP/NCAR 1.2 C/decade
ERA-interim 1.7 C/decade
AndyG55, if you think I cherrypicked 18 points, that’s not true. Its a regular pattern and first try.
Only 0.17% of the global spatial temperature information is used:
http://postmyimage.com/img2/621_UAH_18.png
Here is the inverted day to day average change in temp.
It’s from about 60 some million surface stations.
UHI via night lights has already been demonstrated to be an invalid method.
Population data is easy to acquire. The census bureau provides population data broken out geographically.
The only reason to use night lights to estimate population is because you don’t want to produce accurate results.
Demonstrated to be invalid by whom? Have you read tendentious blog posts instead of scientific papers?
Try the original: http://pubs.giss.nasa.gov/docs/2010/2010_Hansen_ha00510u.pdf
OR,
Another pack of lies by the cartoonish clown and lying lunatic Haha Hansen? Thanks for the laugh!
Chimp, in O R’ s mental case, it is called brain-washed advocacy..
or he’s on the trough.
For those who can read: In the Hansen 2010 paper where they used unadjusted GHCN 2, the UHI adjustment brought down the CONUS long-term trend by 10%
Nowadays when GISS use adjusted GHCN 3, the nightlighs UHI adjustment has no significant effect, because the GHCN algorithm has already eliminated UHI bias.
This phenomenon is well known; a belt has little effect on your pants if you already are wearing suspenders..
” The point is simple: the climate is changing and you can try to deny it, you can appoint people who don’t care about it into positions of power, but regardless nature has the last vote on this.”
Of course the climate is changing! What sort of scientist is this guy?
Why dosn’t he prove that it is the fault of mankind if he is so smart?
Cheers
Roger
http://www.rogerfromnewzealand.wordpress.com
ADFAIK DT never disputed that the clamate is changing – and will be changing until the Good Lord takes other decisions.
I hope that DT manages to get the databenders off the trough.
Tony Heller identifies the handiwork.
http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=tony+heller&&view=detail&mid=769E71AC154A4C9EDBBA769E71AC154A4C9EDBBA&FORM=VRDGAR
I am well aware of Tony Heller’s “handiwork”
Inconvenient facts, such as cooling of data from one of the most techical stations worldwide, does not pass moderation on his blog..
ftp://ftp.ncdc.noaa.gov/pub/data/ghcn/v3/products/stnplots/7/70089009000.gif
LOL
You do realize that is a plot of anomalies, not actual temperature data
Thanks for showing us the COOLING or ZERO trend in Antarctica.. But we already knew.
And that is now with over 400ppm ! .. oops !!
Gavin Schmidt refused to even sit at the same table as Roy Spencer when John Stossel interviewed the both of them 2 years ago. What Gavin and “climate inc.” wouldn’t and won’t admit is the uncertainty of their suppositions, which always ends with their invocation of the precautionary principle. “But, what if were right?” Yes, let’s spend 10% of GDP on non-solutions to non-existent problems so that nerds can virtue signal.
DO NOT insult nerds that way.
They universally seek truth, the name you are looking for is “Social Justice Warrior”
I thought they spent most of their time seeking dates?
MarkW,
Ain’t THAT the truth! :>)
Pulling the precautionary principle out of your ass, means you don’t have any real science to back up your argument.
I reckon he’ll be looking for a new job. Donald loves people who tell him not to do things. On ya bike, sport.
“It is expected that there will be discrepancies between models and observations. However, why these arise and what one should conclude from them are interesting and more subtle than most people realize. Indeed, such discrepancies are the classic way we learn something new.” — Gavin Schmidt on RealClimate.org https://www.ted.com/speakers/gavin_schmidt
Learned something yet, Mr Schmidt??
Isn’t it odd that the main thing which is to be learned i.e. that the models and by extension the hypotheses and assumptions they encapsulate are simply wrong is the very thing which must never even be considered. This is how we know that what we are dealing with here is completely outside of the purview of science and lies solely in the supernatural ‘Magisterium’.
Two quotes from Gavin Schmidt :
“If the models are as flawed as critics say you have to ask yourself, ‘How come they work? ‘ “
and
“It’s the whole or it’s nothing.”
It might come as a surprise to the NASA’s supremo that models don’t work, not whole, not even partially; and as you said Gavin the climate models are worth ‘nothing’.
Barn side……
OOPS.. MISSED..
Build a bigger barn !!
Or move the barn !! It was obviously built in the wrong place.
Well, that’s one straightforward way to get rid of this idiot!
If he quits, he doesn’t get unemployment.
A new NASA brief and Judith Curry as new head of GISS. Then have the data processing by Gavin c.s. vetted by the physicists of the Argonne Lab or the National Bureau of Standards. There won’t be much left of it, but the new analysis would produce an authoritive temperature record, which then in its turn will expose the machinations going into the other data sets.
Why? Dump GISS. Get NASA back in the space exploration business. We have NOAA to worry about our weather, climate, ocean and atmosphere. The whole idea of needing multiple government agencies to do the same thing is ridiculous and as a taxpayer I feel cheated and abused.
You’re fired Gavin.
I think Gavin Schmidt is simply worried about being shuffled off “down the hall” to NOAA, instead of NASA… the office where weather studies, climate research (legitimate or otherwise) & other Earth-observing missions should have been in the first place. I’m quite certain he understands very well indeed that saying “I work for NOAA” is pretty cool, but “I work for NASA” is waaay sexier. ~_^
In all seriousness, having put himself “out there” in the media eye, now if he gets fired he can claim “oppression” & get all sorts of street cred from those who firmly believe that the next Administration is nothing more than the Second Coming of Adolphus Minimus. The usual Soros-funded “advocacy” groups will no doubt reward him handsomely to trot out his sob story at every opportunity, to weep publically about how his “deeply held, eminently scientific views” were “discriminated” against, and how he “lost everything” at the hands of this “denialist” Administration.
Oh, the humanity. 😛
I do hope that Trumph/Cruz/Smith will set up a commission or two to look into the GISS and NOAA temperature records as well as U of C Boulder satellite sea level measurements and how they spliced these on to gauge measurements without continuing gauge measurements for comparison and adjustment. If US universities will not produce the qualified scientists and statisticians to man such commissions then I am sure that Trump’s oil and gas connections will find competent scientists and statisticians from their own ranks who have demonstrated competence in having their projections confirmed with actual finds. This needs to happen asap after 12.01 on 20 January 2017. We need to know from sources other than Tony Heller and a few others what actually has been happening to the original readings to produce “man made global warming”. This is essential to be able to confront and destroy the various UN agencies (including IPCC) plotting to extract $100 billion p.a. from the so-called “developed world”. Steinbeck would not recognise NOAA’s USA temperatures in the thirties as they are today.
I vaguely recall there being some Canadian chap with a mining background who’s a bit of a whizz at number crunching. Perhaps he could help?
John Peter November 17, 2016 at 1:53 am
+1.
In particular the comment about data scrutiny from other people. NASA/GISS and NOAA’s data should be put through the wringer. If it’s found to have been tampered with or wrongly adjusted, well there’s ways of dealing with the guilty parties.
Find Gavin Schmidt a nice office on Shemya in the Aleutians 🙂
There he’ll find that warmer is better. I hope?
Too close.
How about Antarctica? Or perhaps the central Congo?
Given how Gavin feels about warming, a cold place would be better for him.
Antarctica is far too close, at least to me, and why offend the gorillas by sending him to the Congo. In keeping with the original aim of his organisation might I suggest Tranquility Base?
Richard of NZ:
What? Send Gavin into space on one of those rockets he didn’t help design?
I like it!
And you think the gorillas will refuse to sit at debate tables with Gavin at the same time? agin, you’re probably right.
But Tranquility aside, Congo it is!
Tom Halla — No physical data from central Antarctica’ Send Gavin there to remedy that. — Eugene WR Gallun
Reblogged this on Climatism and commented:
“Senior Nasa scientist suggests he could resign if Donald Trump tries to skew climate change research results….”
Astonishing irony in that comment, knowing that NASA GISS temp is the most highly adjusted (tampered) dataset of all the products, by a mile!
And what is Schmidt so afraid of if there was an audit of NASA climate practices to check the veracity of their GISS data set through:
– The highly questionable and radical temperature homogenisation techniques of ‘cooling the past and warming the present’.
– Spurious temperature in-filling.
– UHI-effected, poorly sited temp stations?
Furthermore, the people, the tax payer own NASA, its data and pay Schmidt’s wage.
It is not climate activist-in-chief Gavin Schmidt’s private playground to tamper data to fit the “global warming” narrative, and use the (once) respected name of “NASA” as a platform to spread blatant climate change activist propaganda with genuine religious zeal, dismissing all remnants of scientific rigour and open enquiry, in favour of, IMHO, open scientific fraud.
Time to “drain the (climate change) swamp”!