NCDC says that they knew the problems with the temperature record were as large as I described, yet failed to report this information to Congress or the courts ahead of the EPA ruling.
#NOAAgate
Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Google Search
-
Recent Posts
- “Rapid Antarctic sea ice loss is causing severe storms”
- “pushing nature past its limits”
- Compassion For Terrorists
- Fifteen Days To Slow The Spread
- Maldives Underwater By 2050
- Woke Grok
- Grok Explains Gender
- Humans Like Warmer Climates
- Homophobic Greenhouse Gases
- Grok Explains The Effects Of CO2
- Ice-Free Arctic By 2027
- Red Hot Australia
- EPA : 17.5 Degrees Warming By 2050
- “Winter temperatures colder than last ice age
- Big Oil Saved The Whales
- Guardian 100% Inheritance Tax
- Kerry, Blinken, Hillary And Jefferson
- “Climate Change Indicators: Heat Waves”
- Combating Bad Weather With Green Energy
- Flooding Mar-a-Lago
- Ice-Free Arctic By 2020
- Colorless, Odorless CO2
- EPA Climate Change Arrest
- Nothing Nuclear Winter Can’t Fix
- “We Are From The Government And We Are Here To Help”
Recent Comments
- Jehzsa on “pushing nature past its limits”
- arn on Fifteen Days To Slow The Spread
- dm on Fifteen Days To Slow The Spread
- dm on “pushing nature past its limits”
- William on Compassion For Terrorists
- arn on “pushing nature past its limits”
- arn on Compassion For Terrorists
- Francis Barnett on Compassion For Terrorists
- arn on Compassion For Terrorists
- arn on Fifteen Days To Slow The Spread
Congressional inquiries are in order.
Contact your Congressman’s constituent services. Let them know that the Temperature office refuses to provide public data as requested.
Congressmen like to help constituents. Bureaucrats are terrified of Congressional inquiries.
It’s a place to start.
I agree fully. It’s time we contact our elected officials. Enough is enough.
(And, Heller gets to name it–“NOAAgate”. Works for me!)
Hmmm … shades of the FCC withholding damning evidence about Broadband over Power Line (BPL) when they released ‘studies’ a few years back.
FCC Releases Unredacted BPL Case Studies after ARRL FOIA Request
http://www.arrl.org/news/fcc-releases-unredacted-bpl-case-studies-after-arrl-foia-request
Opening excerpt:
– – – – –
05/19/2009
Earlier this month, the FCC released the redacted portions of the studies on which they relied with regard to its Broadband over Powerline (BPL) rulemaking in 2004 after ARRL filed a Freedom of Information Act request on March 31 for the studies. In October 2007, the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit heard ARRL’s case against the Commission, stating, among other things, that the FCC not only withheld the internal studies until it was too late to comment, but had yet to release portions of studies that may not support its own conclusions regarding BPL. The FCC claimed that the studies were “internal communications” that it did not rely upon in reaching its decision to adopt the BPL rules. In its April 2008 ruling, the Court ordered the FCC to release the studies.
In its decision, the Court agreed with the ARRL that the FCC had failed to comply with the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) by not fully disclosing for public comment the staff studies on which it relied and that “there is no APA precedent allowing an agency to cherry-pick a study on which it has chosen to rely in part.”
Writing for the three-judge panel of Circuit Judges Rogers, Tatel and Kavanaugh, Judge Rogers summarized in the Court’s decision that “The Commission failed to satisfy the notice and comment requirements of the Administrative Procedure Act (‘APA’) by redacting studies on which it relied in promulgating the rule and failed to provide a reasoned explanation for its choice of the extrapolation factor for measuring Access BPL emissions.” The Court concluded that “no precedent sanctions such a ‘hide and seek’ application of the APA’s notice and comment requirements.”
– – – – – –
Keep it up, Steve. You’re following in the footsteps of two of the greatest (for me) and most admired skeptics of this entire scam.
John Brignell (c. 2007): http://numberwatch.co.uk/manmade.htm
John Daly (c. 2000): http://www.john-daly.com/ges/surftmp/surftemp.htm
The problems have been known for decades, yet the climate establishment not only have failed to correct them, but exaggerated them in the name of “The Cause”. You’re energy and dogged determination is starting to pay dividends.
It’s called “being economical with the truth”.
A well known technique in politics.
“economical with the truth”, that is the understatement of this Century.
They are absolutley outright and BLATANTLY LYING.
What is worse, they are getting away with it.
The term refers specifically to withholding relevant facts.
You can’t be lying if you don’t say anything.
It’s long past time for a special prosecutor. RICO should be invoked.
For years, EPA has been holding back data from studies they use to quantify the “benefits” from their new regulations. They claim the data is “proprietary” and therefore cannot be released. This is used to support their arguments that all of their new regulations that drive up the cost of electricity are really really good for you and actually save you money. Hogwash! I want to see the data if they are taking money out of my pocket.