,
10 tweets,
3 min read
Read on Twitter
NEW WITH EXCLUSIVE INTERNAL DOCUMENTS. The White House tried to stop a State Department senior intelligence analyst from discussing climate science in congressional testimony this week, internal emails and documents show. nytimes.com/2019/06/08/cli…
The White House office of leg affairs tried to delete five pages of science from testimony to the House intel committee on the links between climate and national security. Their objections? Read on with me from the original document: int.nyt.com/data/documenth…
"Cut sections of the testimony that don't directly address the hearing topics," WHLA wrote. This was basic, fundamental climate science - the foundational information underlying intelligence analysis. Like the fact that the past 5 years have been the hottest 5.
And then we get to the comments from the National Security Council, which two sources told me came from Dr. William Happer. Mr. Happer is trying to launch a federal panel to question establish climate science.
“This is not objective testimony at all,” one NSC comment read. “It includes lots of climate alarm propaganda that is not science at all. I am embarrassed to have this go out on behalf of the executive branch of the Federal Government.”
The comments bring in debunked theories, like that the medieval warming period disproves the influence of man-made greenhouse gas pollution. "No there is nothing exceptional about current climate."
Then there was this comment from the NSC in response to an assertion in the testimony that it draws from peer-reviewed and literature by top US government scientists. 
In another place the NSC contends the projected warming is moderate - and "would be an overall benefit."
Meanwhile, some anger over the phrase "tipping point' -- and animus toward @algore
@algore There's so much here I can't possibly get into all of these comments. "Junk Science!" "Nonsense!" "Climate Alarm Propaganda!" Read along here to see how the White House NSC views the peer-reviewed, established scientific consensus on climate change. int.nyt.com/data/documenth…
