In it I discuss Climategate, The Hockey Stick, Grijalva, 538, IPCC, Mann's years of attacks on me and others & the differences between fraud as a catch-all colloquialism and the formal definition of research misconduct in science . . .
An excerpt . . .
I'm on record defending Mann against inquiries by Congress and Commonwealth of Virginia
I'm also on record about the ridiculousness of his various lawsuits -- and scientists going to the courts in general
Pennsylvania state climate assessment just published
Relies centrally on RCP8.5 as BAU
Prepared by yet another "climate consultancy" that trades in RCP8.5 analyses penncapital-star.com/energy-environ…
The PA report also confuses growth in wealth with climate trends, using the widely misused "billion dollar disaster" metric of @NOAA
I have no idea how much public money across the US is being spend on "climate consultants" to produce dodgy reports based on RCP8.5 and billion$ disasters, but it has to be an awful lot ... It's like spending public health money on homeopathy instead of vaccines
“A new 46-person federal scientific integrity task force with members from more than two dozen government agencies will meet for the first time on Friday. Its mission is to look back through 2009 for areas where partisanship interfered with...” apnews.com/article/donald…
The idea presented in this piece that the politicization of science by presidents started with Ronald Reagan is laughable
Here is an Eisenhower anecdote from our science advisors project
The politicization of science in the White House has deep roots
President Biden’s OSTP political appointees just reassigned the climate scientist leading the US National Climate Assessment in order to present a “less nuanced” view of climate change
Back in 2001 I led a NASA workshop on the risks and benefits of (a) a controlled re-entry of the TRMM (precipitation measurement) satellite vs (b) extending the mission, collecting more data and having the satellite re-enter in uncontrolled fashion sciencepolicy.colorado.edu/about_us/meet_…
At our workshop NASA estimated risk of injury of uncontrolled re-entry to be ~2 in 10,000 (0.021%) w/ significant uncertainties
This was based on a 35 deg orbital inclination, estimates of the debris field and estimated 2004 global population densities