NASA Stonewalling Stokes Fears of 'U.S. Climategate'

nasa_logo1From NewsMax

By: David A. Patten — Climategate may be just the tip of the global-warming iceberg according to the Washington, D.C.-based Competitive Enterprise Institute, which says the next weather-science scandal may erupt right here in the United States.

For nearly three years CEI, a free-market, public-interest organization, has pursued a series of Freedom of Information Act Requests intended to force NASA’s climate-science division to hand over e-mails it says could reflect the same sort of pro-warming bias seen in the recent e-mails from the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) of East Anglia University.

One reason NASA’s unresponsiveness is drawing attention: For years, the CRU stonewalled a request filed through the British information-act process, before information was “hacked” and posted on the Internet in November.

“They have resisted and haven’t wanted to turn anything over,” CEI Energy and Global Warming Policy Director Myron Ebell says of NASA. “. . . So this looks like climategate all over again to us.”

CEI senior fellow Chris Horner, author of Red Hot Lies: How Global Warming Alarmists Use Threats, Fraud, and Deception to Keep You Misinformed, has led the fight for the information.

Horner is requesting internal e-mails and other information from NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS).

That institute, directed by controversial global-warming advocate James Hansen, has played an influential role in stoking concern that massive climate changes endanger the planet.

Horner tells Newsmax that he fully expects the GISS data will echo the U.K.-based CRU e-mails.

“The information is, [based on] all indications from what we can tell from available data and past manipulations and modifications of their claims, likely to be damning on a scale similar to the CRU ‘climategate’ documents, computer code, and annotations,” Horner states.

Before Horner and CEI can prove that cooking the climate books is a transatlantic phenomenon, they have to get their hands on the e-mails. And that apparently won’t be easy.

Read the rest of the story.

19 Responses to NASA Stonewalling Stokes Fears of 'U.S. Climategate'

  1. Rob N. Hood December 14, 2009 at 4:45 pm #

    So some if the info they wanted was their emails? I wouldn’t willing give anyone my emails either. Now if it was actual research data for actual peer review I would think that was kosher. If indeed this is a “hoax” which I am convinced it cannot be (logically), then I think the truth of that kind of massive dishonesty will reveal itself in a relatively short period of time. If it does not then that means the climate change data is scientifically valid (meaning there is still some room for error, as it always is). That of course will not stop the Denier Movement, nor any other right-wing-nut cause.

    Sorry too for jumping the gun for good news for ya’ll. Update from Copenhagen (the den of the evil-Liberals):

    “We’re going back,” Pa Ousman Jarju from the delegation of Gambia, told Reuters after a meeting of the African group.
    The protest held up a session due to start at 1030 GMT, just four days before a summit of 110 leaders aims to agree a U.N. pact to combat global warming that could bring more heatwaves, floods and rising sea levels.

    He said that the Danish hosts gave assurances that there would be more focus on African nations’ demands for an extension of the Kyoto Protocol, the existing pact for curbing emissions of greenhouse gases.

  2. paul wenum December 14, 2009 at 11:22 pm #

    “Room for error”. Humm, that’s interesting. What does that mean in the scientific community? I thought your “Idle” Albert Gore said the it was irrefutable!!! No more discussion. “Room for Error?” interesting comment. I like that!

  3. Adam Ricker December 15, 2009 at 2:45 am #

    “Rob N. Hood”? Really? And you liberals are always complaining when we call you socialists… You’ve got to be kidding.

    Anyway, speak English much?

    “Now if it was actual research data for peer review I would think that was kosher.” Wait a minute. Isn’t peer review one of the major sticking points in the Climategate scandal? Specifically, the fact that they didn’t want any, because they knew their numbers wouldn’t hold up to legitimate peer review?

    Let me explain something to you, Mr “room for error, [even if the slightest error could cost trillions of wasted dollars]”. Global Warming is what is commonly referred to as a “theory”. According to the formal scientific method, in order that a theory may be proven correct, a valid scientific experiment must be conducted in which all possible variables must be controlled or segregated. In this experiment (in which data spanning about 4 billion years must be included), there are infinite variables. INFINITE. Any idea what that means? It means that a valid scientific experiment, in any rational understanding of the term, is IMPOSSIBLE. These frauds are simply grasping at straws, pulling numbers out of the “Thin September air”.

    What I’m saying, my mentally challenged friend, is that this has already been proven to be bogus science. A hoax. A fraud. A SCAM. Lots of very greedy, powerful people are getting rich because they’ve managed to dupe hundreds of millions of useful idiots like yourself.

    But don’t be sad or ashamed. Don’t waste your time feeling sorry for yourself because you’ve been had. And stop kidding yourself that you’re right only because you’re afraid to admit that you’re just not smart enough to figure it out for yourself.

    There is a solution to your anger, self-hatred and guilt. It’s very simple. Come over to our side…

    The Right Side.

  4. Rob N. Hood December 15, 2009 at 9:55 am #

    Glad you like it. As you already know, in science there’s always “room for error.” You know what that means, you’re just playin’ me. Both room for error and a scientific statement of Theory, which is what Climate Change and all other science is based on, are two separate things, but are present simultaneously. That is, at least, Science as we humans know it. What Gore said was more his opinion, and he should have pharased it that way, or clarified the theory aspect. Focusing on semantics and what Gore said or did not say should not be the focus here. He is one very small aspect of this issue. He has unfortunately (his own fault this) turned out to be a very nice scape-goat for the denier movement. A very good distraction. And I think less of him for it, although I still think his heart was in the right place.

  5. Rob N. Hood December 15, 2009 at 12:14 pm #

    Go to – if you would like to watch a video that effectively, I think, debunks the denier claims re: the stolen emails. Pretty interesting.

    • Adam Ricker December 15, 2009 at 12:57 pm #

      You’re kidding, right?

      There is infinitely more evidence contradicting this scam than there is supporting it, and if you weren’t so emotionally tied to being right, you would see it. I’m not alone on this; there are tens of thousands of scientists who question the “evidence” itself, let alone the overreaching conclusions to which the “evidence” has led the political hacks in labcoats at East Anglia and countless other liberal thinktanks that pose as learning institutions.

      These “scientists” jump straight from A to Z, without hitting a damn thing in between. If you tweak just a few base numbers within their range of “room for error”, then extrapolate the data the way they have (without accounting for the infinity of variables that they’ve conveniently overlooked), and POOF! The whole thing goes up in smoke. Another outfit run by liberal hacks. I’ve done my homework, friend- have you? This debate is not over. Hell, it’s not even about what you say it’s about. It’s about world government, it’s about empowering socialist tyrants, and it’s about a multi-trillion dollar rape of capitalism in the form of total control of the worldwide energy industry. And the energy industry is only where it starts. If you don’t believe me now, that’s just fine. But you’re not doing yourself any favors thinking you’ve got it all figured out just because you’ve read a few articles on some kooky left-wing radical blogs posing as objective media outlets.

      You’ll see. If this abuse of science doesn’t stop soon, God help us, you’ll see.

  6. Rob N. Hood December 15, 2009 at 2:16 pm #

    Uh, you didn’t watch the video on the Real News did you? Guess not. Oh well. And “friend,” the debate is not over. Now you sound just like someone Neil and Paul really hate… I think Al Gore is his name. Didn’t he proclaim the same thing and received loads and loads of hatred from you guys for it? You are the one blinded by bias my “friend.”

    • Adam Ricker December 16, 2009 at 12:59 pm #

      What the hell are you talking about? You didn’t even read my post, did you? The debate is NOT OVER, is what I said; that is exactly the OPPOSITE of what Chicken Little (Al Gore, in case the reference to a children’s story is over your head) said. I’m starting to think you’re just not smart enough to keep up with the discussion.

      You’re right about one thing: I didn’t watch the video. I’ve watched countless hours of interviews arguing both sides, and I’ve heard enough. You idiots keep saying the same thing over and over and over and over and at least half of what you people say has already been scientifically proven to be full of lies, half-truths and fudged data, so why should I watch yet another video of some global warming evangelist telling me to just have faith? is a shamelessly liberal blog which claims to be an objective news source, member-funded by your ilk, i.e., people who like to read stories that simply confirm for them exactly what they already think.

      And since when does the need for actual proof constitute bias? What is it about you people that causes you to just open your mouths before consulting your brains? I guess I have no one to blame for my frustration but myself; I know better than to engage a mental midget in discussion, but I have more faith in people than I probably should. It’s unfortunate that I allow lemmings like you to make me more cynical every day… I think it’s about time I stopped.

  7. Paul Wenum December 15, 2009 at 9:14 pm #

    Rob, there is no hate for Al Gore. Just simply disdain for what he has pushed down the unwitting throats on ignorant people that have been sucked into his BS. He is not a person of science and is simply in it for the dollar. To this day, Gore will never debate anyone with a difference of opinion, that is, unless they agree. I agree with Mr. Rickers comments posted. When, just when will we all wake up? You included.

  8. Rob N. Hood December 17, 2009 at 9:32 am #

    Paul, you may not hate him, but others obviously do- so that is a weak statement to make. And Adam- you are the one who sounds like he’s full of hate. Anyway, you really should watch that video- really, it is very good (it examines the full emails that are in dispute). You don’t have to let it change your mind or anything crazy like that, but refusing to do that says something about you too. Your condesending attitude is quite elitist actually. I am guilty of it too- but to pretend you and your fellow deniers aren’t elitist in your own way is hilarious, i.e. you think everyone else is, and that you and others like you are just regular home-boys who don’t get fooled by fancy Liberal elitists. I at least do not claim to know anything for sure. And my simple, very simple, explanation of the scientific method was not meant to be a dictionary definition obviously, I was just making a point- and I stand by my definition (it was re: theory which all valid scientists admit is NOT exact, it never is and never was- but MANY things in the past 100 years have been proven “correct” based upon “theories”). Libertarians are elitist too, in their way. Any group that professes to know “the truth” and want only their way, with no compromise or no real debate, or no real democracy- is elitist. I didn’t say anything radical or extreme either. And to answer one of your initial questions: Yes, I do speak English much.

  9. paul wenum December 17, 2009 at 8:51 pm #

    “Any group that professes to know “the truth” and want their only their way, with no compromise or “no real debate,” or no real Democracy – is elitist.” Your comments, not mine. You have just defined Al Gore, George Soros, et al. Why do you think the average American has requested a DEBATE by both parties??? Gore claims that it is over. No debate. What debate??? There has never been a debate by your Elitists!!!!! They are afraid of the “TRUTH.”!!! Wizard of Oz all over again. When will they finally pull the curtain back to finally show these frauds for what they are??? Think about it.

  10. Rob N. Hood December 19, 2009 at 4:43 pm #

    I have, yes, placed your reviled Mr. Gore in that category. Keep up, Paul. But is he one of the most powerful of the elites? No. And the result of Copenhagen proves it. In fact I predicted the shambles that has occurred, and it deflates your paranoid fanatasy about a Left-wing climate police take-over. But I am confident that you people will continue your crusade and extremist beliefs.

  11. paul wenum December 20, 2009 at 1:10 am #

    Rob, I’m devoting my time to other issues. I may meet you there someday.

  12. Rob N. Hood December 20, 2009 at 5:26 pm #

    Oh, and Paul, in case you missed it- you got your DEBATE in Copenhagen. IN fact, it was a very large and expensive one. You should be happy and relieved on several levels. Go ahead and tell me I was right about some things…. I’m waiting…

  13. paul wenum December 21, 2009 at 12:26 am #

    The game has just begun. Trust me the Chavez’s of the world will continue to attempt to prevail. It will be a long year up and until November 2010! Only then, will we find what America really stands for. Right, or wrong. I trust that the America people with make the right choices/decisions. That said, who am I? I’m only one person, one vote, one value. Again, Have a “Merry Christmas!” my friend.

  14. Rob N. Hood December 25, 2009 at 6:05 pm #

    The Chavez’s of the world. I know of only one of them. The right-wing dictatorships out-number any left-wing type of government by a long shot. You sure like to worry about the impossible and/or the very unlikely don’t you? It’s like worrying about a hurricane in Minnesota. If it wasn’t so disturbing that there are people who think the way you do it would be funny.

  15. paul wenum December 26, 2009 at 1:07 am #

    It’s coming my friend. Be prepared.

    • Rob N. Hood January 4, 2010 at 3:51 pm #

      A fascist take-over you mean? It’s already happened. Most people are just to dense to notice. Maybe what you are referring to is the next clamp-down, the gradual increase of the power of the fascist-state. Hmmm?

  16. paul wenum December 27, 2009 at 11:30 pm #

    Rob, I learned along time ago. Always prepare for the worst and then prepare going forward thereafter.

A project of Minnesota Majority, hosted and maintained by Minnesotans for Global Warming.