posted on www.SustainabiliTank.info
February 17, 2006,
by Pincas Jawetz
(PJ@SustainabiliTank.info)

A statement recognizing the fact that some US Government Scientists
did previously recognize a link between the hurricanes - i.e. Katrina
and Rita (what SustainabiliTank called KatRita - see Search mechanism)
and Global Warming and that they were deflected by the White House from
saying so.

The Wall Street Journal of February 16, 2006, reports that: “Amid a
growing outcry from climate researchers in its own ranks, the National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration backed away from a statement it
released after last year’s powerful hurricane season that discounted
any link to global warming.” The Wall Street Journal brings to our
attention that a corrected statement, which says some NOAA researchers
disagree with above view, was posted to NOAA’s Web site February 15,
2006.

This article, coming from the bastion of World capitalism, is not
just
an accusation of the White House - it is a clear recognition that the
White House is manipulating scientific news in order to serve some
higher values as it seems fit. The fact that the news broke into the
WSJ, says to me that the business comunity starts finally to realize
that being duped by the White House is indeed not the best thing for
business and the economy at large - after all - the world did not start
with the oil industry and we do not want to see it go down with the oil
industry.

The change is part of a high-stakes fight over the issue of global
warming, and what some scientists complain is a widening gap between
what their research shows and White House climate policy.

Three NOAA scientists, speaking in interviews, said the agency has
begun keeping closer tabs on their comments to journalists. One of them
also said the agency has declined to let him take part in interviews on
controversial topics.

Such charges have been publicly leveled by scientists outside the
agency since December. They gained force last week when James Hansen, a
climate researcher at NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies, again
accused NOAA of censoring scientific communication. Dr. Hansen has said
NASA public-affairs officials had tried to discourage him from
presenting his views that human activities could lead to severe global
warming. His words were quoted all over the world and White House
credibility got lower and lower marks.

Late Tuesday, NOAA administrator Conrad C. Lautenbacher Jr., sent an
email to agency staff saying that he encourages “scientists to speak
freely and openly” and rejected charges that NOAA scientists have been
discouraged from commenting on whether human-caused global warming is
influencing hurricanes.

In the wake of Dr. Hansen’s comments, some NOAA scientists say they
are now speaking out - which means they could not speak out earlier.

Pieter Tans, a researcher who studies carbon dioxide at NOAA’s Earth
System Research Laboratory in Boulder, Colo., says public-affairs
“minders” now sit in on more interviews, something that didn’t happen
before. He said he sees it as an attempt to control comments about the
dangers of climate change. Now, please this is in the United States of
America at a time it admonishes other regimes for their lack of candor.
George Orwell - where are you?

A ruckus erupted after the November issue of the agency’s magazine
said there was a “consensus” among NOAA hurricane experts that
increases in hurricane activity were primarily the result of natural
factors — even though within NOAA some believed man-made warming was a
key cause. So, what is the White House “concensus” on this?

Kerry Emanuel, a climate researcher at the Massachusetts Institute of
Technology, said he found the statement problematic because it appeared
to represent an official NOAA position, and might discourage agency
scientists from contradicting it.
Dr. Emanuel, who believes global warming is making hurricanes worse,
was among the first to publicly criticize NOAA’s policy
at a major meeting in December, where he termed it “censorship.”

Scott Smullen, NOAA’s deputy director of public affairs, said the
article was never meant to be an official position, and added that the
use of the word “consensus” was a mistake made by one of his staff
members. “There is no consensus,” Mr. Smullen said.

“Thomas Knutson, a research meteorologist with the agency’s
Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory in Princeton, N.J., said he
believes his views have been censored by the NOAA public-affairs office
because of his view that global warming could be
making hurricanes worse. Last October the public-affairs office said
no to a scheduled interview with CNBC television, he said.”

Is this muzzling science to fit the White House policy of “see not,
hear not, lead not” - when it comes to Global Warming?

“NOAA public affairs called and asked what I would say to certain
questions, like is there a trend in Atlantic hurricanes,” Dr. Knutson
said. “I said I thought there was a possibility of a trend emerging
that tropical hurricanes were becoming more intense. They turned down
that interview.”

Mr. Smullen says he wasn’t aware of that particular case, but notes
that Dr. Knutson gives dozens of interviews a year, and that interview
requests can be turned down for numerous reasons.

On another occasion, Dr. Knutson said he had been invited around the
time of Hurricane Katrina to appear on a television show with Ron
Reagan, the son of former President Reagan who is co-host of a show on
MSNBC. But shortly before he was to appear, he got a voice mail from a
person in public affairs. “He said, ‘The White House turned it down,’ “
Dr. Knutson said.

A clear case of a White House telling a scientist what to think!

White House officials said they weren’t immediately aware of any
attempt on their part to block Dr. Knutson’s interview, but added they
don’t censor government scientists. They added NOAA researchers gave
numerous interviews during the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. “Dr. Tom
Knutson took part in those interviews and is a leading climate modeler
and well respected in the scientific community,” said White House
spokeswoman Michele St. Martin.

NOAA officials say the White House doesn’t rule on their media
requests. They also say they weren’t immediately aware of the Ron
Reagan matter, but add they usually decline media requests when it
appears they are frivolous. “If someone were to call in and it is in
the nature of a food fight, we decline that,” said Jordan St. John,
director of NOAA’s public affairs. “We are a serious science agency.”

What about science only if it does not interfere with the oil
industry? Is this what someone close to the White House wants? Does
that remind us of other energy dealings by White House visitors?

For further information from Wall Street writers, please contact:
Antonio Regalado at  antonio.regalado at wsj.com or Jim Carlton at
 jim.carlton at wsj.com