Rep. Joe Barton, 'anti-climate-change fundamentalist'

by Plutonium Page

Rep. Joe Barton (R-TX) doesn't have much in his background that qualifies him as a critic on climate science studies... not unless you count the fact that he has received substantial donations from the global warming industry oil and natural gas industry.

So, Rep. Barton's in the pocket of the energy lobby, and you have to wonder if that plays any part in his recent participation in the GOP war on science:

In what observers are calling an unprecedented request, a member of the U.S. Congress has asked prominent researchers for all the raw data underpinning an influential historical study that shows that the earth’s climate has been warming dramatically since 1900.

In a letter dated June 23 and sent to three scientists, Rep. Joe Barton (R-TX) charges that other researchers have found methodological flaws and data errors in their study, which has become known as the hockey-stick paper. Barton also asserts that the researchers have failed to share their raw data and the computer code used in the analysis.

However, scientists familiar with the research say that the hockey-stick paper has already stood up to intense scientific scrutiny and that the raw data are already available. They say that the request is simply politics and is meant to intimidate climate scientists from further linking global warming to human activity.

This makes me want to scream. Who the hell does this asshat think he is? Oh yeah. He's a Republican congressman. Never mind, my mistake. Sorry about that.

Anyway, look below the fold for more on hockey sticks, Barton, and blatant intimidation tactics.

So what's this "hockey stick" paper?

Well, it takes data from a variety of sources (tree rings, ice core composition, etc.) and puts it all together to show increasing temperatures. In other words, they generated the following plot, which, if you use your imagination, looks like a hockey stick (click image to enlarge):

(If you have access to the journal Nature, the reference is Nature 1998, 329, 779–787.)

What do I mean by the "GOP war on science"?

Well, I've written quite a bit about that, but the article sums it up in one paragraph:

Barton’s requests come as a growing number of scientists charge that President Bush has been attempting to make the science on global warming appear uncertain. Rick Piltz, a government employee in the U.S. Climate Change Science Program, recently resigned because White House officials were making excessive changes to the program’s reports.

Barton's intimidation tactics letters

He wants it all, and he wants it now:

In letters to Michael Mann, an assistant professor with the department of environmental sciences at the University of Virginia, and two of his colleagues, Barton wrote: “Provide the location of all data archives relating to each published study for which you were an author or coauthor.” Barton also asked for curricula vitae, lists of all sources of financial support for research, and the computer code used to generate the hockey-stick analysis.

The U.S. National Science Foundation (NSF) also received a letter from Barton requesting a list of “all grants and all other funding given for research in the area of climate.” The letter also asks for details of any violations concerning the sharing of information and enjoins NSF to describe “in detail how your agency has supported or disseminated the information in the Mann et al. studies.

According to scientists who have read the letters, the letters sound as if Barton doesn't have an actual climate scientist advising him. And the best quote from the article is the one I've highlighted in bold:

“What a pain,” says Frank von Hippel, a professor of public and international affairs at Princeton University and a former assistant director in the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy. “It looks like the work of these anti-climate-change fundamentalists,” he added. “These guys are really feeling their oats.”

I'm not one of those "framing" people, but damn, if "anti-climate-change fundamentalists" isn't a great way to start talking about this idiots, I don't know what is.

All of the scientists intend to respond to the requests, although Mann points out that all of his data are available on the internets. But that would be too easy for Barton.

Here's the conclusion to the article. Read it, and you'll see why all of this anti-science stuff perpertrated by the GOP really pisses me off:

In June of this year, the presidents of 11 national academies of science signed a statement that climate change is real. “Action taken now to reduce significantly the buildup of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere will lessen the magnitude and rate of climate change,” wrote the presidents. Signatories included scientific leaders from the U.S., U.K., China, India, and Russia.

This statement was largely ignored by major media outlets in the U.S.

Yes, it's real. Either that, or all of those damned presidents of those national academies are a bunch of delusional idiots.

Nope, that would be the President of the United States, and all of his oil-loving constituents and their GOP CongressCreatures.

Comments

[HHN mimi]

while we are on the subject of global warming,CO2 etc.,has anyone ever figured out how many thousands of tons of CO2 Coca Cola,Pepsi and the rest of the soft drink Industries are dumping into the Environment annually, carbonizing their Products??

[Jerry]

It's nice to see that the whole government is not in agreement with Barton:

"Late last week, Sherwood L. Boehlert, a New York Republican and chairman of the House Science Committee, sent a letter to Mr. Barton expressing "strenuous objections to what I see as the misguided and illegitimate investigation you have launched." The investigation, writes Mr. Boehlert, "breaks with precedent and raises the specter of politicians opening investigations against any scientist who reaches a conclusion that makes the political elite uncomfortable...My primary concern about your investigation is that its purpose seems to be to intimidate scientists rather than to learn from them, and to substitute Congressional political review for scientific peer review," wrote Mr. Boehlert. "That would be pernicious." (Chronicle of Higher Education, 07/18/05)

It seems to me that it is critical that such moderate actions from the party in power get as much press as the extreme ones.