‘Scaremongering’: Scientists Pan Obama Climate Report: ‘This is not a work of science but an embarrassing episode for the authors and NOAA’…’Misrepresents the science’

Updated: July 8, 2009

Below is a small sampling of first reactions to the President Obama’s new global warming report. (See: Obama issues global warming report — ‘Detailed picture of the worst case scenarios’ — ‘Poised for its most forceful confrontation with American public’ )

Sampling of Scientific Reactions to report:

Meteorologist: ‘This is not a work of science but an embarrassing episode for the authors and NOAA’ – June 16, 2009
By Meteorologist Joe D’Aleo, the first Director of Meteorology at The Weather Channel and former chairman of the American Meteorological Society’s (AMS) Committee on Weather Analysis and Forecasting. D’Aleo publishes www.IceCap.US

Excerpt: The report issued was the Hollywood supported NOAA CCSP report which after two rounds of comments by many scientists citing peer review reasons to change, largely ignored the comments and delivered a document even more alarmist than the UN IPCC. It starts out DAY ONE being wrong on many of its claims but goes much further to rely on climate models for 2050 and 2100 to make even more dire prognoses. This is not a work of science but an embarrassing episode for the authors and NOAA. They gave the administration the cover to push the unwise cap-and-tax agenda. For D’Aleo’s complete reaction, go here.

U.S. Government Scientist: ‘I disagree strongly with the hurricane-related conclusions of this report!’ – June 16, 2009
Excerpt: U.S Government Atmospheric Scientist Stanley B. Goldenberg of the Hurricane Research Division of NOAA. Goldenberg is expressing his personal views on the report, not those of any organization. Goldenberg: I saw the news story on this and looked up the report. I have a pretty good grasp of the hurricane and AGW issues. I have skimmed over the hurricane findings (by the way — I didn’t notice a single recognized hurricane climate expert in the list of authors) and they definitely ignore a large body of the published hurricane research. There are a number of hurricane climate experts (including myself) that would disagree strongly with the hurricane-related conclusions of this report! […] I can only imagine how slanted the other portions of the report might be as well. (For Full Goldenberg reaction, go here:

Prof. Pielke Jr.: Report ‘misrepresents the science’ — ‘ignores relevant work in peer-reviewed literature’ – June 16, 2009
By Roger Pielke Jr., professor of environmental studies at the Center for Science and Technology Policy Research at the