Scientists hold their ground against Rep. Smith's NOAA subpoena
Rep. Lamar Smith (R) of Texas, Chairman of the House Science, Space, and Technology Committee, is adamant that the聽National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) should turn over internal communications relating to a June climate-change study.
In July, Rep. Smith first questioned the NOAA study, in the prestigious peer-reviewed journal Science, which found that a "pause" in global warming found in a previous study never existed 鈥� the Earth continues to warm because of human activity.
A prominent climate change denier, Smith sent a subpoena to NOAA on Oct. 13 demanding that internal communications between the study's authors be turned over to his committee for examination.
Arguing she has never engaged with a 鈥減olitically correct agenda,鈥� NOAA Administrator Kathryn Sullivan refuses to answer the congressman鈥檚 subpoena. 鈥淚 have not or the science or coerce the scientists who work for me,鈥� Dr. Sullivan wrote in a letter to Smith, Friday.
Sullivan鈥檚 stance against Smith has garnered support from Commerce Secretary Penny Pritzker, the committee鈥檚 ranking Democrat Rep. Eddie Johnson and many in the scientific community.
鈥淭here鈥檚 been a united front because many, if not most, scientists see this as an attack on the science process and it has a real chilling effect on science more broadly,鈥� Andrew Rosenberg, Director of the Center for Science and Democracy with the Union of Concerned Scientists, tells 海角大神 in a phone interview.聽
鈥淐hairman Smith is sending a message to young scientists that you shouldn鈥檛 work on controversial issues, because if someone doesn鈥檛 like your results 鈥� beware. You will have to hire lawyers and they鈥檒l go after you with the weight of a congressional committee subpoena.鈥澛�
Rep. Smith鈥檚 office did not respond immediately to a request for comment. 聽
鈥淭he American when NOAA alters data to get the politically correct results they want and then refuses to reveal how those decisions were made,鈥� Smith said in a statement last month. But NOAA says they have given the congressman all relevant information pertaining to the study.
鈥淚n six separate, and increasingly aggressive, letters, the only thing you accused NOAA of doing is 鈥� i.e., doing their jobs,鈥� Rep. Johnson wrote to Smith in a Nov. 19 letter.
Rep. Johnson also notes that Smith鈥檚 "whistleblowers" don鈥檛 actually refute the scientific findings that support climate change 鈥� they only suggest the study was "rushed."
"His argument is about going after communications between scientists," Rosenberg tells The Monitor. "He鈥檚 looking for sound-bites, but that鈥檚 not how science works."听
But the scientific community doesn鈥檛 show any signs of backing down.
"This paper went through as rigorous a review as it could have received," Ginger Pinholster, chief of communications fro the American Association for the Advancement of Science, which publishes the journal Science, told the Washington Post. "Any suggestion that the review was 'rushed' ."听
"No one is saying he shouldn鈥檛 speak his beliefs," says Rosenberg "but he can鈥檛 change the science around to support his view."
