Energy Dept. report lacks merit, say 85 scientists Climate report is a sham
On Tuesday, more than 85 leading climate scientists said that the recent climate assessment of the Trump Energy Department used to justify a relaxation of federal greenhouse gas regulations does not meet standards of scientific integrity.
The group, led by professors Andrew Dessler of Texas A&M University (TX A&M) and Robert Kopp of Rutgers University (Rutgers University), submitted a review of more than 400 pages of the assessment by five scientists selected by Energy Secretary Chris Wright, who hold a contrary view to mainstream climate science, in time for the deadline of Sept. 2, for public comments.
The report of Wright's Climate Working Group, they said, "fails adequately to represent current scientific understanding on climate change."
They wrote that "no attempt appears to be made to balance the views represented on the [Climate Working Group] ; rather, this is a group which appears to have personally been recruited by the Secretary to Energy to promote a particular point of view favored by DOE Leadership,"
Wright, who released the report in July, said that he believed climate change was real but thought it necessary to have a public debate on the topic.
He said, "I have carefully read the report and I think it accurately represents the current state of climate research today." "Yet, many readers will be surprised by the report's conclusions--which are different in important ways from mainstream narrative. This is a sign that the public discourse has strayed from science.
The group of 85 researchers said that the Energy Department relied on too much debunked research. They also claimed the department misinterpreted some research and did not conduct a peer review process to ensure its credibility.
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and U.S. National Climate Assessment, on the other hand, have thousands of authors or contributors. They also undergo a time-consuming and independent review. These reports show that the climate is changing and its impacts are felt around the world.
Andra Garner is a climate scientist that participated in the review. She said, "The report gives more weight to the old views of individuals than the consensus among scientists." The report was written to support a particular policy decision, and not as an objective synthesis of climate research.
The Energy Department has received more than 2,000 comments about the report by Monday. This is well ahead of the deadline of Tuesday. (Reporting and Editing by Franklin Paul, Valerie Volcovici)
(source: Reuters)
