Is NASA Scientist James Hansen Involved in a Cover Up?

There is some buzz in the media that NASA tried to keep quite the recent changes to the US historical temperature record. There is nothing like a good conspiracy theory to get the keyboards clicking. The change in historical temperature data due to a GISS error in the years 2000 to 2006 was allegedly kept quite by GISS head James Hansen. Based on the email posted on Dr. Hansen's Columbia University page, information on the error was released to the press.

It was not released in a manner that should be consistent with NASA policy. Dr. Hansen's email was sent to a select few journalists with only Andy Revkin of the New York Times mentioned by name. The initial release was not through normal GISS channels, unless Dr. Hansen's Columbia University web page is the normal place for GISS press releases.

Oddly, the email listed on Dr. Hansen's site references an email that is not on the site. That email referenced in my previous article is the second email concerning the error in historical data. The first email referenced, the original notification to the press, is difficult to find.

Andy Revkin, the reporter for the New York Times, mentioned in the email as being a recipient of the first email notification, is fishing off Costa Rica. When I contacted Mr. Revkin via email, he referred me to the Columbia University site where the email was posted. However, the original email is not posted, only the second follow up email where Dr. Hansen apologizes for the poor choice of wording in the original.

Dr. Hansen's email "scandal" is more humorous than detrimental as is the response to the error by Gavin Schmidt in the realclimate.org blog. Dr. Schmidt detailed the changes, minimizing the impact of the error on the global temperature averages. While realclimate.org is an informative website it does not seem an appropriate GISS location for press releases. Then perhaps "minor" corrections are not worthy of an official press release.

The "minor" error is viewed as less than minor by many that follow the global warming subject closely. Anthony Watts author of sitesurvey.org initiated a survey of the United States Historical Climate Network (USHCN) to determine how well maintained the weather stations are maintained. His survey has shown that not all sites are properly located or maintained, indicating that some additional error in the temperature averages may be found.

The site survey effort is gradually being adopted by others around the world. With the US data considered one of the most accurate, the possibility that there will be corrections in the global data is likely. It is impossible to determine what impact a global survey of weather stations will have on the global temperature trend.

While I am not a climate expert by any means, my limited background in engineering tells me there is plenty of room for additional errors given the complexity of the subject. The comment that the science is settled by climatetologists associated with the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is disconcerting.

Given the importance of the issue, it would be nice for both sides to step back and regroup in a more scientific and professional manner. Name calling, even when delightfully eloquent, is still name calling. Pre-releasing information to select journalists is less than professional. You can never know whose teapot dome holds the tempest.

To view the second email and Steve McIntyre's response visit "Watts up with this?" The GISS crew's discussion is available on realclimate. Dr. Hansen's Columbia website.