RealClimate � Consensus as the New Heresy
Seeded by Spacegoat to Newsvine.com
Jan 4, 2007
Comments posted at Newsvine.com
I think the author makes a very good point here. If you want the real
story, have an open mind and go to the proper source for your
Thu Jan 4, 2007 8:24 PM CST
I've posted at RealClimate since it's beginning.
For the most part, I think RC scientists talk to people they know
through their own research. Most of the scientists at RC avoid
commenting on suggestions or points of concern made by scientists whom
they haven't met at their coast to coast conference meetings (which I
despise) and through their peer review sub-groups.
Studies by National Weather Service meteorologists and hydrologists
get reviewed and approved by NWS Regional Scientific Services to be
viewed as "peer reviewed".
While I was a NWS hydrologist in 2003, I did a study on earlier
snowmelt runoff and increasing dewpoint temperatures in the Upper
Midwest. I did not get NWS Regional approval even though I submitted
my work in plenty of time for a NWS review. NWS simply chose not to
act (didn't approve or disapprove) on my paper.
Thus I gave my poster presentation and paper at the conference, which
was at the Nugget Casino near Reno, NV in Oct 2003, without having had
my paper and results approved by NWS Central Region.
In 2004 and 2005 I wrote to the Vice Admiral, NOAA director,
explaining my concerns about climate change and the need to consider
hydrologic change in modeling for snowmelt runoff, floods and low
water conditions. I explained to the Vice Admiral the my 2003 study
and snowmelt runoff and increasing dewpoints demonstrated a need to
account for hydrologic changes due to climate changes in modeling
runoff in predicting floods and low water. The Vice Admiral's reply
was that I needed to go through proper channels and get peer review to
have my study taken seriously.
I reminded the Vice Admiral that I had tried that. H didn't
acknowledge my attempt to do that. Instead, mere indicated that I
needed abide by my chain of command in NWS and NOAA.
I issued a press release on 30 Oct 2003 to give my work some
visibility and to express my concerns about global warming.
Afterwords, I was told by my supervisor to remove all reference to
myself as a NWS Senior Hydrologist.
In 2004 I was issued a suspension for doing the press release.
In 2005 I was removed from federal civil service, after having served
29 years and 5 months - which was just 7 months short of the time
needed for me an my family to qualify for retirement benefits.
During my career, I issued flood predictions with NWS for the Red
River in 1979, central Michigan in 1986, the Midwest in the great
summer flood of 1993, the Red River (Grand Forks) flood in 1997,
Devils Lake in ND, the Upper Mississippi River basin in 2001 and the
Illinois River basin in 2002, 2004 and 2005. My career work in
research, hydrologic procedures development and operation river
forecast was always considered to be outstanding, commendable or fully
successful. My behavior was outspoken when I believed that the public
was being wrongly served by government, but my language and physical
expressions dealing with the sensitivity of the subject of climate
change were professional in all manners.
Earlier in the Year Snowmelt Runoff and Increasing Dewpoints for
Rivers in Minnesota, Wisconsin and North Dakota
Patrick J. Neuman, Snow Hydrologist
September 11, 2003
U.S. Newswire Press Release
Senior Scientist: Rapid Global Warming is Happening Now
10/30/03 8:28:00 AM
- Fri Jan 5, 2007 7:29 AM CST
That sucks man. I'm not going to call it global warming just yet, but
anyone from Minnesota knows that winters have been warmer and dryer
(as in precipitation) the last 4 years or so. Snow mobile sales and a
slow tourism business can account for that.
Jan 5, 2007 10:43 AM CST
The people buying snowmobiles before are now buying ATVs. They know.
So did NWS in 2003, know that climate change was happening, but they
wouldn't say. They (NWS) chose not to say anything about my message to
them below either. Thus I drove to the Casino where NWS CPC was having
their conference at in Oct 2003 without official approval of my paper.
Few of the 500 or so attendees bothered to look at my poster. I think
most were afraid to be seen even looking at it because it said Climate
Change. It was a sickening experience for me.
---------- Forwarded Message -----------
14 Oct 2003 Internal NOAA NWS NCRFC e-mail.
From: Pat Neuman <pat.neuman@...
To: John Halquist <john.halquist@...
Daniel Luna <daniel.luna@...
Date: Tue, 14 Oct 2003 18:50:55 -0700
Subject: [Fwd: Paper on snowmelt runoff and humidity]
As indicated in the forwarded message from Doug Kluck, Doug intends to
look at my paper when he gets back into town next week.
I prefer not to make additional changes to the 14 October version of my
paper after I leave work tomorrow. I plan to be on leave from Oct 16 -
Nov 2 as requested.
There may be people at the workshop next week that would like a copy of
my paper. I would like to take along additional copies of my 14 October
paper when I leave work tomorrow, to make available to others. I
assume that I am allowed to do that. If I am not allowed to provide
copies of my paper to others please let me know that later today, if
Jan 5, 2007 12:01 PM CST
From: "Conrad C Lautenbacher" <Conrad.C.Lautenbacher@...>
Date Tuesday, August 17, 2004 6:57 pm
To Pat Neuman <Pat.Neuman@...>
Cc Dee L Nelson <Dee.L.Nelson@...>
Subject Re: Hydrologic climate change work in the NCRFC area
Now that I have had a chance to review your paper, which appears to me
as a noteworthy and scholarly addition to the body of scientific
knowledge -- however, remember that peer reviewers on really the ones
to go to for criticial comments -- and a chance to look at your
request in more detail, I have the following thoughts for you. First
I encourage you to continue to do the best scientific work possible
and to find outlets that are personally satisfying to you. Second, I
really can't and do not want to try to interfere with what your
supervisor assigns to you for work in support of his mission within the
agency. There are avenues for you to discuss these issues within the
chain of command and our organization. Third, I hope that you can
come to terms with your work assignments whatever they may be or what
they may or may not include. Finally, I appreciate your service and
your contributions to NOAA and I hope that you will continue to gain
personal satisfaction from being part of an organization that is so
vital to the future!
Pat Neuman wrote:
> August 11, 2004http://www.mnforsustain.org/climate_snowmelt_dewpoints_minnesota_neuman
> Vice Admiral Conrad C. Lautenbacher, Jr., U.S. Navy (Ret.),
> Undersecretary of Commerce for Oceans and Atmosphere and
> NOAA Administrator
> Dear Vice Admiral Lautenbacher,
> I plan to attend your presentation in Chanhassen, MN tomorrow.
> I am a senior hydrologist with the North Central River Forecast
> Center (NCRFC).
> I would appreciate your suggestions on if / how I might be able to
> continue work on hydrologic climate change in the Upper Midwest and
> Northern Great Plains, at the NWS NCRFC.
> I made a presentation on earlier snowmelt runoff in the Upper
> Midwest at a NOAA Climate Prediction Center (CPC) / Desert Research
> Institute (DRI) workshop in October, 2003. Please view my work
> at the web site which follows, showing the material which I
> presented at the workshop:
> The final draft of my paper for my presentation at the CPC / DRI
> workshop was not acted upon by NWS Central Region.
> After returning from the workshop, I wanted others to view my work,
> so I arranged a 30 October 2004 press release. I prepared a draft
> that included giving attention to my paper and my general comments
> on global warming, but I had no intention that the press release
> give an appearance of support by NWS. Changes were made by wire
> services after my final approval, which I did not approve of.
> Earlier this year, my supervisor Dan Luna,Hydrologist in Charge
(HIC), regarding climate change, said: "That subject is not part of the
> NCRFC/NWS mission�. I have shown that hydrologic climate change has
> already been occurring in the NCRFC area and therefore must be part
of the NCRFC mission, in my view.
> In 2002 and 2003 I researched NWS cooperative climate data and
> flow data from the US Geological Survey. I used the results of
> my research in preparing my presentation for the CPC / DRI workshop.
> In 2000 and 2001, HIC Dean Braatz stated: "global warming was
> beyond the time window of our hydrologic forecast mission". The
> statement was supported by NWS directors in giving final approval
> to suspensions I received that were directly related to my efforts
> in hydrologic climate change and model needs. I provided Mr.
> Braatz and others with data showing trends for earlier snowmelt
> runoff in the Red River basin, which indicated that climate
> warming was in the time window for the NCRFC mission, in fact
> already occurring.
> Please reply at your convenience concerning this request for
> your suggestions on if / how I might be able to continue work
> on hydrologic climate change in the Midwest and Northern Great
> Plains, at the NCRFC.
> Pat Neuman
> NCRFC Senior Hydrologist
> Cc Ms. Dee L. Nelson, NOAA Alternative Dispute Resolution, Seattle,
WA Ms. Nelson suggested that I write to Vice Admiral Conrad C.
> Lautenbacher on this matter, by voice mail to me on July 21, 2004.