(now including a complete list of committee members and contact info)
Incidentally, a 30 point complaint has been filed by Grantham Research Institute with the Independent Press Standards Organization for gross misrepresentation of the facts in the Mail's Feb 5th article written by David Rose. It clearly disputes all of the claims and arguments Lamar makes in the following. http://www.lse.ac.uk/GranthamInstitute/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/Mail-on-Sunday-follow-up-February-2016.pdf
I’ve taken the liberty of examining Congressman Lamar Smith’s Feb 5th press release about supposed scientific manipulation. Though under the banner of the US House Science, Space and Technology Committee, the text reads more like a melodramatic PR stunt than any serious effort at understanding. It’s goal being to hoist up Dr. John Bates as some national hero, while maliciously slandering Dr. Tom Karl and climate scientists’ good reputation.
Smith’s arguments stink of the self-certain prosecutor who refuses to acknowledge that anything exists outside of his bubble of reality. Which is why I’ve decided to take on the role of defending advocate, so I can cross-examine and share comments with the Congressman, and then I will call up authoritative witnesses to share their story.
Hopefully it will help you better understand the malicious game being played by US Representative Lamar Smith, since they are playing for keeps.
In reading the following keep in mind Lamar’s new age Republican mindset. Namely that Personal Truths and self-interest allows them to disconnect from recognizing fundamental Universal Truths, such as the geophysics that made Earth the boundless cornucopia that humanity discovered not all that many generations ago. It’s spooky scary and too few dare call them on it. More need to pitch in. Can you help?
Admittedly I can imagine how easily Lamar’s self-certain slander and derision is embraced by people who are too preoccupied getting through their own day to days, scared people with little time or sympathy for worrying about what’s happening to the planet that we depend on for everything. But that doesn’t make it right or honest or honorable. Certainly doesn’t make it correct no matter how much they lie to themselves and others.
I did not change or rearrange any of his text, I simply inserted a paragraph break at every item of note. Sometimes commenting but often simply sharing relevant quotes from a dozen authoritative sources.
I’ve collected all of them in an appendix that includes long quotes and links. Since the whole thing got unwieldy I’ve split it off into it’s own post so the two can be viewed side by side, an abbreviated appendix is listed at the end of this post. I’ve also linked the author’s names to their stories. Please think about what the GOP is trying to pull here.
I’m just a working guy doing this in what scattered spare time I can manage. It probably leaves a lot to be desired. It is what it is, still look through it, bet you'll find some interesting thoughts. Please think about it because your future hangs in the balance. How successful Trump and the GOP are in the next weeks and months and year or two, will make all the difference in the world to your future.
If We The People keep allowing them to believe their fantasy, its hello Orwell like you never imagined. Only hope is getting some of those self-certain imaginary bubbles to pop.
If you’re still reading think about how you can improve on this. How could you better manage these sorts of gold mines worth of information. I’m not concerned about attribution, my concern is trying to inspire some to do this a hell of a lot better and to figure out how to have an impact on people. All this information I’ve collected in a few hours worth of effort, with reading and digesting taking another few, simple homework projects. A sharp young student can do it in a fraction of that. The evidence is out there! To be found everywhere for the critical thinking student - can you help confront the liars?
Feel free to copy, share, and use the following and please include attribution where appropriate.
{last edit midnight, Mtn. time, Feb 23}
_____________________________________
Now to the Press Release that started everyone talking about the Bates Motel mystery.
Congressman Lamar Smith:
Feb 5, 2017. - Press Release
WASHINGTON – U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Science, Space, and Technology members today responded to reports about the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s (NOAA) 2015 climate change study (“Karl Study”){I changed those to “Karl et al. 2015”}. According to Dr. John Bates, the recently retired principal scientist at NOAA’s National Climatic Data Center, (Karl et al. 2015) was used “to discredit the notion of a global warming hiatus
_________________________
{11} PeterThorne:
… The 'whistle blower' is John Bates who was not involved in any aspect of the work. NOAA's process is very stove-piped such that beyond seminars there is little dissemination of information across groups.
John Bates never participated in any of the numerous technical meetings on the land or marine data I have participated in at NOAA NCEI either in person or remotely.
This shows in his reputed (I am taking the journalist at their word that these are directly attributable quotes) misrepresentation of the processes that actually occurred. In some cases {Bates’} misrepresentations are publicly verifiable. …
_______________________________________
and rush to time the publication of the paper to influence national and international deliberations on climate policy.”
________________________
All this begs the question:
Is Bates obsessed with forcing tedious drawn out archiving red tape for quality control standards? Or, is Bates’ concerned with delaying release of scientific information as long as possible?
{4} Scott K. Johnson:
“ Bates alleges that the Karl et al. 2015 was “rushed” for political reasons, but Peterson said the reality was that NOAA was well behind the times, waiting to include known improvements like additional recording stations in the rapidly warming Arctic.
“I had been arguing for years that we were putting out data that did not reflect our understanding of how the temperature was actually warming—[for] literally years we slowed down to try to account for some of these processing things that we had to do,” Peterson said. (At the time of the Karl paper, NOAA’s dataset showed less warming in recent years than other datasets, like NASA’s.) … ”
… Bates expected the same approach (as satellites) from his surface temperature counterparts, but Peterson explained that their work with weather station data was not nearly so high-stakes—problems could easily be fixed on the fly. The engineering-style process NOAA was using for endlessly double-checking the software for all dataset updates could drag on for quite a long time—years, in fact—and Bates opposed any attempt to speed this up. Peterson and other scientists were naturally anxious to incorporate changes they knew were scientifically important.
_______________________________________
Chairman Lamar Smith (R-Texas): “I thank Dr. John Bates for courageously stepping forward to tell the truth about NOAA’s senior officials.
_________________________
OR was it self-serving opportunism?
{5} Warren Cornwall:
Instead, the dispute appears to reflect long-standing tensions within NOAA's National Centers for Environmental Information (NCEI), based in Asheville, North Carolina, over how new data sets are used for scientific research.
… Bates does not directly challenge the conclusions of Karl's study, and (Bates) never formally raised his concerns through internal NOAA mechanisms. …
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
{12} Gavin Schmidt
Unfortunately, Bates and Curry, perhaps deciding that judgement calls about where on a complex maturity matrix (link to graph) (Bates et al, 2014) any specific dataset should be placed, was not likely to generate much attention, decided to over-egg their pudding:
Bates added obviously wrong claims to his litany (like the claim that ASCII data on an ftp site was neither an archive nor ‘machine readable’), and let his imagination run beyond what he could actually show (‘thumbs on the scale’ for instance).
David Rose, certain that he had a juicy data tampering story didn’t bother to check his graph when it seemed to show a big difference between analyses. Note that the graph did not actually use the data from the Karl et al (2015) paper at all. …
_______________________________________
playing fast and loose with the data
_________________________
{6} Eric Davidson:
… while climate science knowledge is evolving, these reports do not change our fundamental understanding of climate change.
The Karl study updated the NOAA global temperature record, but there have been many other studies, using other, independent global temperature records, that have improved our understanding of the climate system and anthropogenic climate change since then. For example, all independent records now show that the past two years were the warmest years on record.
_______________________________________
in order to meet a politically predetermined conclusion.
_________________________
Lamar Smith, the evidence points to you pursuing your own predetermined conclusion to ignore all inconvenient climate science.
Lamar Smith's record reveals him to be a passionate partisan, a tea-partier who has long been focused on politicizing and rejecting the scientific process. He and the GOP cling to their global hiatus illusion like scared children to their blankets. It’s disconnected from physical reality.
{7} Seepage: The effect of climate denial on the scientific community
By Stephan Lewandowsky | May 7, 2015
Professor, School of Experimental Psychology and Cabot Institute, University of Bristol
We must be clear, the GOP’s “notion of some global warming hiatus” is the product of a very smooth PR campaign, it is a farce, a figment of the imagination and a gauge of one’s profound ignorance toward our physical planet. At best we were looking at a temperature observation and processing issue.
What they refuse to grasp is that it’s our atmosphere doing all the heavy lifting when it comes to warming our Earth!
That insulating action is happening 24/7/365.25, with accumulating interest, so to speak. Scientists and engineers figured this out to exquisite detail in the 50/60s. We use many modern marvels that depend on the absolute mastery of this radiative reality that keeps our planet livable against a frigid universe.
Rep Smith and fellow stalwart Republicans, stop refusing to honestly learn about that fundamental ‘first base’ understanding that’s required before any of the rest of it can make sense?
CO2 Science - Why We Can Be Sure.
Archive, Hanscom AFB Atmospheric Studies, Cambridge Research Lab
Play all the rhetorical games you can dream up. Still, the inescapable fact is that at ~180 ppm our planet has ice sheets covering its continents, at ~280ppm we got the nice temperate climate regime that nurtured and enabled our crowded society to evolve. Now we have cranked that atmospheric insulation regulator up past 400ppm and counting. Do the math! One doesn’t need super fine details to ‘get it’ - one simply needs the curiosity and the intellectual honesty god gave all children. Scientists still possess that, while the GOP has lost it to egomania and fear of all they don’t know. Those are not the qualities that make for good leadership.
Where in the world do Republicans get off pretending our massive fossil fuels burning isn’t going to have substantial and disruptive impacts on the natural systems and cycles that we depend on for everything? And that those in turn won’t severely impact human lives and infrastructure that we all depend on?
There are Personal Truths and there are Universal Truths.
Science is the path to understanding physical universal truths.
Science is predicated on the understanding: We Need Each Other To Keep Ourselves Honest.
Unidirectional skepticism adds up to blind denial.
Self-certainty strips the ability to learn from new relevant information.
_______________________________________
In the summer of 2015, whistleblowers alerted the Committee that (Karl et al. 2015) was rushed (1st mention) to publication
_________________________
Seems Bates’ wants to deliberately slow down the dissemination of important climate data as much as possible. Why? To what advantage?
{4} Scott K. Johnson:
… Bates alleges that the Karl paper was “rushed” for political reasons, but Peterson said the reality was that NOAA was well behind the times, waiting to include known improvements like additional recording stations in the rapidly warming Arctic. “I had been arguing for years that we were putting out data that did not reflect our understanding of how the temperature was actually warming—[for] literally years we slowed down to try to account for some of these processing things that we had to do,” Peterson said. (At the time of the Karl paper, NOAA’s dataset showed less warming in recent years than other datasets, like NASA’s.) …
Some give Bates a pass since his expertise is in satellite data processing and archiving. But, I can’t turn a blind eye to the company this man ran to. That is the realm of opportunists and politics for profits. After all, consider Bates never filed a formal complain within his organization. Nah, he saved it for the contrarian queen Curry to send his petty peeve internet viral.
{12} Gavin Schmidt:
… Thus a perhaps interesting claim about process, got turned instantly into a claim about misconduct, and another hammer to be used to undermine independently replicated conclusions (Hausfather et al, 2016). In Bates’ later interviews, he tried to close Pandora’s box – for instance saying that “The issue here is not an issue of tampering with data, but rather really of timing of a release of a paper that had not properly disclosed everything it was”. Well, whoop-dee-doo.
Weirdly he also claimed that he is wary of his critique becoming a talking point for those skeptical of human-caused climate change and that “I knew people would misuse this”.
Which kinda makes my point but also raises some obvious questions!
_______________________________________
before underlying data issues were resolved
_________________________
What unresolved data issue?
How significant are those issues?
How perfect of a temperature data set does Lamar expect?
What will it tell him that he doesn’t know already?
{8} Recent Ocean Warming has been Underestimated
_______________________________________
to help influence public debate about the so-called Clean Power Plan and upcoming Paris climate conference.
_________________________
Doesn't this indicates a visceral resentment toward Clean Power efforts? That in turn, indicates someone trapped within a bubble, disconnected and oblivious to the natural systems that we depend on for everything.
{13} Scott Waldman:
… Whether the research was published to influence the Paris climate talks is a moot point, said Andrew Light, a senior member of the State Department's climate talks negotiating team in 2015. He said the talks had already been underway for about four years when the paper was published and that 188 nations were relying on a tremendous amount of research to support their goal of reducing humans' carbon emissions to slow the warming of the planet.
They had also already crafted proposed reductions by the time the research was published, he said.
"I never heard it discussed once, let alone this one NOAA report, discussed in Paris, the run-up to Paris or anything after Paris, so this is really just an incredibly bizarre claim," Light said (Light is a senior member of the State Department's climate talks negotiating team in 2015)…
_______________________________________
Since then, the Committee has attempted to obtain information that would shed further light on these allegations,
_________________________
It is difficult to shed light on contrived allegations.
Congressman Smith can’t even define what wrongdoing he’s after. All he’s offered is the vague arm waving of a self-certain prosecutor who feels no need to offer details.
{10} Alex Kasprak:
The allegations made against Karl and his co-authors fall into three general groups:
1) That the team unethically selected flawed data that was supportive of their cause. {False, walked back by Bates }
2) That they failed to archive their data as required by both NOAA and the journal Science. {Okay lets look at that}
3) That they rushed through the required internal review process to get the paper published before the 2015 Paris Climate Summit. {Utter deluded fantasizing}
The first one has been withdrawn by Bates, but not the contrarian blogosphere that he ran to.
The second is about what appear to be overly tedious delay saturated archiving rules, in fact new and still controversial ones. Bates won’t mention that. But it’s another story for another post.
The third is a contrived cow pie. Karl et al. 2015 had nothing to do with the general consensus or anything at the Paris negotiation or the momentum behind it.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
{14}. What’s the Deal with Rep. Lamar Smith’s Subpoena to NOAA over Climate Science? An FAQ Resource
Research Director, Center for Science and Democracy | November 16, 2015
_______________________________________
but was obstructed at every turn by the previous administration’s officials. I repeatedly asked, ‘What does NOAA have to hide?’
_________________________
{4} Scott K. Johnson
… Rather than engage with the science behind this paper, Rep. Lamar Smith has, without any evidence, accused the NOAA scientists of doctoring their results to exaggerate recent warming.
Although NOAA provided Smith with the (publicly available) data and methods behind the paper and provided a personal explanation of the research, Smith subpoenaed the e-mails of the scientists and other NOAA staff. NOAA handed over staff e-mails but refused to make the researchers’ e-mails available for a fishing expedition, citing the importance of protecting scientists’ ability to communicate freely while trying to understand their data.
_______________________________________
“Now that Dr. Bates has confirmed that there were heated disagreements within NOAA about the quality and transparency of the data before publication, we know why NOAA fought transparency and oversight at every turn.
_________________________
{5} Warren Cornwall:
… Instead, the dispute appears to reflect long-standing tensions within NOAA's National Centers for Environmental Information (NCEI), based in Asheville, North Carolina, over how new data sets are used for scientific research. …
In the blog post, Bates says that his complaints provide evidence that Karl had his “thumb on the scale” in an effort to discredit claims of a warming pause, and his team rushed to publish the paper so it could influence national and international climate talks. But Bates does not directly challenge the conclusions of Karl's study, and he never formally raised his concerns through internal NOAA mechanisms. …
{15} SOU
… The crux of his complaint is that the data from Karl15 was in the research stage and hadn't been through Bates' full and complete archiving process. But to do that takes a very long time. It can take five years just to get to what he calls the IOC phase, and a full seven years to get to what he calls "full operations". Bear in mind that these data have been up on the NOAA's ftp server since June 2015, the month Karl15 was published (h/t Nick Stokes). This is from his paper: ...
_______________________________________
Dr. Bates’ revelations and NOAA’s obstruction certainly lend credence to what I’ve(Rep.Smith) expected all along –
_________________________
Representative Smith, stop kidding us. Citizens in your district know that you resent and reject all science you find inconvenient ! Worst, you have zero interest in learning. It’s disgraceful.
Remember, Bates does not directly challenge the conclusions of Karl's study, and he never formally raised his concerns through internal NOAA mechanisms ! ! !
Al Braden | December 7, 2016
and the Global Climate March Coalition
_______________________________________
that (Karl et al. 2015) used flawed data,
_________________________
{9} Zeke Hausfather:
… What he fails to mention is that the new NOAA results have been validated by independent data from satellites, buoys and Argo floats and that many other independent groups, including Berkeley Earth and the UK’s Met Office Hadley Centre, get effectively the same results. …
{15} SOU
There is almost no difference to speak of between NOAA and other data sets …
So close they are almost identical
The linear rates of warming over that 1975 to 2014 period, from fastest to slowest are shown in the legend at the bottom of the charts. (Click the arrow on the bottom right to see all the trend numbers. Move the cursor over the chart to see the trends/temperatures at different times):
• GISTemp and HadCRUT4 and BEST and NOAA's Karl15 all have a trend of 1.7 C/century
• NOAA old version had a trend of 1.6 C/century.
See the odd one out? Yes, it's the old version from NOAA. In other words, the most recent updates just bring NOAA more into line with other data sets. Contrary to what disinformers try to make out, it's based on rigorous research from NOAA scientists - it's not a conspiracy, nor is there any "fudging".
Similarities are be expected in the case of GISTemp and Karl15, because they both use the Global Historical Climate Network (GHCN) for land and ERSST v4 for the ocean. …
_______________________________________
was rushed (2nd mention) to publication
_________________________
{5} Warren Cornwall:
… In the blog post, Bates says that his complaints provide evidence that Karl had his “thumb on the scale” in an effort to discredit claims of a warming pause, and his team rushed to publish the paper so it could influence national and international climate talks.
Recall, Bates does not directly challenge the conclusions of Karl's study, and he never formally raised his concerns through internal NOAA mechanisms! …
_______________________________________
in an effort to support the president’s climate change agenda,
_________________________
Nonsense, there was nothing revolutionary, it simply explained some errors that everyone already suspected were there. And it deals with such small increments, Smith should be ashamed of wasting all this tax payer money.
{6} Eric Davidson:
AGU believes that the merits of the Karl et al. (2015) should be and have been discussed in appropriate peer-reviewed scientific journals. We note that the main results of that study have since been independently replicated by later work. In the meantime, we will continue to stand up for the credibility of climate science, the freedom of scientists to conduct and communicate their science.
The purpose of our posts on this topic – past, present, and future — are to make you aware of this development affecting climate science and scientific data management. We are closely monitoring how this will play out among policymakers and influencers. ‘
For example, U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Science, Space, and Technology issued a misleading press release. These types of statements by policymakers that attempt to take one study/dispute and blow it out of proportion are both unhelpful and misleading. We will be working with the science committee to demonstrate the scientific consensus on climate change and to encourage them not to interfere with the scientific process. …
_______________________________________
and ignored NOAA’s own standards for scientific study.
_________________________
{5} Warren Cornwall:
… Bates says he first became concerned when the Karl paper came out, as the team shared their data only on a public NOAA file server, not NCEI's data archive, as the agency would for its operational data sets. Karl and his team have since uploaded the data to NCEI's archive, a process that finished last year. Bates claims that happened as a result of his concerns. “I shouldn't have to be the whistleblower.
They should have had a process in place at NOAA to check this off. And they didn't do it,” he says
The Science paper would have been fine had it simply had a disclaimer at the bottom saying that it was citing research, not operational, data for its land-surface temperatures, Bates says.
But Mike Tanner, director of NOAA’s Center for Weather and Climate at NCEI, says there’s no NOAA policy that requires such a disclosure. “There's nothing. That doesn’t exist,” he says. …
_______________________________________
The Committee thanks Dr. Bates, a Department of Commerce Gold Medal winner for creating and implementing a standard to produce
and preserve climate data,
_________________________
Since Lamar Smith, doesn’t bother to introduce his target Dr. Tom Karl, I will:
… (Dr. Thomas Karl) has received many awards and recognition for his services and scientific research in climate-related work including:
two Distinguished Presidential Rank Awards,
five Gold Medals from the Department of Commerce and
two Bronze Medals;
the American Meteorological Society’s Suomi Award;
National Associate of the National Academy of Sciences;
the NOAA Administrator’s Award,
and several others.
He has served as Editor of the Journal of Climate (1997-2000) and has been the Convening and Lead Author and Review Editor of all the major IPCC assessments since 1990. He was Co-Chair of two US National Climate Assessments.
He has received a B.S. in Meteorology from Northern Illinois University, a M.S in Meteorology from the University of Wisconsin, and a doctorate of humane letters (honoris causa) from North Carolina State University.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Not coincidentally Karl was also Bates' boss during an unhappy period for all involved. From the scuttle it seems that Bates has attitude issues and doesn't interact well with others. After reading Bates' attack piece at Curry's blog I can well imagine.
{4} Scott K. Johnson:
There may also be something beyond simple “engineers vs. scientists” tension behind Bates’ decision to go public with his allegations. Two former NOAA staffers confirmed to Ars that Tom Karl essentially demoted John Bates in 2012, when Karl was Director of NOAA’s National Centers for Environmental Information. Bates had held the title of Supervisory Meteorologist and Chief of the Remote Sensing Applications Division, but Karl removed him from that position partly due to a failure to maintain professionalism with colleagues, assigning him to a position in which he would no longer supervise other staff. It was apparently no secret that the demotion did not sit well with Bates. …
{15} SOU
... John Bates is a meteorologist turned computer data person whose nose was out of joint because he didn't always get his way when he used to work at NOAA. It was a sour grapes whine from someone who wanted attention. That's all. However his attention-seeking moan had major repercussions through the deniosphere.
In his latest article, David Rose finishes with this:
"We cannot allow such a vital issue for our future to be mired in half truths and deceptions."
Which raises the question - why is David Rose himself so mired in half truths and deceptions? His article doesn't just contain half truths, he's a bald-faced liar! …
_______________________________________
for exposing
_________________________
For exposing what ? !
{12} Gavin Schmidt
… Bates added obviously wrong claims to his litany (like the claim that ASCII data on an ftp site was neither an archive nor ‘machine readable’), and let his imagination run beyond what he could actually show (‘thumbs on the scale’ for instance).
David Rose, certain that he had a juicy data tampering story didn’t bother to check his graph when it seemed to show a big difference between analyses. Note that the graph did not actually use the data from the Karl et al (2015) paper at all. …
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
{5} Warren Cornwall:
Personal grudge?
Some suggest Bates’s criticism might also have a personal side to it. Tanner says Bates was administratively admonished and relieved of a supervisory position at NCEI in 2012, at a time when Karl led the center. Karl confirms that Bates was removed from his post as division chief, and placed in a position where he was not supervising other people.
Bates confirms the job shift, …
In a strange coincidence, Peterson ran into Bates at the theater in Asheville on Saturday, shortly before the Mail article was published. He says he asked Bates how retirement was treating him. Bates replied that it was “going to get interesting,” then walked off without clarifying what he meant.
The play they were attending: Shakespeare’s Much Ado About Nothing.
The play they were attending: Shakespeare’s Much Ado About Nothing.
“That just strikes me as perfect,” Peterson says.
Hmmm, it strikes me as antsy anticipation for the shit storm he was about to unleash. It also points to all this being calculated and premeditated. Could it be rather than a naive archivist, we are dealing with a psycho opportunist?
As for this Dr. Tom Karl? What kind of person is he?
_______________________________________
the previous administration’s efforts to push their costly climate agenda at the expense of scientific integrity.”
_______________________________________
US Representative Lamar Smith, get an education!
While you have your faith-shackled blinders on. Here's a tiny sampling of what’s going on in the world outside of your self serving bubble:
The US Economic Impacts of Climate Change and the Costs of Inaction |
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The National Climate Assessment
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Climate Change in the United StatesThe Prohibitive Costs of Inaction
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
=====================================
=====================================
List of Appendix items. For the Appendix itself, with extensive quotes, link to "BatesMotel#4B - US Rep Lamar Smith - Feb 5th Press Release, his NOAA smear campaign dissected - APPENDIX"
for side by side viewing.
for side by side viewing.
The first three and the last item, are not referenced in the above text - I share them for background.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
By Christina Reed - May 21, 2015
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Scott K. Johnson - 2/6/2017
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Warren Cornwall - Feb. 8, 2017
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Posted by Eric Davidson - February 4, 2017
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Stephan Lewandowsky | May 7, 2015
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Alex Kasprak - February 8, 2017
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
PeterThorne |. February 5, 2017
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Gavin Schmidt - February 9th, 2017
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Scott Waldman - February 7, 2017
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
{14} What’s the Deal with Rep. Lamar Smith’s Subpoena to NOAA over Climate Science? An FAQ Resource
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
{15} David Rose doubles down on #climate disinformation about NOAA. Let's get some perspective
SOU | February 13, 2017
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
To: Rep. Lamar Smith - October 23, 2015
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
Committee On Science, Space, and Technology -
115th Congressional Session - 2017/18
(total 31 = 22 Republicans/9 Democrats)
__________________________________________________________________
Republican Members
Lamar Smith (Chair)
Texas ~ 21 district
2409 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
Phone: 202-225-4236
Fax: 202-225-8628
1100 NE Loop 410, Suite 640
San Antonio, TX 78209
Phone: 210-821-5024
Fax: 210-821-5947
2211 South IH-35, Suite 106
Austin, TX 78741
Phone: 512-912-7508
Fax: 512-912-7519
301 Junction Highway, Suite 346C
Kerrville, TX 78028
Phone: 830-896-0154
Fax: 830-896-0168
Frank D. Lucas (Vice Chair)
Oklahoma ~ 03 district
2405 Rayburn HOB
Washington, DC 20515
Phone: (202) 225-5565
Fax: (202) 225-8698
10952 NW Expressway Suite B
Yukon, OK 73099
Phone: (405) 373-1958
Fax: (405) 373-2046
Dana Rohrabacher
California ~ 48 district
https://rohrabacher.house.gov/contact/email-me
2300 Rayburn HOB
Washington, DC 20515
Phone: (202) 225-2415
101 Main Street, Suite 380
Huntington Beach, CA 92648
Phone: (714) 960-6483
Mo Brooks
Alabama ~ 05 district
2400 Rayburn HOB
Washington, DC 20515
Phone: (202) 225-4801
Fax: (202) 225-4392
302 Lee Street
Room 86
Decatur, AL 35601
Phone: (256) 355-9400
Fax: (256) 355-9406
2101 W. Clinton Avenue
Suite 302
Huntsville, AL 35805
Phone: (256) 551-0190
Fax: (256) 551-0194
102 South Court Street
Suite 310
Florence, AL 35630
Phone: (256) 718-5155
Fax: (256) 718-5156
Randy Hultgren
Illinois ~ 14 district
2455 Rayburn HOB
Washington, DC 20515
phone: (202) 225-2976
fax: (202) 225-0697
40W310 Lafox Road, #F2
Campton Hills, IL 60175
phone: (630) 584-2734
fax: (630) 584-2746
Bill Posey
Florida ~ 08 district
Washington, DC Office
2150 Rayburn HOB
Washington, DC 20515
Phone: (202) 225-3671
Fax: (202) 225-3516
District Office
2725 Judge Fran Jamieson Way Building C
Melbourne, FL 32940
Phone: (321) 632-1776
Fax: (321) 639-8595
Indian River County
Phone: (772) 226-1701
Titusville
Phone: (321) 383-6090
Toll Free: 1-888-681-1776
Thomas Massie
Kentucky ~ 04 district
2453 Rayburn HOB
Washington, DC 20515
phone: (202) 225-3465
1700 Greenup Ave
Suite 505
Ashland, KY 41101
Phone: (606) 324-9898
108 W. Jefferson Street
LaGrange, KY 40031
Phone: (502) 265-9119
Fax: (502) 265-9126
541 Buttermilk Pike
Suite 208
Crescent Springs, KY 41017
Phone: (859) 426-0080
Fax: (859) 426-0061
Jim Bridenstine
Oklahoma ~ 01 district
Washington, DC Office
216 Cannon House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
Phone: 202-225-2211
Tulsa District Office
2448 E. 81st St.,
Suite 5150
Tulsa, OK 74137
Phone: 918-935-3222
Fax: 918-935-2716
Randy K. Weber
Texas ~ 14 district
1708 Longworth House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
phone: 202-225-2831
fax: 202-225-0271
505 Orleans Street
Suite 103
Beaumont, TX 77701
phone: 409-835-0108
fax: 409-835-0578
Lake Jackson Office
122 West Way
Suite 301
Lake Jackson, TX 77566
phone: 979-285-0231
fax: 979-285-0271
League City Office
174 Calder Road
Suite 150
League City, TX 77573
phone: (281) 316-0231
fax: (281) 316-0271
Stephen Knight
California ~ 25 district
WASHINGTON, DC OFFICE
1023 Longworth House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
(202) 225-1956
ANTELOPE VALLEY OFFICE
1008 West Avenue M-14, Suite E
Palmdale, CA 93551
(661) 441-0320
SANTA CLARITA VALLEY OFFICE
26415 Carl Boyer Drive, Suite 220
Santa Clarita, CA 91350
(661) 255-5630
SIMI VALLEY OFFICE
1445 E. Los Angeles Avenue, #206
Simi Valley, CA 93065
(805) 581-7130
Brian Babin
Texas ~ 36 district
Washington, DC Office
316 Cannon House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
Phone: (202) 225-1555
Fax: (202) 226-0396
Deer Park District Office
203 Ivy Avenue, Suite 600
Deer Park, TX 77536
Phone: (832) 780-0966
Fax: (832) 780-0964
Orange District Office
420 Green Avenue
Orange, TX 77630
Phone: (409) 883-8075
Fax: (409) 886-9918
Woodville District Office
Tyler County Courthouse
100 W. Bluff Drive
Woodville, TX 75979
Phone: (844) 303-8934
Cleveland Satellite District Office
Phone: (844) 303-8934
Barbara Comstock
Virginia ~ 10 district
229 Cannon House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
Phone: (202) 225-5136
Fax: (202) 225-0437
21430 Cedar Drive
Suite 218
Sterling, VA 20164
Phone: (703) 404-6903
Fax: (703) 404-6906
117 E. Piccadilly Street
Suite 100 D
Winchester, VA 22601
Phone: (540) 773-3600
Gary J. Palmer
Alabama ~ 06 district
330 Cannon House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
Phone: (202) 225-4921
Fax: (202) 225-2082
3535 Grandview Parkway
Suite 525
Birmingham, AL 35243
Phone: (205) 968-1290
Fax: (205) 968-1294
703 2nd Avenue North
Box 502
Clanton, AL 35045
Phone: (205) 280-6846
Oneonta City Hall
202 3rd Avenue
Oneonta, AL 35121
Phone: (205) 274-2136
Barry Loudermilk
Georgia ~ 11 district
Washington, DC Office
329 Cannon House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
Phone: 202-225-2931
FAX: 202-225-2944
Woodstock District Office
9898 Highway 92, Suite 100
Woodstock, GA 30188
Phone: 770-429-1776
FAX: 770 -517-7427
Cartersville District Office
135 West Cherokee Avenue, Suite 122
Cartersville, GA 30120
Phone: 770-429-1776
Galleria District Office
600 Galleria Pkwy, Suite 120
Atlanta, GA 30339
Phone: 770-429-1776
Fax: 678-556-5184
Ralph Lee Abraham, M.D.
Louisiana ~ 05 district
417 Cannon House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
Phone: (202) 225-8490
Fax: (202) 225-5639
426 DeSiard St.
Monroe, LA 71201
Phone: 318.322.3500
Fax: 318.322.3577
2003 MacArthur Dr., Bldg. 5
Alexandria, LA 71301
Phone: 318.445.0818
Fax: 318.445.3776
Darin LaHood
Illinois ~ 18 district
1424 Longworth HOB
Washington, DC 20515
Phone: (202) 225-6201
Fax: (202) 225-9249
100 NE Monroe Street
Room 100
Peoria, IL 61602
Phone: (309) 671-7027
Fax: (309) 671-7309
235 S Sixth Street
Springfield, IL 62701
Phone: (217) 670-1653
Fax: (217) 670-1806
201 W Morgan Street
Jacksonville, IL 62650
Phone: (217) 245-1431
Fax: (217) 243-6852
3004 G.E. Rd
Suite 1B
Bloomington, IL 61704
Ph: 309-205-9556
Daniel Webster
Florida ~ 11 district
Washington, DC Office
1210 Longworth House Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515
Phone (202) 225-1002
Fax (202) 226-6559
Minneola
800 N U.S. Hwy 27
Minneola, FL 34715
Phone (352) 241-9220
Fax (352) 241-9181
The Villages
8015 E. County Road 466 Suite B
The Villages, FL 32162
Inverness
212 West Main Street Suite 208A
Inverness, FL 34450 T TBD
Brooksville
15 N. Main Street, Suite B,
Brooksville, FL 34601 T TBD
Jim Banks
Indiana ~ 03 district
509 Cannon House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
Phone: 202-225-4436
1300 S Harrison St
Fort Wayne, IN 46802
Phone: 260-702-4750
Andy Biggs
Arizona ~ 05 district
1626 Longworth House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
Phone: 202-225-2635
2509 S Power Rd
Suite 204
Mesa, AZ 85209
Superstition Plaza
(480) 699-8239
Roger W. Marshall
Kansas ~ 01 district
https://marshall.house.gov/contact/email
312 Cannon House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
Phone: 202-225-2715
200 East Iron Avenue
Salina, KS 67401
Phone: 785-829-9000
Neal P. Dunn
Florida ~ 02 district
423 Cannon House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
Phone: 202-225-5235
Fax: 202-225-5615
840 West 11th Street
Suite 2250
Panama City, FL 32401
Phone: 850-785-0812
Fax: 850-763-3764
300 South Adams Street
Tallahassee, FL 32301
Phone: 850-891-8610
Fax: 850-891-8620
Clay Higgins
Louisiana ~ 03 district
1711 Longworth House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
Phone: 202-225-2031
?????
“No office locations have been added yet.”
__________________
Democratic Members
Eddie Bernice Johnson
Texas ~ 30 district
2468 Rayburn Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
phone: (202) 225-8885
fax: (202) 226-1477
hours: M-F 9-5:30pm
3102 Maple Avenue, Suite 600
Dallas, TX 75201
phone: (214) 922-8885
fax: (214) 922-7028
hours: M-F 9-5:30pm
Zoe Lofgren
California ~ 19 district
WASHINGTON, D.C. OFFICE
1401 Longworth House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
Phone:(202) 225-3072
SAN JOSE OFFICE
635 N. First Street, Suite B
San Jose, CA 95112
Phone:(408) 271-8700
Daniel Lipinski
Illinois ~ 03 district
Washington D.C. Office
2346 Rayburn HOB
Washington, DC 20515
Phone: (202) 225 - 5701
Phone: (866) 822 - 5701
Fax: (202) 225 - 1012
Chicago District Office
6245 South Archer Avenue
Chicago, IL 60638
Phone: (773) 948-6223
Fax: (773) 767 - 9395
Oak Lawn Office
5210 Ste. 104 West 95th Street
Oak Lawn, IL 60453
Phone: (708) 424 - 0853
Lockport Office
Central Square Building
222 E. 9th Street, #109
Lockport, IL 60441
Phone: 815-838-1990
Orland Park Office
Orland Park Village Hall
14700 S. Ravinia Avenue
Orland Park, IL 60462
Phone: 708-403-4379
Suzanne Bonamici
Oregon ~ 01 district
439 Cannon HOB
Washington, DC 20515
Phone: (202) 225-0855
Fax: (202) 225-9497
Hours: M-F 9AM-5PM EST
12725 SW Millikan Way, Suite 220
Beaverton, OR 97005
Phone: (503) 469-6010
Fax: (503) 469-6018
Hours: Monday-Friday 9:00AM-5:00PM Toll Free: (800) 422-4003
Ami Bera, M.D.
California ~ 07 district
1431 Longworth House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
Phone: (202) 225-5716
Fax: (202) 226-1298
8950 Cal Center Drive
Building 3, Suite 100
Sacramento, CA 95826
Phone: (916) 635-0505
Fax: (916) 635-0514
Elizabeth H. Esty
Connecticut ~ 05 district
221 Cannon House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
Phone: (202) 225-4476
Fax: (860) 225-7289
1 Grove St.
Suite 600
New Britain, CT 06053
Phone: (860) 223-8412
Fax: (860) 225-7289
Marc A. Veasey
Texas ~ 33 district
1519 Longworth
Washington, DC 20515
Hours: Monday-Friday, 9am-6pm
Phone (202) 225-9897
Fax (202) 225-9702
JP Morgan Chase Building
1881 Sylvan Ave., Ste. 108
Dallas, TX 75208
Phone (214) 741-1387
Fax (214) 741-2026
6707 Brentwood Stair Rd.
Suite 200
Fort Worth, TX 76112
Phone (817) 920-9086
Fax (817) 920-9324
Donald S. Beyer
Virginia ~ 08 district
WASHINGTON, D.C. Office
1119 Longworth H.O.B.
Washington, DC 20515
Phone:(202) 225-4376
Fax: (202) 225-0017
Alexandria District Office
5285 Shawnee Road
Suite 250
Alexandria, VA 22312
Phone:(703) 658-5403
Fax:(703) 658-5408
Jacky Rosen
Nevada ~ 03 district
413 Cannon House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
Phone: 202-225-3252
8872 S Eastern Ave
Suite 220
Las Vegas, NV 89123
Phone: 1-888-216-5692
No comments:
Post a Comment