Hill Heat: Letter from Ben Santer in Support of Tom Karl, Climate Scientist Under Attack by Lamar SmithScience Policy Legislation Actiontag:hillheat.com,2005:TypoTypo2015-11-18T21:16:41-05:00Brad Johnsonurn:uuid:83f5b815-9a94-478c-a679-e13df3afc0e62015-11-18T21:15:00-05:002015-11-18T21:16:41-05:00Letter from Ben Santer in Support of Tom Karl, Climate Scientist Under Attack by Lamar Smith<p><em>Message from Ben Santer: Here is a message of support I sent to Tom Karl on November 17, 2015. I remain deeply concerned by the unwarranted Congressional scrutiny that the 2015 Karl et al. Science paper continues to receive.</p>
<p>I have no concerns about public distribution of this letter.</em></p>
<p>Dr. Thomas R. Karl<br />
Director, National Center for Environmental Information<br />
Veach-Baley Federal Building<br />
151 Patton Avenue<br />
Asheville, <span class="caps">NC 28801</span>-5001</p>
<p>Dear Tom,</p>
<p>I just wanted to express my gratitude and scientific appreciation for the critical research you and your <span class="caps">NCEI</span> colleagues have performed over the last several decades. You have been pioneers in many different areas: in producing observational estimates of global-scale changes in land and ocean surface temperatures, in identifying non-climatic artifacts in temperature measurements, in developing rigorous scientific methods of adjusting for such artifacts, and in accounting for the incomplete, time-varying coverage of observations.</p>
<p><span class="caps">NCEI</span> has made its surface temperature data sets freely and openly available to the entire climate science community, thus enabling important research on the nature and causes of climate change, climate variability, and climate model evaluation. <span class="caps">NCEI</span> staff have clearly and thoroughly documented each surface temperature data set that <span class="caps">NCEI</span> has released – in scientific publications, in presentations to policymakers and professional societies, and in extensive online material. No scientific organization has done a more thorough or transparent job in developing and analyzing observations of 20th and early 21st century changes in Earth’s climate.</p>
<p>I am deeply concerned that <span class="caps">NCEI</span>’s science is now being subjected to Congressional scrutiny and criticism. Such scrutiny and criticism is not warranted. The leadership of the House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology should understand that science is dynamic rather than static. All observational temperature data sets have evolved in important ways over time, in tandem with improvements in the ability to identify and adjust for inhomogeneities introduced by changing measurement systems, changing measurement practices, and changes in the spatial coverage of measurements. This is true not only for surface temperature data sets, but also for measurements of the heat content of the world’s oceans, and for satellite-based estimates of temperature change in Earth’s lower and upper atmosphere. Evolution of observational temperature data sets is a normal, on-going scientific process. It is not evidence of non-scientific behavior.</p>
<p>If our country is to take informed decisions on how to address problems arising from human perturbations to the climate system, we need access to the best-available scientific information on how Earth’s climate has actually changed. <span class="caps">NCEI</span> provides such critically important information to the scientific community, policymakers, and the public. You and your <span class="caps">NCEI</span> colleagues deserve our sincere thanks and our continued support.</p>
<p>With best regards,</p>
<p>Ben Santer</p>
<p>Distinguished Member of Scientific Staff, Lawrence Livermore National Lab<br />
Member, U.S. National Academy of Sciences</p><p><em>Message from Ben Santer: Here is a message of support I sent to Tom Karl on November 17, 2015. I remain deeply concerned by the unwarranted Congressional scrutiny that the 2015 Karl et al. Science paper continues to receive.</p>
<p>I have no concerns about public distribution of this letter.</em></p>
<p>Dr. Thomas R. Karl<br />
Director, National Center for Environmental Information<br />
Veach-Baley Federal Building<br />
151 Patton Avenue<br />
Asheville, <span class="caps">NC 28801</span>-5001</p>
<p>Dear Tom,</p>
<p>I just wanted to express my gratitude and scientific appreciation for the critical research you and your <span class="caps">NCEI</span> colleagues have performed over the last several decades. You have been pioneers in many different areas: in producing observational estimates of global-scale changes in land and ocean surface temperatures, in identifying non-climatic artifacts in temperature measurements, in developing rigorous scientific methods of adjusting for such artifacts, and in accounting for the incomplete, time-varying coverage of observations.</p>
<p><span class="caps">NCEI</span> has made its surface temperature data sets freely and openly available to the entire climate science community, thus enabling important research on the nature and causes of climate change, climate variability, and climate model evaluation. <span class="caps">NCEI</span> staff have clearly and thoroughly documented each surface temperature data set that <span class="caps">NCEI</span> has released – in scientific publications, in presentations to policymakers and professional societies, and in extensive online material. No scientific organization has done a more thorough or transparent job in developing and analyzing observations of 20th and early 21st century changes in Earth’s climate.</p>
<p>I am deeply concerned that <span class="caps">NCEI</span>’s science is now being subjected to Congressional scrutiny and criticism. Such scrutiny and criticism is not warranted. The leadership of the House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology should understand that science is dynamic rather than static. All observational temperature data sets have evolved in important ways over time, in tandem with improvements in the ability to identify and adjust for inhomogeneities introduced by changing measurement systems, changing measurement practices, and changes in the spatial coverage of measurements. This is true not only for surface temperature data sets, but also for measurements of the heat content of the world’s oceans, and for satellite-based estimates of temperature change in Earth’s lower and upper atmosphere. Evolution of observational temperature data sets is a normal, on-going scientific process. It is not evidence of non-scientific behavior.</p>
<p>If our country is to take informed decisions on how to address problems arising from human perturbations to the climate system, we need access to the best-available scientific information on how Earth’s climate has actually changed. <span class="caps">NCEI</span> provides such critically important information to the scientific community, policymakers, and the public. You and your <span class="caps">NCEI</span> colleagues deserve our sincere thanks and our continued support.</p>
<p>With best regards,</p>
<p>Ben Santer</p>
<p>Distinguished Member of Scientific Staff, Lawrence Livermore National Lab<br />
Member, U.S. National Academy of Sciences</p>