Letter Rep. Lamar Smith Questions Agency’s Revised Climate Data

To the Editor Nytimes:

To the Editor:

I believe that federal employees at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration have altered temperature data to try to refute an 18-year plateau in global temperatures that numerous other scientific studies have reported.

A Dec. 4 editorial, “The Latest Attack on Climate Science,” and a Dec. 8 Op-Ed essay by a climate scientist, Michael E. Mann, “The Assault on Climate Science,” unfairly described my efforts to get the American people the facts.

Atmospheric satellite data, considered by many to be the most objective, has clearly showed no warming for the past two decades. But NOAA inexplicably omitted satellite data to reach the conclusions it wanted.

Federal employees whose salaries are paid for by American taxpayers have an obligation to be open and honest. Current law allows official communications to be made public, and that is why I have subpoenaed NOAA communications about its study. The American people have a right to know the real motivations behind this study, which are clearly suspect.

The climate is always changing, and human activity likely plays a small role. But what climate alarmists say is sometimes untrue and often exaggerated. We should rely on good science, not science fiction, when we evaluate climate change.

Alarmists like Mr. Mann seek to promote a political agenda, then claim to feel intimidated when anyone asks questions. But claiming that the debate is settled is the opposite of the scientific method.

If NOAA has nothing to hide, why not provide the evidence to support the agency’s claims?

LAMAR SMITH

Washington

The writer, a Texas Republican, is chairman of the House Committee on Science, Space and Technology.