Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Sunday, September 15, 2019

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's acting chief scientist said that he would investigate why the agency backed President Donald Trump's claims about Hurricane Dorian hitting Alabama over its own forecasters.

Advertisement

More

Alternate links: Google News | Twitter

Excerpt from letter written by Craig N. McLean, Assistant Administrator, Oceanic and Atmospheric Research, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration: There was a complex issue involving the President commenting on the path of the hurricane. The NWS Forecaster(s) corrected any public misunderstanding in an expert and timely way, as they should. There followed, last Friday, an unsigned press release from "NOAA" that inappropriately and incorrectly contradicted the NWS forecaster. My understanding is that this intervention to contradict the forecaster was not based on science but on external factors including reputation and appearance, or simply put, political. Our NOAA Scientific Integrity Policy and Code of Scientific Conduct make clear that all NOAA employees shall approach all scientific activities with honesty, objectively, and completely, without allegiance to individuals, organizations, or ideology. The content of this press release is very concerning as it compromises the ability of NOAA to convey life-saving information necessary to avoid substantial and specific danger to public health and safety. If the public cannot trust our information, or we debase our forecaster's warnings and products, that specific danger arises.

You know that the value of our science is in the complexity of our understanding, our ability to convey that understanding to a wide audience of users of this information, and to establish and sustain the public trust in the truth and legitimacy of that information. Unfortunately, the press release of last Friday violated this trust and violated NOAA's policies of scientific integrity. In my role as Assistant Administrator for Research, and as I continue to administratively serve as Acting Chief Scientist, I am pursuing the potential violations of our NOAA Administrative Order on Scientific Integrity. Thankfully, we have such policies that are independently cited as among the best in the federal community, if not the best. Your NOAA and OAR management and leadership team believes in these policies and principles. I have a responsibility to pursue these truths. I will.

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

Probably got a call from Steven Miller?

#1 | Posted by REDIAL at 2019-09-15 07:07 PM | Reply

I guess I should have followed this nonsense a little closer. Living in FL, hurricane forecasts have rarely ever been accurate. From what I thought, Trump was basing his rhetoric off of models that DID predict Dorian would go straight over FL and into Alabama. But with all the ridiculous banter going on, I'm assuming he made those claims only after the models were updated about a week later? Before Trump even said anything, most of our stores on the FL west coast were already out of water and such because the models predicted exactly what Trump was saying. So either he brought all this up only after the models changed AND started agreeing or he brought it up before then. So, depending on the timing, he could be right and he could be wrong. But, suffice to say, prior to the models coming out showing a turn, all forecasts were in agreement it was going to go straight through central FL.

#2 | Posted by humtake at 2019-09-16 12:15 PM | Reply

Gee should I believe Humtake or NOAA scientists on what their forecasts were?

The cult is strong in this one.

#3 | Posted by bored at 2019-09-17 01:34 AM | Reply

"...hurricane forecasts have rarely ever been accurate." Uh huh.

Hummer, if you are looking for forecasts such as the exact minute the eye wall will come ashore, or whether the wind speed will hit 137 MPH for a sustained period of 46 minutes, you're right. Most of us here in the real world recognize that when a big --- storm is coming, you get the hell out of its way with plenty of time to spare. Folks like you live in a world of disappointment, living the life of the Florida Man too stupid to stay out of the weather, surprised when the sign from the gas station down the street hits him in the face while being carried in the wind...

#4 | Posted by catdog at 2019-09-17 09:27 AM | Reply

From what I thought, Trump was basing his rhetoric off of models that DID predict Dorian would go straight over FL and into Alabama. But with all the ridiculous banter going on, I'm assuming he made those claims only after the models were updated about a week later?

The forecasts the NOAA "spokesman" based their "correction" on showed, at best, a 10-20% chance of tropical storm force winds for a corner of south eastern Alabama.

So no, he wasn't giving an outdated forecast. He was just wrong but too childish to admit it.

#5 | Posted by jpw at 2019-09-17 01:12 PM | Reply

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2019 World Readable

Drudge Retort