The New York Times on Climate Change: Two candidates for the day's quote
In today’s New York Times print edition, there is a large front-page article documenting how one of their side lost its latest battle in the climate war. The title is “We embrace climate denial in scientific cuts” (the online title is somewhat different). [emphasis, links added]
In addition, in today's Times (online version), there is also a feature called “Terms for the Day”. The “One Day Quotes” selected by Times is taken from the previously linked “Climate Denied” article.
here it is:
“It seems like we are in the dark age.”
The quote is attributed to a Rachel Cleetus, who was identified as senior policy director for climate and energy programs in the Alliance of Scientists.
But if you spend some time reading this, you will be another great candidate for my quote for the day. It comes from Brooke Rollins, who was recently identified as the new Trump administration secretary of agriculture.
here it is:
“We are no longer doing this climate change.
The focus of this article is what the Times calls it “Get rid of the data.”
In the rotation of the times, the purpose is “Stop national discussions on how to deal with global warming.”
But what kind of “data” are we talking about here?
This article lacks details about cutting or eliminating exact data series, let alone whether these series are accurate or useful.
But, there are enough ideas to give you a general idea:
More than 500 people have left the government's premier climate and weather science agency in recent weeks. …NOAA has also stopped monthly calls for climate change, and the president’s proposed budget will eliminate funding for institutional weather and climate research. The government cleared the phrases “climate crisis” and “climate science” from government websites.
Ah, NOAA (National Ocean and Atmospheric Administration).
They were proposed through a branch called NCEI, who launched the so-called “surface temperature” series that have been systematically altered to create falsely enhanced warming trends in support of the regular “warmest day/month/year ever”.
This is the theme of my current 33-part series “The Greatest Scientific Fraud Ever”.
Let me remind you about the basis of temperature-promoting scams:
(1) The surface temperature record proposed by NOAA/NCEI is not the original instrument data, but is changed;
(2) NOAA admits that it changes the record;
(3) NOAA gives reasonable reasons for the change record (e.g., explaining station movement and instrument changes);
(4) However, The changes implemented are no Related to any specific issues such as station movement and instrument changes; and
(5) These changes systematically enhance the reported warming trends and are used to support the narrative of the “climate crisis”.
For more details, go to XXXIII in the “Greatest Scientific Fraud” series. If you are skeptical about this, here are just a few spare points:
- Regarding whether NOAA changed the original data from ABC News on February 25, 2025, “Yes, NOAA has adjusted its historical weather data: That’s why.” Excerpt: “When the mining conspiracy claimed that federal agencies “manipulate” their historical weather data, Ginger Zee, chief meteorologist and chief climate correspondent of ABC News, was able to confirm that it was true — but conventional public adjustments were well-reasoned. …NCEI [a branch of NOAA] Adjust weather data to illustrate factors such as instrument changes, station relocation and urbanization, and do this through peer review studies published through its federal website. ”
- Regarding whether the data changes implemented by NOAA/NCEI can be related to any specific legal basis (such as station movements or instrument changes), I quoted the 2022 article by O'Neill et al. (17 co-authors) Excerpted from Journal Atmospheric, titled “Evaluation of homogeneous adjustments to European temperature records in global historical climate network datasets”. I can't get a sentence from the article, but here's my summary: “[The authors attempt] Reversing the adjustments of the engineering to figure out what the NCEI is doing, especially whether the NCEI effectively recognizes discontinuities of the station, such as movement or instrument changes, which may lead to effective adjustments. Most importantly, the regulator did not try to adjust the adjustment to any specific event that would lead to legal homogenization, and many of the changes seemed ridiculous and totally incomprehensible…” If you follow these links, there will be more details.
It is not clear from the Times article that 500 people from NOAA recently left include those who have been engaging in this temperature change scam.
If those people aren't leaving yet, it's very soon, and maybe we'll even learn some of the details of how they practice dark art.
Meanwhile, back in the climate real world, the real clear foundation of Monday (May 19) held what they called the “Energy Future Forum.”
Conference co-chairs David Desrosiers and Mark Mills provided the opening keynote speech. Kevin Killough, who only news, released a summary of a meeting on May 20.
“We have gone from scarcity and its trinity ESG God’s green gospel to rich gospels to a promising land guided by the value of affordability and reliability.”
From Mills:
While many tech companies, such as Microsoft, have adopted a net zero target, Mills explains that energy demand in data centers forces companies to compete with reality: intermittent wind and solar energy shortages despite being fashionable in some circles. “End of the time, reality raised its ugly head and we recalibrated around what reality allows,” Mills said.
Bottom line: The times can scream everything it wants, but the world is moving forward. From my point of view it won't happen too quickly.
Read more among Manhattan counter-trends
