This article is from the source 'nytimes' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.
You can find the current article at its original source at https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/01/climate/noaa-trump-hurricane-dorian.html
The article has changed 22 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
| Version 6 | Version 7 |
|---|---|
| NOAA Leaders Privately Disowned Agency’s Rebuke of Scientists Who Contradicted Trump | NOAA Leaders Privately Disowned Agency’s Rebuke of Scientists Who Contradicted Trump |
| (1 day later) | |
| WASHINGTON — Senior officials with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration privately disavowed an unsigned statement issued by the agency last year that rebuked its own weather forecasters for contradicting President Trump’s false warnings that Hurricane Dorian would most likely hit Alabama, new documents show. | WASHINGTON — Senior officials with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration privately disavowed an unsigned statement issued by the agency last year that rebuked its own weather forecasters for contradicting President Trump’s false warnings that Hurricane Dorian would most likely hit Alabama, new documents show. |
| Emails obtained under public records laws show top leaders scrambling to do damage control in the days after Mr. Trump appeared in the Oval Office on Sept. 4 with an altered map of Hurricane Dorian’s path, and forecasters in the Birmingham, Ala., office of the National Weather Service then contradicted him by assuring the public they were safe. | Emails obtained under public records laws show top leaders scrambling to do damage control in the days after Mr. Trump appeared in the Oval Office on Sept. 4 with an altered map of Hurricane Dorian’s path, and forecasters in the Birmingham, Ala., office of the National Weather Service then contradicted him by assuring the public they were safe. |
| Multiple people familiar with the matter have said the White House pressured NOAA to “clarify” that forecast. On Sept. 6, the agency’s communications office issued an unsigned statement suggesting that the president was right all along, and that Alabama forecasters had acted improperly by suggesting otherwise. | Multiple people familiar with the matter have said the White House pressured NOAA to “clarify” that forecast. On Sept. 6, the agency’s communications office issued an unsigned statement suggesting that the president was right all along, and that Alabama forecasters had acted improperly by suggesting otherwise. |
| “The Birmingham National Weather Service’s Sunday morning tweet spoke in absolute terms that were inconsistent with probabilities from the best forecast products available at the time,” NOAA said in the statement. | “The Birmingham National Weather Service’s Sunday morning tweet spoke in absolute terms that were inconsistent with probabilities from the best forecast products available at the time,” NOAA said in the statement. |
| The backlash from the government’s own scientists was fast and furious, according to internal emails. | The backlash from the government’s own scientists was fast and furious, according to internal emails. |
| In response to one angry scientist, both Neil Jacobs, then the acting director of NOAA, and Tim Gallaudet, a retired Navy admiral who is assistant secretary of commerce for oceans and atmosphere at NOAA, emailed responses privately walking back the statement. | In response to one angry scientist, both Neil Jacobs, then the acting director of NOAA, and Tim Gallaudet, a retired Navy admiral who is assistant secretary of commerce for oceans and atmosphere at NOAA, emailed responses privately walking back the statement. |
| Updated Aug. 12, 2020 | |
| Here’s what you need to know about the latest climate change news this week: | Here’s what you need to know about the latest climate change news this week: |
| Mr. Jacobs wrote that “the forecast office did the right thing to calm the nerves of citizens.” | Mr. Jacobs wrote that “the forecast office did the right thing to calm the nerves of citizens.” |
| And Mr. Gallaudet, in the clearest indication yet that the statement rebuking National Weather Service scientists came from political overseers, assured the scientist that Mr. Jacobs’s reply served as “a sincere acknowledgment of a news release we did not approve or support.” | And Mr. Gallaudet, in the clearest indication yet that the statement rebuking National Weather Service scientists came from political overseers, assured the scientist that Mr. Jacobs’s reply served as “a sincere acknowledgment of a news release we did not approve or support.” |
| NOAA did not immediately respond to a request for comment about that email. | NOAA did not immediately respond to a request for comment about that email. |
| Mr. Jacobs was copied on that email, as were other senior Trump administration political appointees like Stuart Levenbach, who at the time was chief of staff at NOAA. Both NOAA and the National Weather Service operate under the Commerce Department. Several people familiar with the matter told The New York Times that Wilbur Ross, the commerce secretary, ordered NOAA to rebut the forecasters’ contradiction of Mr. Trump or face firings. Mr. Ross has denied that he threatened to fire anyone in connection with the incident. | Mr. Jacobs was copied on that email, as were other senior Trump administration political appointees like Stuart Levenbach, who at the time was chief of staff at NOAA. Both NOAA and the National Weather Service operate under the Commerce Department. Several people familiar with the matter told The New York Times that Wilbur Ross, the commerce secretary, ordered NOAA to rebut the forecasters’ contradiction of Mr. Trump or face firings. Mr. Ross has denied that he threatened to fire anyone in connection with the incident. |
| In a separate email to a colleague, Mr. Gallaudet confided he was close to quitting. | In a separate email to a colleague, Mr. Gallaudet confided he was close to quitting. |
| “I’m having a hard time not departing the pattern right now,” he wrote to John D. Murphy, the chief operating officer at the National Weather Service, using aviation lingo to describe his desire to leave. | “I’m having a hard time not departing the pattern right now,” he wrote to John D. Murphy, the chief operating officer at the National Weather Service, using aviation lingo to describe his desire to leave. |
| “Hang in there, sir,” Mr. Murphy replied and suggested the agency needed strong leadership to counteract the creeping political influence on science. “Is this battle to die for or better to stay and fight for what’s right. It’s latter for me … we can do more in pattern.” | “Hang in there, sir,” Mr. Murphy replied and suggested the agency needed strong leadership to counteract the creeping political influence on science. “Is this battle to die for or better to stay and fight for what’s right. It’s latter for me … we can do more in pattern.” |
| The stress the White House moves placed on rank-and-file NOAA employees was evident in the reaction of Dennis Feltgen, a normally unflappable spokesman for the agency’s National Hurricane Center. In response to an inquiry by the news media about the president’s altered map, he wrote a one-word email to higher-ups: “HELP!!!” | The stress the White House moves placed on rank-and-file NOAA employees was evident in the reaction of Dennis Feltgen, a normally unflappable spokesman for the agency’s National Hurricane Center. In response to an inquiry by the news media about the president’s altered map, he wrote a one-word email to higher-ups: “HELP!!!” |
| The documents released Friday under the Freedom of Information Act offer the clearest picture to date of the turmoil brought about by Mr. Trump’s initial remark and subsequent false statements about the path of Hurricane Dorian, as well as his decision to trot out a map in the Oval Office that appeared to have been altered with a black marker to suggest Alabama was in the potential path of the storm. | The documents released Friday under the Freedom of Information Act offer the clearest picture to date of the turmoil brought about by Mr. Trump’s initial remark and subsequent false statements about the path of Hurricane Dorian, as well as his decision to trot out a map in the Oval Office that appeared to have been altered with a black marker to suggest Alabama was in the potential path of the storm. |
| The emails show top NOAA officials knew full well that the map Mr. Trump presented had been altered, even as days later the agency issued an unsigned statement essentially chastising the Birmingham forecasters for having contradicted the president. | The emails show top NOAA officials knew full well that the map Mr. Trump presented had been altered, even as days later the agency issued an unsigned statement essentially chastising the Birmingham forecasters for having contradicted the president. |
| “The chart shown in the briefing is old and doctored to extend the cone to Alabama,” Corey Pieper in NOAA’s press office told colleagues on Sept. 4, as the agency received a barrage of requests from the news media to understand the source of Mr. Trump’s comments. | “The chart shown in the briefing is old and doctored to extend the cone to Alabama,” Corey Pieper in NOAA’s press office told colleagues on Sept. 4, as the agency received a barrage of requests from the news media to understand the source of Mr. Trump’s comments. |
| “Are you sure it was doctored? Was Alabama never in the cone to that extent?” asked Susan Buchanan, another communications officer. | “Are you sure it was doctored? Was Alabama never in the cone to that extent?” asked Susan Buchanan, another communications officer. |
| “Yes, that was doctored,” Mr. Pieper replied. | “Yes, that was doctored,” Mr. Pieper replied. |
| Two days later, after Mr. Trump had continued to insist on Twitter that he was right about Alabama lying in Hurricane Dorian’s path, NOAA issued its unsigned statement rebuking Birmingham forecasters. Staff hit back immediately. | Two days later, after Mr. Trump had continued to insist on Twitter that he was right about Alabama lying in Hurricane Dorian’s path, NOAA issued its unsigned statement rebuking Birmingham forecasters. Staff hit back immediately. |
| “You are not going to believe this BULL,” Maureen O’Leary, a longtime public affairs specialist at NOAA, wrote to a colleague. She followed up, relaying some of the most choice public comments she was finding including, “Should I call the White House for my weather forecasts from now on?”, adding an expletive. | “You are not going to believe this BULL,” Maureen O’Leary, a longtime public affairs specialist at NOAA, wrote to a colleague. She followed up, relaying some of the most choice public comments she was finding including, “Should I call the White House for my weather forecasts from now on?”, adding an expletive. |
| Others made their concerns about the situation known to those higher in the chain of command. | Others made their concerns about the situation known to those higher in the chain of command. |
| “This statement is deeply upsetting to NOAA employees that have worked the hurricane and not fully accurate based on the timeline in question,” Alek Krautmann, who works with NOAA’s satellite and information service office, told communications officials. | “This statement is deeply upsetting to NOAA employees that have worked the hurricane and not fully accurate based on the timeline in question,” Alek Krautmann, who works with NOAA’s satellite and information service office, told communications officials. |
| Craig McLean, NOAA’s acting chief scientist who later filed a complaint with the agency alleging the unsigned statement violated its scientific-integrity policy, took his concerns straight to the top. | Craig McLean, NOAA’s acting chief scientist who later filed a complaint with the agency alleging the unsigned statement violated its scientific-integrity policy, took his concerns straight to the top. |
| “What’s next? Climate science is a hoax?” he asked in an email sent to Mr. Jacobs and other top political appointees at NOAA and the Commerce Department. “Flabbergasted to leave our forecasters hanging in the political wind.” He signed off, “Embarrassed, Craig.” | “What’s next? Climate science is a hoax?” he asked in an email sent to Mr. Jacobs and other top political appointees at NOAA and the Commerce Department. “Flabbergasted to leave our forecasters hanging in the political wind.” He signed off, “Embarrassed, Craig.” |
| Mr. Jacobs, who has since been nominated to formally lead the agency, spent several days afterward trying to calm the waters. | Mr. Jacobs, who has since been nominated to formally lead the agency, spent several days afterward trying to calm the waters. |
| Gary Shigenaka, a NOAA marine biologist, emailed Mr. Jacobs urging him to address “this crisis of moral leadership our agency is facing” and asking for reassurance that “we are not mere pawns in an absurd game” pitting science against politics. | Gary Shigenaka, a NOAA marine biologist, emailed Mr. Jacobs urging him to address “this crisis of moral leadership our agency is facing” and asking for reassurance that “we are not mere pawns in an absurd game” pitting science against politics. |
| “You have no idea how hard I’m fighting to keep politics out of science,” Mr. Jacobs replied. | “You have no idea how hard I’m fighting to keep politics out of science,” Mr. Jacobs replied. |
| Lisa Friedman and Mark Walker reported from Washington, and John Schwartz from New York. | Lisa Friedman and Mark Walker reported from Washington, and John Schwartz from New York. |