British tabloid The Daily Mail has found a niche market in creating thrilling stories about phony medical horrors and delivering breathless reporting of scientific “controversies” with all the lizard-man-ish detail of InfoWars. That they would generate a massive, global, climate change conspiracy story by pulling some quotes out of context is entirely typical. And of course, it was headlined, with all the Mail’s usual accuracy and understatement “Exposed: How World Leaders Were Duped Into Investing Billions Over Manipulated Global Warming Data,”
All of this is about as expected as getting an update from the National Enquirer on the college years of Hillary’s adopted alien son. Until a Republican congressman decides to take it seriously:
Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Texas), a longtime denier of mainstream climate science, is convinced that the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration cooked its books on climate change. …
On Tuesday, Smith’s committee hosted a hearing that had nothing to do with NOAA, at least on the surface. Titled “Making EPA Great Again” and stacked with industry lobbyists, most of whom agree with Smith on climate change, the purpose was to discuss how the Environmental Protection Agency can “pursue environmental protection and protect public health by relying on sound science.” But the chairman couldn’t help but take advantage of the opportunity the Daily Mail story created, quickly switching gears to blast NOAA for its alleged deception.
That the Daily Mail story had already been debunked didn’t bother Smith. And why should it? The fact that the entire “Climategate” story was soundly debunked over and over hasn’t kept any Republican, including Trump, from continuing to treat it as a real issue.
Using the news equivalent of Welcome to Nightvale as his justification, Smith declared the whole basis of the regulatory framework to be fake.
House Science, Space and Technology Committee Chairman Lamar Smith has alleged that the Obama administration relied on falsified data to justify new regulations, such as limiting carbon emissions from coal-fired power plants.
Smith went as far as saying that the American Association for the Advancement of Science should “redact” the NOAA study prepared by Thomas Karl. Though “redacting” is not something that the AAAS does.
However, AAAS Chief Executive Rush Holt—former congressman and genuine scientist—fired back at Smith, pointing out that the scientist quoted as a “whistleblower” in the Daily Mail article had already denied the piece, and that the Karl study had survived a fresh review.
Smith was, of course, not letting his pre-generated scandal evaporate so easily.
The GOP congressman, who has received $697,747 in donations from the oil and gas industry since 1989, has been on a years-long crusade ― or “witch hunt,” as some have called it ― to discredit all-but-universally accepted climate science. In 2015, after NOAA published its study updating the global temperature record, Smith harassed agency scientists, issuing subpoenas to obtain communications related to their analysis. He has also gone after seemingly everyone looking into Exxon Mobil’s suppression of climate change research, including the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, often parroting the oil and gas giant’s go-to First Amendment defense in the process.
So … expect to hear about this again. It’ll be “Climategate II” or “Climategazi” or … whatever. Because when you have people who are arguing things they know to be lies in the first place, the fact that their scandals are also lies is just expected.