Be careful. You’re gonna’ send Roger into a “comment guidelines” frenzy.
]]>01 The following shall be referred to the servicing PAO:
c. official and non-official scientific and technical papers authored or co-authored by NOAA employees that may result in media interest.
.02 NOAA employees must notify the servicing PAO or OPCIA before responding to news media inquiries whenever the inquiries:
a. are of national news interest;
b. concern regulatory actions or issues;
c. concern controversial issues;
d. pertain to science or research having known or potential policy implications;
e. involve the release of scientific or technical papers that may have policy implications or are controversial; or
f. involve a crisis or a potential crisis situation.
]]>Your original comment, “I have yet to identify anyone who claims to HAVE BEEN censored by NOAA leadership….” [emphasis mine]
My reporting here is done. Back to work.
]]>The story refers to experiences a “few months ago” when NOAA admitted that they had some problems, as did NASA. Those issues became public, and the head of NOAA apologized and said he’d make changes. Since then I have not heard similar allegations.
If you know different, then simply provide the evidence. Allegation absent evidence is innuendo. I do wonder why you continue to point to old news to make claims about the present.
]]>Brilliant.
]]>I just spent the week with Knutson and Landsea. The article is not right or wrong, it is one reporter’s experience. Your reference to it is good fodder for consipracy theorists, but doesn’t really address the issue. You are a reporter, no? Why don’t you do some real reporting on this issue? I’m not really sure what it is that you disagree with, since you haven’t really presented an argument or claims.
I am satisfied from what I see with my eyes and hear with my ears that the arguments that I present here are accurate. But beware — they could be wrong, and I’ll change my views when that is the case. But it is unlikely that second-hand innuendo from weblog commenters is going to make that threshold. Sorry. Do some reporting and maybe that’d be different.
Thanks.
]]>Roger’s denial continues, “I have yet to identify anyone who claims to have been censored by NOAA leadership, though I’d be interested in hearing from them. If you (or Jerry Mahlman) would like to name names, I’m all ears.”
See story in Providence Journal here:
NOAA accused of hiding truth about global warming
By PETER B. LORD
The Providence Journal
28-MAR-06
link: http://tinyurl.com/rzbn5
Knutson seems to be out, while Landsea seems to be NOAA’s superstar scientist for the moment. Gee, I wonder why?
Obviously, this is the case of yet ANOTHER journalist not getting it “wrong”, Roger. I would suggest you send a letter to the editor.
]]>