Last week, Coleman commented on a federal government-commissioned report spotlighted by the New York Times, which falsely claimed it was a report that was leaked because of fear that President Trump would try to suppress it.
But the report, the National Climate Assessment, had been available to the public for as many as seven months.
A project of the U.S. Global Change Research Program, the report claims “evidence for a changing climate abounds, from the top of the atmosphere to the depths of the oceans.”
It also states “many lines of evidence demonstrate that human activities, especially emissions of greenhouse (heat-trapping) gases, are primarily responsible for recent observed climate change.”
Coleman said of the report: “In all its detailed reports linking weather events to climate change and the linking of ‘record-high temperatures’ with climate change, this report lacks the one key element that is essential to satisfy the scientific basis of the basic claim: linking increases in CO2 with significant climate change. In fact, this report provides absolutely no new science to support this key point.”
Therefore, Coleman said, “on a scientific basis it is entirely without merit.”
Several experts at the Heartland Institute, a free-market think tank that frequently addresses climate issues, blasted the Times for printing “fake news” and “fake science.”
“The New York Times’ front-page story on the national climate assessment represents fake news in collaboration with the deep state,” said Fred Palmer, energy policy senior fellow at the Heartland Institute.
He said the first paragraph of the story “gives the game away, claiming there has been a massive warming in the United States since 1980.”
“In fact, there has been little if any warming based on satellite readings, corroborated 100 percent by weather balloon readings,” he said. “The satellite data readily available on Dr. Roy Spencer’s webpage show 0.28 degrees Celsius warming since 1979. That rate of warming would equal less than 0.75 degrees Celsius over 100 years.”
Marc Morano, publisher of the Climate Depot website, said the Times was “hyping a rehash of frightening climate change claims by Obama administration holdover activist government scientists.”
“The new report is once again pre-determined science. The Trump administration should reject this new climate report and consider a national commission on climate change with scientists not affiliated with environmental activist groups.”
D’Aleo, executive director of IceCap.us and environmental policy adviser at the Heartland Institute, said the “great scientists I have been privileged to know over my long career including Namias, Willett, Landsberg and Gray and the great men who championed the scientific method like Feynman, Popper, and Einstein would be appalled by this report and the overall decline in the sciences and the alarming peer-review failures that allow bad and dangerous science like we find in this report to propagate and be used to support harmful policies.”
“I believe the only part of this work that is ‘extreme likely’ is that future scientists and historians will look on it as a low point in the history of climate,” he said.