Green Corrections

Bad science gets a bad review:

Roger Pielke Jr., a former environmental studies professor at the University of Colorado, requested that NOAA correct its billion dollar disasters (BDD) dataset in January, alleging that the dataset’s sourcing and methodology are not sufficiently transparent for the metric to inform policy. NOAA responded to Pielke’s correction request on Aug. 21, admitting that the dataset has not undergone external peer review since 2015 and committing to improving its “documentation and transparency” of the dataset’s component parts going forward. BDD data keeps track of natural disasters that caused $1 billion or more in inflation-adjusted damages going back to 1980, with NOAA and the Biden White House contending that the increasing frequency of BDD events evidences worsening climate change. However, BDD is an economic statistic rather than an indicator of changing meteorological conditions; the same exact hurricane could hit the same exact city 100 years apart, but the damage totals for each storm would be vastly different given that there are more assets to be destroyed in harm’s way now than there were a century ago. In response to Pielke’s request, NOAA said it would start disclosing more of the publicly available sources that it uses to craft its data, formalize and disclose the steps the agency takes to ensure the BDD data’s “robustness” and set up a peer-review system that is consistent with NOAA’s own policies. “NOAA made some difficult admissions here about the fact that the BDD tabulation has failed to meet their standards for scientific integrity and information quality,” Pielke, who believes climate change is a serious problem, told the DCNF. “The BDD tabulation is clever marketing and the media love it. However, no one should mistake it as science.”

Because it never was...