Thanks for doing what we asked, but we still say no...

Today the Washington Post published an article titled "Congress kills request for National Climate Service" (Link to Story). This article obviously appeals to me because of my career/personal interest in weather. Read the full article to get the whole story, but here is a quick summary:

The National Climate Service was basically proposed as a service that would consolidate all the sources of data that The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) offers that relates to weather. Having been in a research position at two different jobs/research stints, I understand first hand how important it is to be able to access data to set up your research as well as complement research when validation/conformation is needed. Nothing is more annoying than needing data, requesting data, and having to wade through the bureaucracy and paper work associated with getting certain types of data because there is no "central" storage of data and no similar protocol amongst the sources. Anyway, basically the creation of this service would serve to centralize everything and make a one-stop-shop when it comes to data. Not only would this assure that climate scientists are all using the same data, but it would also assure that the data were not being tampered with (this should appeal to all the skeptics who think data tampering is an issue).

However, at first glance one might think, 'Meh, it is a tough economic time. There is really no need to create a new department/agency/office'. This is a legitimate thought and very true; however, if you were to learn how the agency would be created, it would basically take a little from here, a little from there and reallocate these resources and funds into this new agency - meaning a net zero $$$ increase in current funds. Wow, you might think. Government restructuring to eliminate redundancy and create efficiency, what more can we ask for?

Well, evidently doing what all government agencies have been asked to do this year is not acceptable if they think there might be a government conspiracy. From the WaPo Article:

'"Our hesi­ta­tion,” Rep. Andy Harris (R-Md.) told Lubchenco at a hearing in June, “is that the climate services could become little propaganda sources instead of a science source."

At the same hearing, a key opponent to the service, Rep. Ralph M. Hall (R-Tex.), said he recognized that “certain climate services can provide value.” But he fretted that the reorganization would “severely harm vital research at NOAA.”'

How? How will using the data that is already there harm vital research. By that logic, its like saying combining all the books ever written into a central library is a bad idea because when they were disorganized and in different locations they were harmless, but combined they might make people think/use them differently.

At the same time, there were also accusations that NOAA was operating separately for this administration and that the creation of this Climate Services would provide secret climate data that has been hiden by NOAA for decades...well the article also points out that "For supposedly being in the dark, a lot of light shines on NOAA’s climate data: It’s been public for decades."

That's right, all data that NOAA collects is publicly available (albeit hard to find unless you really know what you are looking for), but nonetheless, if you want it and can process it, it is there, and it is free. That is part of what makes out Weather research in the USA so great, in my opinion.

It is just so astounding that something that is seemingly so simple, cut, and dry can create so much controversy. We are not trying to cut a deficit, balance a budget, fund a war...we are simply asking for congress to say, "Why yes, thanks for listening and making your data more readily available for all atmospheric science research" (of course with snorts and clapping that goes along with 19th century congressional proceedings because that's how I wish congress still worked - Something like this), but it seems like we can't even get that right.

But have no fear, because in the past few weeks, while this did not pass, we did reaffirm that "One nation under God" was still part of the Pledge of Allegiance and that Pizza is STILL considered a vegetable.