You would think President Joe Biden would consult directly with The Right Climate Stuff, the group of retired and highly experienced NASA engineers and scientists who have assessed the state of today’s climate change science. After all, back in July, Biden heaped praise on NASA engineers and scientists in the televised briefing to preview the first images from the James Webb Space Telescope.

But no, Biden clearly is not interested in the findings of these experts when they come to conclusions inconvenient to his climate policy objectives. For the findings of The Right Climate Stuff (TRCS), experts demonstrate conclusively that the president’s climate change policies are not founded on reliable science.

In “Steely-Eyed Missile Men” Demolish the Climate Scare, part 1 of this series of articles about TRCS, I discussed the origins of this important group, the main players, and the focus of their activities. Even though climate science is not one of the technical specialties of these engineers and scientists, the academic training and experience gained through their many years working in America’s space program required expertise in physics, chemistry, geology, meteorology, biology, data analysis, and interpretation, and complex systems modeling, all of which is very applicable to assessing the state of today’s climate science.

TRCS certainly did their homework as well, hosting two symposiums on global warming topics during September and October 2011, featuring speakers on both sides of the global warming debate. If only the American government would do the same.

They also invited others with interest and expertise to join the team and share the results of their studies of the scientific issues involved. In particular, the Texas State Climatologist, Dr. John Nielson-Gammon, agreed to work with TRCS, guiding the group to the best peer-reviewed research and helping moderate internal discussions about that research.

TRCS were primarily motivated by concerns about how today’s hysterical public and political dialogue about climate change is being promoted by predictions of impending catastrophic global warming by the climate research leadership at NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies at Columbia University in New York City. TRCS volunteers felt that these alarming and premature predictions, with so little supportive empirical data, would eventually damage NASA’s reputation.

Consequently, some members of the TRCS team, as well as a wider population of NASA retirees, signed two letters sent to the NASA Administrator expressing their concerns about alarming public statements by NASA leaders regarding catastrophic climate change. You can read one of the open letters, signed by 49 former NASA engineers and scientists, here.

While there are many important contributions made by TRCS experts, one is particularly noteworthy.

It is the late Dr. Harold Doiron’s analysis of the amount of atmospheric warming caused by increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO₂). Indeed, former NASA engineer and current Chairman of TRCS Jim Peacock considers it “the most valuable product of our TRCS Climate Research.” Mr. Peacock explains:

“Hal took the direct approach of using the two variables, measured atmospheric CO₂ concentration and measured increase in average global atmospheric temperature, to determine the upper bounds of warming by increases of CO₂. The result is a metric called Transient Climate Sensitivity (TCS) that projects an upper bound of 1.0⁰C (1.8⁰F) warming of the global mean surface temperature by 2100 from rising CO₂ and other greenhouse gases and aerosols.”

ONE DEGREE!
Let that sink in for a moment.
The world is spending over $1 billion USD every day to stop what, at most, would be a degree of warming.

Apparently, this was the first analysis published by the climate change community to determine the TCS of CO₂. Dr. Doiron’s original analysis, “BOUNDING GHG CLIMATE SENSITIVITY FOR USE IN REGULATORY DECISIONS,” was first published in 2014, a condensed version of which, “What Climate Crisis?”, by TRCS Vice-Chairman, Marty Cornell, was published in 2020.

The takeaway from Dr. Doiron’s work is that, even though the models relied upon by the United Nations climate authorities are highly complex, while the TRCS model is based merely on a simple energy balance between incoming and outgoing radiation, the TRCS model correlates far better with measurements of what is actually happening in the real world than do the UN models. This is because the TRCS model uses an “Observational Method,” based on actual empirical data, not unvalidated climate model simulations that are at the core of the complicated models relied upon by the UN. And although the government and mainstream media are loath to admit it, as the following graph demonstrates, the UN models have failed miserably, forecasting, on average, more than twice the warming than has actually occurred. Yet, this is the sole basis for fears of dangerous warming in the future.

Again, in contrast, TRCS analysis of the effect of increasing CO₂ in the atmosphere was validated by comparison with measured data. And, in comparison to 34 years of failed climate models at a cost of hundreds of millions of dollars, TRCS completed their work in 14 months for free.

Concerning the upper limit of 1.0⁰C that the TRCS model projects, Marty Cornell explained:

“Such modest warming would be beneficial, not detrimental, to mankind and the biosphere. We thus suggest that only reality-based projections such as our TCS metric be used in policy development of CO₂ emission regulations. The alternative is the continued misuse of falsified climate models for policy justification. This practice will lead to the degradation of the economic vitality of the world, a nation, or state.”

Readers will be happy to hear that TRCS scientists and engineers have taken political action with their findings. For example, in addition to their letter to the NASA Administrator, in 2016, TRCS, led by Dr. Doiron, made a range of sensible public recommendations to the Trump transition team investigating actions to take at the Environmental Protection Agency. Dr. Doiron was also the lead signatory to an open letter to President Donald Trump in 2017 in which TRCS concluded:

“We recommend the proper course for the USA today is to show world leadership by withdrawing from both the UNFCCC [United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change] and UN Paris Treaties, with a statement that the climate science on which these agreements are based is too immature and uncertain, with potentially severe unintended consequences for all mankind.”

Although Mr. Trump did successfully withdraw from the flawed Paris Agreement, powerful “deep state” entities inside the government made it politically difficult for the president to dump the UNFCCC, the origin of all UN treaties on climate change. Clearly, that should be one of the primary goals of the next president.

To learn more about Dr. Doiron’s important contribution to helping push America away from its dangerous course on climate change, see his 2017 presentation “Climate Alarmists Are A Threat To Our National Security.”

In part three of this series, I will discuss the findings of TRCS team member Gregg Goodnight about the real reasons for the February 2021 Texas blackout and the lessons that must be learned if the US is to avoid a nationwide power disaster. Concerning new federal legislation targeting 80% renewable power by 2030 and 100% by 2035, Mr. Goodnight says, “This is suicidal!”