Eco-Cult Website ‘Climate.gov’ Being Shuffled Off to a New NOAA Webpage
This is a direct-hit to the climate crisis propagandists who have been directing news content and policy direction.
Last week, I noted that many people were beginning to notice the hyperbolic reporting about summer high temperatures that has become a very predictable part of the media’s climate madness.
The government’s “Climate.gov” has been one of the biggest sources of misinformation and eco-propaganda. Now the site is being relegated to a remote corner of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s website.
This move is in direct response to recent executive orders by President Donald Trump. It aims to streamline the delivery of climate information, making it more accessible and better aligning it with real science that has verifiable and reproducible results. The move occurred after most of the Climate.gov staff were fired earlier this year.
Climate.gov, the gateway website for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)’s Climate Program Office, will imminently no longer publish new content, according to multiple former staff responsible for the site’s content whose contracts were recently terminated.
“The entire content production staff at climate.gov (including me) were let go from our government contract on 31 May,” said a former government contractor who wished to remain anonymous for fear of retaliation. “We were told that our positions within the contract were being eliminated.”
Rebecca Lindsey, the website’s former program manager, who was fired in February as part of the government’s purge of probationary employees, described a months-long situation within NOAA where political appointees and career staff argued over the fate of the website.
Our final updates have been posted to the https://t.co/OBr0sjrZ3l website, and this will be our final post to our social media channels. pic.twitter.com/dieRzIfQJu
— NOAA Climate.gov (@NOAAClimate) June 27, 2025
The new page, noaa.gov/climate, offers the following introduction:
UPDATED: June 24, 2025. In compliance with Executive Order 14303 (“Restoring Gold Standard Science”), the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy’s June 23, 2025 Memorandum (“Agency Guidance for Implementing Gold Standard Science in the Conduct & Management of Scientific Activities”), 15 USC § 2904 (“National Climate Program”), 15 USC § 2934 (“National Global Change Research Plan”), and 33 USC § 893a (“NOAA Ocean and Atmospheric Science Education Programs”), you have been redirected to NOAA.gov. Future research products previously housed under Climate.gov will be available at NOAA.gov/climate and its affiliate websites.
Charles Rotter of Watts Up With That climate blog highlights how this shift is a direct hit to the climate crisis propagandists who have been directing news content and policy direction.
For years, millions of casual web surfers landed on Climate.gov only to be lectured by animated carbon-cycle maps, sliding-scale temperature-anomaly widgets and color-coded doom gauges predicting imminent coastal calamity.
All of that eye-candy is now frozen in digital amber—archived but never to be updated—so that future historians can gawp at government-sponsored hysteria in its unedited glory. No more breathless countdowns to climate Armageddon, no more click-bait pop-ups proclaiming every thunderstorm as “proof” of runaway warming. The propagandists have packed up their graph-generating scripts and left, leaving behind only static pages that serve as curious relics of alarmist marketing.
Clearly, the Trump administration hopes that the new emphasis on science and reason will help drive policies that are actually beneficial to the country. Going forward, it is intended that NOAA will focus on presenting information related to the importance of both natural climate variability and long-term trends, rather than attributing every fluctuation to human causes without robust evidence.
A good example of this approach, Accounting for Natural Variability in Our Changing Climate. The discussion covers two of the more famous climate phenomena that the media have been using for years to gin up worry about global warming: El Niño and La Niña.
Many scientific, engineering, and economic activities rely on conventional “climate normals”—30-year averages—as a benchmark of climate conditions across the United States. To enhance the usefulness of these averages, a new set of ENSO (El Niño–Southern Oscillation) Climate Normals has been developed for the contiguous United States by NOAA NCEI. These primarily take into account the influence of El Niño, La Niña, and climate change impacts.
El Niño and La Niña events are part of the ENSO cycle, which affects weather and climate conditions worldwide. Globally, El Niño leads to a warming effect, while La Niña contributes to cooler conditions. However, over the continental United States, El Niño and La Niña events are each associated with areas that are colder-than-normal or warmer-than-normal, as well as areas that are drier-than-normal or wetter-than-normal. The new averages also consider an optimal climate normal (OCN) to account for climate change impacts and align the basis of the normals with the most recent climate conditions.
All of this is very good news for those of us who love both real science and our nation.
The climate scam is dying on the vine.
— Mark Swisher (@markswisher) June 27, 2025
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
There is no way to determine the temperature of the Earth with the claimed accuracy and precision.
Climate models reflect the assumptions of their creators rather than reality.
“As briefly as possible, a model may make good, even excellent predictions, but this does not prove that the model’s premises accurately describe reality.”
William M. Briggs
Probability Doesn’t Exist: Nothing Has A Probability at Science Is Not The Answer
https://wmbriggs.substack.com/p/probability-doesnt-exist-nothing
“The data doesn’t matter. We’re not basing our recommendations on the data. We’re basing them on the climate models.”
Professor Chris Folland, Hadley Centre for Climate Prediction and Research.
“The models are convenient fictions that provide something very useful.”
Dr David Frame, climate modeler, Oxford University.
Models are always wrong but sometimes useful. Climate models are always wrong and never useful.
Prediction: this website – or more accurately this quackery – will only be gone until the next radical leftist steals a presidential election. After which you will be compelled to believe in their myths.
Or else.
It’s the one thing communists can be counted on to do.
“Now the site is being relegated to a remote corner of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s website.”
There is no ‘remote corner’ of the internet. There is either a web address or there is not.
If there is still a web address that functions then this is NOT a positive step.
On that note, why wasn’t eliminated completely?
Many years ago, I once reached the end of the Internet, from which you could only hit the back button. But it was way smaller then.
End of the Internet
Lofl
Lol
Sites that are not updated get pushed further and further back in searches.
This is what ‘remote corner of the internet means.
An apparent fit to data does not mean that either model or the underlying assumptions are correct. A lesson from history that applies to today.
Ptolemy’s Geocentric Model of the universe was the generally accepted wisdom for about 1,500 years. This model of the universe has the earth in the center with the then known planets, along along with the sun and moon, in orbit around the earth. The stars were fixed. The word “planet” means wanderer. Ptolemy had to “fudge” as problems arose. The planets were supposed to orbit the earth in perfect circles with uniform motion.
First problem: retrograde motion. Mars for example moves in the wrong direction for part of the year. Whoops. The model doesn’t match the observed data. So Ptolemy invented epicycles as a fix. Now imaginary points orbit the earth, and each planet orbits around its associated imaginary point. The new model is much more complicated than the original.
Second problem: The varying speeds of the planets. So Ptolemy invented the “eccentric,” which shifts the central point from the earth to an imaginary point. This is a major fudge and I don’t know how it got away with it. We no longer have a geocentric model. All those epicycles are orbiting around the eccentric, not the earth.
Third problem: To keep the idea of uniform motion Ptolemy invented the “equant.” The planetary epicycles move with constant angular speed around the equant. Another imaginary point.
Then came Galileo Galilei and Kepler in the 17th Century. They put the sun in the center and Kepler gave us the elliptical orbits. Now here is the kicker of this little history lesson. Ptolemy’s Geocentric Model matched the data as well or better than Kepler’s! Huh. The wrong model gives seemingly correct answers. How is that? Ptolemy’s complex model has lots of free parameters. All those epicycles along with the locations of eccentric and equant. John von Neumann put it well: “With four parameters I can fit an elephant, and with five I can make him wiggle his trunk”.
This is how the climate change activists work. Their models have lots of free parameters so you can back fit. In a way Ptolemy was more honest. Now all the fudges are hidden in complex computer codes and sometimes you can’t get to the source. “Sorry the source code is proprietary”
Nicely said. Briefly: correlation does not imply causation.
For my personal simple-brained self, I could never get past the idea of a “global temperature”. Even with satellites, how does one obtain enough sample points to ascertain a meaningful average? Are 10,000 sample points enough? Then, as oden points out, the method by with you assemble those data points into something meaningful contains so many variables as to render the exercise pointless. How do you combine data from Iceland with that of Dubai and make an average. How far can you extrapolate a single data point? Recall the famous climate analysis for 1,000 years ago based on tree rings..,from a single tree? Yes, they extrapolated the planet’s climate from a single sample…with no information about the circumstances under which that tree had to grow.
It’s a fun game, especially if you can make money from it but ….
https://www.statology.org/correlation-does-not-imply-causation-examples/
Then, of course, you have the problem of them “revising” certain data points they find, shall we say, inconvenient.. Tell me, how is it possible to “revise” a point of data for a measurement taken nearly a century in the past? Did you borrow Doc Brown’s DeLorean to go back and retake it?
It’s pretty easy.
You have one data point. Decide what you think it tells you. Then extrapolate to the rest of the planet for whatever period you decide that one data point represent
You might find this article interesting reading
https://climatediscussionnexus.com/2023/12/20/a-tree-ring-record-you-werent-supposed-to-see/
With surface-based temperature stations, we have what’s called the “scattered data problem.” The measurements don’t occur on a regular grid, and for some regions are sparse, like the oceans. The climate researchers use a technique call “Kriging” to interpolate the measurements between stations. This technique was invented by a South-African mining engineer, and formalized by the French mathematician Matheron. It uses spatial correlation and regression for interpolation and extrapolation. The spatial correlation gets expressed in the form of a “variogram” which has to be assumed or estimated from data. Getting the variogram is a big deal. Once you have the interpolations, you can calculate a global average. Many climate researchers are unaware of an alternate approach, which doesn’t depend on a variogram, called Hardy’s multiquadratic. A radial basis function idea. My info might be out of date. The climate people might use some radial basis function technique today.
Satellite-based measurements, available since 1978, are probably better than surface measurements. But don’t give data before 1978. I have given you a long-winded jargon-filled answer to a reasonable question. Sorry this subject gets very technical. You some some terms to look up the subjects and check me.
It’s summer, yahoos – try common sense.
But… but common sense is so common!
We can easily determine the Pacific Duocadal Climate cycle in Hawaii. The number of fireplaces in homes on Kauai, Upcountry Maui and the island of Hawaii tell you how cold those 2 decades were in relation to homes constructed during warmer periods.
Say! That reminds me. My wife has a subscription to a home design magazine. Did you know that fireplaces are back in fashion again?
I read a story yesterday that said almost all of the temperature gauges used in reporting the climate warming hysteria are level 4 or 5. The thermometers are rated on a 1-5 scale with the higher the number the farther off in variability they are. 5 is something like a 2c window so all the average rise in temperature breathlessly reported is within the margin of error. Probably not happening at all.
I have to say…. there is so much winning going on right now.
Daily.
The news gets better and better.
Trump fights the right fights and he’s winning.
These are not “tribal” good for our side wins. These are wins that are making America stronger and safer.
I’m on the cusp of having enough “eff you money” to leave my W2 job. I’ll stay as long as I can, but it’s been 4 1/2 years since my pandemic stock option win (I did good on that one) and Biden still managed to beat the tar out of my net worth with years of stagnant growth AND wreck my net worth’s buying power anyway through inflation.
I still get white knuckles looking at groceries, but its stopped going up.
The tranny stuff is coming to a grind. He’s taking the fight to the hell holes that still push this agenda.
Immigration…. I mean wow. If this keeps up we stand to have our country back by the end of this term.
Graft and grift…. good wins up front, but a long way to go.
Energy…. he just put three TN natives on the TVA. TN is going to build a nuke plant.
Foreign policy… I mean the list of wins just keeps going.
I have not seen this level of winning since Reagan and I think he’s beating Reagan in many areas (Reagan caved on immigration).
Great post!
“this was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal …” So Obama was right, sort of, not the way he expected, not by the means expected, not by whom he expected, not when he expected, but still . . .
Leave a Comment