To use the access keys for this Web site, note the following information: h = Link to the home page of the Web site, s = Search our Web site, x = Skip the navigation links and go directly to the content of the page.
Committee on Energy and Commerce, Democrats Home Page
Who We Are Schedule What's New

Prepared Statement of The Honorable Joe Barton

Questions Surrounding the 'Hockey Stick' Temperature Studies: Implications for Climate Change Assessments

Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations
July 27, 2006

Opening Statement of the Honorable Joe Barton
Chairman, Committee on Energy and Commerce
Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations Hearing on
Questions Surrounding the 'Hockey Stick' Temperature Studies: Implications for Climate Change Assessments

July 27, 2006

Thank you, Chairman Whitfield. It is clear from last week's hearing on global climate temperature studies that we face issues involving much more than the particulars of Dr. Mann's "hockey stick" studies. However, it is the particulars of these studies - and how the existing climate assessment process dealt with them - that got us here today. And so I appreciate that Dr. Mann accepted our invitation to lay out his important work on global temperature reconstruction, as well as to answer our broader questions concerning climate change assessments.

I also appreciate the participation and perspective of our distinguished panelists today, including Dr. Ralph Cicerone, the President of the National Academy of Sciences. Let me also welcome back Dr. Wegman and Mr. McIntyre, who testified last week.

As you noted, Chairman Whitfield, last week's hearing demonstrated why we as policymakers need to understand the quality and reliability of the science on which we are urged to base policy that is both sweeping and costly. Some very respected and authoritative sources testified last week that Dr. Mann's studies were flawed, and that they couldn't support the findings for which they were used by the United Nation's climate change assessment, the IPCC. Today I hope we can examine some of these issues a bit more.

I do recognize that additional work has been published that supports in broad outline some of the conclusions of Dr. Mann's initial "hockey stick" studies. But according to the National Research Council, even that subsequent work cannot provide the level of confidence that IPCC placed upon the hockey stick studies.

Nothing about the process of turning observations into accepted theories is smooth. It has been said that the politics of small towns and big universities are brutal enough to make our kind look amateurish by comparison, and I think that might be true. In any case, that's the way science progresses. I not only accept it -- bumps included -- but I support it.

What I can't accept is the improbable notion that this committee may not ask science- or research-related questions that bear on policymaking when the answers could improve the information we use to reach those policy decisions. It is just wrong to say that questions are not permitted, or that free debate is improper, or that anyone who wonders if the scientific establishment really has it right should be dismissed as anti-science or oblivious to the real risks of manmade climate change. Because this Committee holds a key role in any policymaking relating to climate change, as its Chairman I will do everything I can to ensure that the very best information on these issues is available to us.

We're interested in Dr. Mann's work because it is seminal. During our last hearing, some shrugged at it as distant and early, but the fact is that Dr. Mann's conclusions influence both current research and global policy. As we try to close the loop on our concerns, I also want to emphasize that this Committee will continue to work on the issues raised here, to help ensure the reliability of future scientific assessments.

A couple of months ago, Chairman Whitfield and I asked the U.S. Government Accountability Office to help us examine federal data sharing policies, especially as they related to climate change research. This work will help our efforts to improve the exchange of scientific data and other essential information - which as we have seen has been a particular problem in this climate change arena.

Also, when the dust settles on these hearings, I'm going to prepare a request to the National Research Council, which Dr. Cicerone chairs, to take on some of the issues that Dr. Wegman and others have raised for us. I will ask for a study that assesses how to include a wider spectrum of scientific disciplines in climate change research so that we can be enlightened by the very best work that our scientists conduct, all of them. I'll ask that this study be coordinated and run though the NRC's Division on Engineering and Physical Sciences, so that we can ensure that disciplines like mathematics, physics, and statistics participate up front. I'll welcome Dr. Cicerone's perspective on this today, so that we can formulate an effective request.

Letting a wider scientific community address questions about climate change assessments can only help the process and improve the results. We have an obligation on this Committee to ensure that America's decision-makers have the best information possible.

Thank you all for coming to testify today. I yield back the remainder of my time.

Related Documents