{"id":400274,"date":"2025-09-05T12:59:01","date_gmt":"2025-09-05T10:59:01","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=400274"},"modified":"2025-09-05T12:59:03","modified_gmt":"2025-09-05T10:59:03","slug":"science-is-not-team-sport-the-blue-team-response-to-doe-climate-report-shows-that-climate-assessment-is-broken-dr-roger-pielke-jr","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=400274","title":{"rendered":"\u2018Science is Not Team Sport\u2019 \u2013 \u2018The blue team response to DOE (climate report) shows that climate assessment is broken\u2019- Dr. Roger Pielke Jr."},"content":{"rendered":"\n
\"A<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n\n\n\n

From Climate Depot<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Dr. Roger Pielke Jr.:<\/a>\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

I took a look at the DK25 (Trump Admin’s DOE dissenting climate) report in my areas of expertise, as\u00a0I did with the DOE CWG (85 scientists pushing back on DOE report)<\/a>, and I found numerous statements that were simply false \u2014 among them that World Weather Attribution was not created with litigation in mind, that NOAA\u201ds \u201cbillion dollar disasters\u201d (RIP) tabulation was scientifically valid, that SRES had 6 not 40 scenarios, and that RCP8.5 has not been the most commonly used scenario in research and assessment. DK25 ignored all of our research that was accurately cited by DOE CWG.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

DK25 also includes a bizarre claim regarding the detection of changes in extreme weather events:2<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n

\u201cthe absence of statistically significant trends in the historical records does not mean that changes are not occurring\u201d3<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

Actually, that is exactly what the absence of detection means \u2014 don\u2019t take it from me, take it from the IPCC, which defines a <\/a>change <\/a><\/em>in climate<\/a> as follows:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n

A change in the state of the climate that can be identified (e.g., by using statistical tests) by changes in the mean and\/or the variability of its properties and that persists for an extended period, typically decades or longer.<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

The assumption here is that if you find some degree of merit in the DOE CWG then climate policy is doomed and if you instead side with DK25, then carbon dioxide regulation is on its way. Viewed from this perspective, scientific assessments are \u201dtactics\u201d to be mobilized to support political action or delay.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Such a perspective turns scientific assessment into partisan politics. Scientific integrity inevitably suffers.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

By\u00a0Admin<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

https:\/\/rogerpielkejr.substack.com\/p\/science-is-not-team-sport<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

BY ROGER PIELKE JR.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Excerpt:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Blue team has responded <\/a>to the report<\/a> of the Department of Energy\u2019s Climate Working Group (DOE CWG<\/a>) \u2014 the Red team. Together, the two reports show how not <\/em>to do scientific assessment.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Led by Andrew Dessler of Texas A&M and Robert Kopp of Rutgers, the report (DK25)<\/a> includes contributions from 85 contributors (mostly academics from various disciplines) and spans 459 pages. The authors should be commended for working fast to prepare their substantive response. Science is better when discussion and debate take place.1<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Dessler, who calls the DOE report \u201cbullshit<\/a>,\u201d pulls no punches in asserting that there is absolutely nothing that is scientifically accurate<\/a> in the DOE CWG report\u2026<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u2026<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This framing has been adopted by the media, as you can see in the headlines below characterizing the critique upon its release this morning.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"Screenshot
Move along, nothing to see here.<\/em><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

I took a look at the DK25 report in my areas of expertise, as I did with the DOE CWG<\/a>, and I found numerous statements that were simply false \u2014 among them that World Weather Attribution was not created with litigation in mind, that NOAA\u201ds \u201cbillion dollar disasters\u201d (RIP) tabulation was scientifically valid, that SRES had 6 not 40 scenarios, and that RCP8.5 has not been the most commonly used scenario in research and assessment. DK25 ignored all of our research that was accurately cited by DOE CWG.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

DK25 also includes a bizarre claim regarding the detection of changes in extreme weather events:2<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n

\u201cthe absence of statistically significant trends in the historical records does not mean that changes are not occurring\u201d3<\/a><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

Actually, that is exactly what the absence of detection means \u2014 don\u2019t take it from me, take it from the IPCC, which defines a <\/a>change <\/a><\/em>in climate<\/a> as follows:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n

A change in the state of the climate that can be identified (e.g., by using statistical tests) by changes in the mean and\/or the variability of its properties and that persists for an extended period, typically decades or longer.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

This line of argument seems not to be against the DOE CWG report \u2014 which relies heavily on the IPCC \u2014 but against the IPCC\u2019s framework for detection and attribution, which is already under siege<\/a> for not producing strong indications of change in most measures of weather extremes.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u2026<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Extreme event attribution, RCP8.5, and \u201cbillion dollar disasters\u201d are not the hills I\u2019d choose to die on, but apparently the authors of DK25 were so intent in asserting that every claim of DOE CWG is false<\/em>, that they could not admit the many places where DOE CWG got things right.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

My view is that there are stronger and weaker claims in both DOE CWG and DK25. In my areas of expertise \u2014 notably scenarios and extreme weather \u2014 the DOE CWG is pretty strong (but could be better) and DK25 is pretty weak. In other areas, the balance will surely be different. But the Manichean nature of climate debates is that no territory can be given to the enemy.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The exercise \u2014 Red team vs Blue team \u2014 does reveal something important: science is not team sport.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

There is a big obstacle to inclusive, adversarial assessment in climate science \u2014 Politics.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u2026<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The assumption here is that if you find some degree of merit in the DOE CWG then climate policy is doomed and if you instead side with DK25, then carbon dioxide regulation is on its way. Viewed from this perspective, scientific assessments are \u201dtactics\u201d to be mobilized to support political action or delay.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Such a perspective turns scientific assessment into partisan politics. Scientific integrity inevitably suffers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u2026<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Full Pielke Jr. article here: https:\/\/rogerpielkejr.substack.com\/p\/science-is-not-team-sport<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

I took a look at the DK25 (Trump Admin’s DOE dissenting climate) report in my areas of expertise, as\u00a0I did with the DOE CWG (85 scientists pushing back on DOE report), and I found numerous statements that were simply false \u2014 among them that World Weather Attribution was not created with litigation in mind, that NOAA\u201ds \u201cbillion dollar disasters\u201d (RIP) tabulation was scientifically valid, that SRES had 6 not 40 scenarios, and that RCP8.5 has not been the most commonly used scenario in research and assessment. DK25 ignored all of our research that was accurately cited by DOE CWG.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":121246920,"featured_media":400279,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_coblocks_attr":"","_coblocks_dimensions":"","_coblocks_responsive_height":"","_coblocks_accordion_ie_support":"","_crdt_document":"","advanced_seo_description":"Explore Dr. Roger Pielke Jr.'s critique of the DOE's climate report, highlighting discrepancies and the politicization of scientific assessment.","jetpack_seo_html_title":"The Flaws of Climate Reports: Pielke Jr. Critiques DK25","jetpack_seo_noindex":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":false,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","default_image_id":0,"font":"","enabled":false},"version":2},"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false},"categories":[1],"tags":[691818056,691820954,691837760,691821642,691833237,691823146,691834206],"class_list":{"0":"post-400274","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","6":"hentry","7":"category-uncategorized","8":"tag-climate-change","9":"tag-department-of-energy-doe","10":"tag-dk25","11":"tag-ipcc-intergovernmental-panel-on-climate-change","12":"tag-noaa-national-oceanic-and-atmospheric-administration","13":"tag-weather-extremes","14":"tag-world-weather-attribution-wwa","16":"fallback-thumbnail"},"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/09\/AQN9eX2H9tTiyTsG-y-lu63mhoKIA_vYbA6o45Wmi4zKU3vdGk7wOAMAr4YEyB4W3edJhgLtbF06J9It2OayUiZWqkv2VLBSHZ__PQpPDPl2rVAoiKmwI3vX2vJcoU8dzaUineDyOKskw8VoH1dIikCCEnqkJQ.jpeg?fit=1280%2C1280&ssl=1","jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/paxLW1-1G82","jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":294439,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=294439","url_meta":{"origin":400274,"position":0},"title":"Major U.S. Disaster Database That Was Quoted by President Biden as Proof of Climate Change is Slammed as an \u201cEgregious Failure of Scientific Inquiry\u201d","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"10\/01\/2024","format":false,"excerpt":"The findings from this database have fuelled climate alarm for decades, and it is widely quoted by scientific journals, media and politicians.","rel":"","context":"In \"Attribution studies\"","block_context":{"text":"Attribution studies","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=attribution-studies"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/01\/00tornado-supercell-evening-stock.jpg?fit=1200%2C847&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/01\/00tornado-supercell-evening-stock.jpg?fit=1200%2C847&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/01\/00tornado-supercell-evening-stock.jpg?fit=1200%2C847&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/01\/00tornado-supercell-evening-stock.jpg?fit=1200%2C847&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/01\/00tornado-supercell-evening-stock.jpg?fit=1200%2C847&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":238944,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=238944","url_meta":{"origin":400274,"position":1},"title":"Climate change makes heat waves, storms and droughts worse\u2013Say weather attribution models","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"10\/01\/2023","format":false,"excerpt":"Weather attribution has been politicised since its early beginnings, and is undertaken for the express purpose of linking extreme weather to climate change. It should not be confused with real science.","rel":"","context":"Similar post","block_context":{"text":"Similar post","link":""},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/01\/image-451.png?fit=1200%2C675&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/01\/image-451.png?fit=1200%2C675&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/01\/image-451.png?fit=1200%2C675&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/01\/image-451.png?fit=1200%2C675&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/01\/image-451.png?fit=1200%2C675&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":280515,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=280515","url_meta":{"origin":400274,"position":2},"title":"NOAA and the Media Continue to Misinform About Climate Change and Extreme Weather","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"26\/09\/2023","format":false,"excerpt":"The\u00a0Scientific American, among other mainstreams media outlets, such as\u00a0The New York Times\u00a0and\u00a0The Washington Post, are promoting claims made by\u00a0the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration\u00a0(NOAA), that climate change is causing increased instances of extreme weather,\u00a0causing billions of dollars of damage.","rel":"","context":"In \"Climate change\"","block_context":{"text":"Climate change","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=climate-change"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/09\/OIG-2023-08-15T141942.710.jpeg?fit=1024%2C1024&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/09\/OIG-2023-08-15T141942.710.jpeg?fit=1024%2C1024&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/09\/OIG-2023-08-15T141942.710.jpeg?fit=1024%2C1024&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/09\/OIG-2023-08-15T141942.710.jpeg?fit=1024%2C1024&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":288740,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=288740","url_meta":{"origin":400274,"position":3},"title":"\u2018National Embarrassment\u2019: Key Stat Used In Biden Admin\u2019s Landmark Climate Report Is Misleading","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"26\/11\/2023","format":false,"excerpt":"From The Daily Caller NICK POPE CONTRIBUTOR A key top-line statistic featured in the Biden administration\u2019s latest report on the state of climate change in the U.S. is misleading in several ways. The\u00a0Fifth National Climate Assessment\u00a0(NCA 5) features numerous analyses and graphics that purport to highlight extreme weather events that\u2026","rel":"","context":"In \"Biden Administration\"","block_context":{"text":"Biden Administration","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=biden-administration"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/11\/0210422083025-03-biden-climate-summit-0422-super-tease.jpg?fit=1100%2C619&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/11\/0210422083025-03-biden-climate-summit-0422-super-tease.jpg?fit=1100%2C619&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/11\/0210422083025-03-biden-climate-summit-0422-super-tease.jpg?fit=1100%2C619&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/11\/0210422083025-03-biden-climate-summit-0422-super-tease.jpg?fit=1100%2C619&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/11\/0210422083025-03-biden-climate-summit-0422-super-tease.jpg?fit=1100%2C619&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":247858,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=247858","url_meta":{"origin":400274,"position":4},"title":"Biden warns young people \u2018damned\u2019 if his green policies thwarted & makes wildly wrong climate claims \u2013 Point-by-point rebuttal by Climate Depot","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"16\/03\/2023","format":false,"excerpt":"President Joe Biden made remarkably uninformed and inaccurate climate comments in a TV interview in March 2023 and invoked the hell and brimstone imagery of \u201ca whole generation damned\u201d if his climate policies are not implemented.","rel":"","context":"Similar post","block_context":{"text":"Similar post","link":""},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/03\/image-499.png?fit=1200%2C821&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/03\/image-499.png?fit=1200%2C821&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/03\/image-499.png?fit=1200%2C821&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/03\/image-499.png?fit=1200%2C821&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/03\/image-499.png?fit=1200%2C821&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":251912,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=251912","url_meta":{"origin":400274,"position":5},"title":"How Climate Reductionism is Itself Causing Bad Science . . .","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"09\/04\/2023","format":false,"excerpt":"Great example of how climate reductionism is itself causing bad science . . .","rel":"","context":"In \"Bad Science\"","block_context":{"text":"Bad Science","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=bad-science"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/0home-run-clipart-14.jpg?fit=1200%2C942&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/0home-run-clipart-14.jpg?fit=1200%2C942&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/0home-run-clipart-14.jpg?fit=1200%2C942&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/0home-run-clipart-14.jpg?fit=1200%2C942&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/0home-run-clipart-14.jpg?fit=1200%2C942&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]}],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/400274","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/121246920"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=400274"}],"version-history":[{"count":5,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/400274\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":400281,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/400274\/revisions\/400281"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/media\/400279"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=400274"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=400274"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=400274"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}