John Christy

John R. Christy


  • Ph.D. Atmospheric Science, University of Illinois (1987). [1]
  • M.S., Atmospheric Science, University of Illinois, (1984). [1]
  • M.Div. Golden Gate Baptist Theological Seminary (1978). [1]
  • B.A., Mathematics California State University, Fresno (1973). [1]


John R. Christy is a professor of Atmospheric Science and Director of the Earth System Science Center of the University of Alabama in Huntsville. Christy has been Alabama State Climatologist since November, 2000. [2], [3], [4]

Christy is associated with climate change skeptic Roy Spencer, who is is best known for jointly developing a satellite temperature record. Christy also collaborated with Spencer on a George C. Marshall Institute Roundtable discussion on climate change in April 2006. Christy noted that the two of them had been described as “swimming upstream against the climate change debate.” [2], [5]

John Christy has testified on numerous occasions against the mainstream scientific views on man-made climate change including testimony before the House Energy and Commerce Committee, House Committee on Government Reform, House Ways and Means Committee, and others. [6], [7], [8]

Stance on Climate Change

November 2007

Christy wrote in The Wall Street Journal:

“I’m sure the majority (but not all) of my IPCC colleagues cringe when I say this, but I see neither the developing catastrophe nor the smoking gun proving that human activity is to blame for most of the warming we see.” [9]

Key Quotes

February 2016

“The real world is not going along with rapid warming. The models need to go back to the drawing board.” [10]

June 2015

“[W]e are not morally bad people for taking carbon and turning it into the energy that offers life to humanity in a world that would otherwise be brutal (think of life before modernity). On the contrary, we are good people for doing so.” [11]

April 2015

“Carbon dioxide makes things grow. The world used to have five times as much carbon dioxide as it does now. Plants love this stuff. It creates more food. CO2 is not the problem … There is absolutely no question that carbon energy provides with longer and better lives. There is no question about that.” [12]

August 2013

“I was at the table with three Europeans, and we were having lunch. And they were talking about their role as lead authors. And they were talking about how they were trying to make the report so dramatic that the United States would just have to sign that Kyoto Protocol.” [13]

February 2013

“If you choose to make regulations about carbon dioxide, that’s OK. You as a state can do that; you have a right to do it. But it’s not going to do anything about the climate. And it’s going to cost, there’s no doubt about that.”  [14]

March 2011

“…it is fairly well agreed that the surface temperature will rise about 1°C as a modest response to a doubling of atmospheric CO2 if the rest of the component processes of the climate system remain independent of this response.” [15]

May 2009

“As far as the AGU, I thought that was a fine statement because it did not put forth a magnitude of the warming. We just said that human effects have a warming influence, and that’s certainly true. There was nothing about disaster or catastrophe. In fact, I was very upset about the latest AGU statement [in 2007]. It was about alarmist as you can get.” [16]

February 2009

“We utilize energy from carbon, not because we are bad people, but because it is the affordable foundation on which the profound improvements in our standard of living have been achieved – our progress in health and welfare.” [17]

December 2003

In a 2003 interview with the San Francisco Chronicle, Christy describes himself as ”  a strong critic of scientists who make catastrophic predictions of huge increases in global temperatures and tremendous rises in sea levels.” [18]

Christy also added:

“It is scientifically inconceivable that after changing forests into cities, turning millions of acres into farmland, putting massive quantities of soot and dust into the atmosphere and sending quantities of greenhouse gases into the air, that the natural course of climate change hasn’t been increased in the past century.” [18]

Key Deeds

September 2020

Talking to E&E News after the recent appointment of David Legates and Ryan Maue in positions at the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Christy told E&E News that he had been previously offered a position working at NOAA under the Trump administration. [48]

The pitch was I would have new influence on the future direction of the agency,” Christy told E&E He said if he had accepted the job, he would “redirect money from the climate modeling project into the weather modeling project.” He was unable to take the position due to academic commitments. [48]

Christy had passed the offer on to Judith Curry, however she also declined. [48]

May 8, 2019

Christy gave a presentation to the UK-based climate science denial group the Global Warming Policy Forum, a transcript of which was published on its website under the title “Putting Climate Change Claims to the Test”. In the talk, Christy said: [47]

“The weather we really care about isn’t changing, and Mother Nature has many ways on her own to cause her climate to experience considerable variations in cycles. If you think about how many degrees of freedom are in the climate system, what a chaotic nonlinear, dynamical system can do with all those degrees of freedom, you will always have record highs, record lows, tremendous storms and so on. That’s the way that system is.” [47]

January 31, 2019

Acting EPA Administrator Andrew Wheeler appointed Christy to the agency’s Science Advisory Board, putting him in position to take an active role in guiding agency policies and regulations. [45], [46]

May 2017

John Abraham, a professor of thermal science, writes at The Guardian about additional errors identified in Roy Spencer and John Christy’s temperature estimates. According to Abraham, Spencer and Christy’s claims that troposphere and stratosphere temperatures have not been rising are wrong:  [44]

They errantly include stratosphere temperatures in their lower atmosphere readings; and they have incorrect temperature calibration on the satellites,” Abraham writes. [44]

He also points to a recent paper that had questioned Christy and Spencer’s decision to use preliminary data in their congressional testimony while it was still in the peer review stage: [44]

At present, the UAH v6 (most recent Christy/Spencer data) results are preliminary and a fifth revision has now been released as v6beta5 (Spencer 2016). The release of the UAH version 6 products before publication is unusual, and Spencer recently stated that a manuscript has been submitted for a peer-reviewed publication. While some may find it scientifically inappropriate to utilize UAH v6b6 data before publication, these data have already been presented in testimony during congressional hearings before both the U.S. House and Senate and have also appeared on websites and in public print articles,” Abraham quotes the January 207 paper. [44]

Abraham adds, “let’s not be deluded into thinking these satellites are more accurate than thermometers (as some people suggest).” [44]

March 29, 2017

John Christy was a witness in a house committee hearing titled “Climate Science: Assumptions, Policy Implications, and the Scientific Method” chaired by Lamar Smith. The hearing also featuring testimony from Judith Curry, Michael Mann, and Roger Pielke, Jr. DeSmog reported that the House Committee on Science, Space and Technology hearings “have officially turned into theater to stage climate science denial,” noting that Michael Mann was the only witness on the committee to represent the 97% consensus view that humans cause climate change. [41][42]

Officially, the hearing was organized to “examine the scientific method and process as it relates to climate change” and “focus on the underlying science that helps inform policy decisions.”[42]

Rep. Suzanne Bonamici, a Democrat from Oregon, noted from the outset that “The witness panel does not really represent the vast majority of climate scientists.” For an accurate representation of the science, she said to “Visualize 96 more climate scientists that agree with the mainstream consensus. […] For a balanced panel we’d need 96 more Dr. Manns.” [41]

The Global Warming Policy Foundation (GWPF) published the written testimonies by Curry, Christy, Mann, and Pielke online[43]

February 2, 2016

John R. Christy testified at a Congressional hearing, where he claims that climate change models should not be trusted. [19]

“I would not trust model projections on which all policy is based here because they just don’t match facts,” said Christy. “The message here is very simple – the theory does not match the observations as measured independently by both satellites and balloons.” [19]

When asked about extreme weather events, Christy also downplays the influence of man-made climate change: 

“There’s a little bit of hyperbole in things that people see changing right now,” Christy said. “They’ve always changed, I suspect.” [19]

Christy offers the following summary in his full written testimony (PDF) is also available. Full video of the hearing below. [10]

“The messages of the two points outlined in the extract above are: (1) the claims about increases in frequency and intensity of extreme events are generally not supported by actual observations and, (2) official information about climate science is largely controlled by agencies through (a) funding choices for research and (b) by the carefullyselected (i.e. biased) authorship of reports such as the EPA Endangerment Finding and the National Climate Assessment.”

December 8, 2015

Set to coincide with the Paris COP21 (Conference of the Parties), John Christy testified at a hearing of the Subcommittee on Space, Science, and Competitiveness convened by U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) titled “Data or Dogma? Promoting Open Inquiry in the Debate over the Magnitude of Human Impact on Earth’s Climate.” [20] 

Christy suggests that a climate “Red Team” be developed which would “produce an assessment that expresses legitimate, alternative hypotheses” for climate change. John Christy’s full testimony document is available here (PDF). [21]

According to the event description, the hearing will focus on “the ongoing debate over climate science, the impact of federal funding on the objectivity of climate research, and the ways in which political pressure can suppress opposing viewpoints in the field of climate science.”  [20] 

Other listed witnesses include:

June 2015

In response to the release of Pope Francis’s Encyclical on the Environment, John R. Christy published an opinion piece suggesting that burning fossil fuels is actually a good thing:  [11]

“[W]e are not morally bad people for taking carbon and turning it into the energy that offers life to humanity in a world that would otherwise be brutal (think of life before modernity). On the contrary, we are good people for doing so,” Christy said. [11]

Christy concludes that carbon becomes a “positive moral imperative to consider.” [11]

April 2015

John Christy and Roy Spencer were the subject of an interview with According to The Guardian, which describes the interview as “revealing,” Christy offers an innacurate response on the 97% consensus on human-caused global warming: [12], [22]

“The American Meteorological Society did their survey and they specifically asked the question, Is man the dominate controller of climate over the last 50 years? Only 52 percent said yes. That is not a consensus at all in science … Roy and I have both made the statement that we are in the 97 percent because we believe in some (man-made) effect.” [22]

While Spencer and Christy claim to be oart of the 97%, The Guardian argues that they are now: 

“Spencer and Christy each authored five papers captured in our climate science literature survey. Among those papers, we classified one of Spencer’s and two of Christy’s as minimizing or rejecting the human influence on global warming, and the others as not taking a position on the issue.  

That makes both of them authors of the less than 3% of peer-reviewed climate science papers rejecting the consensus on human-caused global warming. This is an indisputable fact – the 97% consensus figure is based on our team’s categorization of the scientific literature, and we put their research outside the 97% consensus.” [22]

Below are some other notable quotes pulled from the interview, including Spencer and Christy’s take on government agencies and fossil fuel interests:

NASA, NOAA, EPA, DOE, those are agencies. Agency leaders are appointed by the government, by the current administration. They do not represent objective independent scientific organizations,” Christy said. “They can’t. They are appointed by the head. They try. People who come out with different views in their organizations are found to be squashed. There is an agenda in those agencies … There are skeptics in NASA and NOAA, a good number. But they are quiet. They know in this administration, they don’t speak out.  [22]

Discussing fossil fuels, Christy repeats the common denier argument that more CO2 will boost plant growth:

“Carbon dioxide makes things grow. The world used to have five times as much carbon dioxide as it does now. Plants love this stuff. It creates more food. CO2 is not the problem … There is absolutely no question that carbon energy provides with longer and better lives. There is no question about that.”  [22]

January 8, 2014

John Christy was part of a “review workshop” chaired by Steve Koonin on the American Physical Society’s climate change statement. Ben Santer, a climate researcher at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, later described the exercise as similar to “red-team, blue-team” exercises that Koonin advocated in the future. Santer was a member of the “blue team” in the APS exercise, along with Isaac Held from the Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Lab and Bill Collins from UC Berkeley and Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. The “red team” members opposing established climate science were Richard Lindzen, John Christy, and Judith Curry. [49]

I did not think that the red team arguments were successful,” Santer commented in 2017[50]

For example, John Christy showed this figure, A not equal to B, and was asked by one of the physicists in the room, well, why? Why, Professor Christy, what’s going on? How do you explain this divergence in warming rates between the models and the observations? What’s going on there? And John, Christy shrugged his shoulders and said Mother Nature’s going to do what Mother Nature’s going to do.”

According to the APS proceedings transcript, Christy had commented on the models as follows: [49]

My comment to the committee when something like that was asked to me a month ago was, ‘Mother Nature has within her all the necessary tools to generate extreme events that exceed what we have seen in the past 50 years.’ So, whatever we have seen out there, Mother Nature already has the ability to do it.”

Santer added: “John Christy was not interested in understanding the why. Why are there these differences in warming rate in the early twenty first century that really aren’t there in the late 20th century? What’s going on? That’s where the science is. That’s what you want to know. The why the understanding and his answer to that question was Mother Nature’s going to do what Mother Nature’s going to do. He made no attempt to provide an explanation as to what he thought physically was going on there. And that was that was telling.” [50]

Santer suggested another “telling” moment was when all of the team members were asked if isotope data supported the conclusion that about 75% of the increase in atmospheric CO2 since the Industrial Revolution was due to the burning of fossil fuels, and Christy was the only member who disagreed. [50]

Of course, those isotopic measurements have been made by labs around the world. You know, it’s very, very well established science. But John Christie did not agree. And when Professor Koonin asked him, well, why don’t you agree? John Christie said, because I did not make the measurements myself. And again, you could sort of see the amazement in in the room, the the import of that statement is that I am not going to trust anyone else, no measurements unless I’ve made them myself.” [50]

Santer concluded:

So the red the red team lost, the red team was not convincing to the members of the American Physical Society, Steve Koonin stepped down as chair of this subcommittee charged with updating the statement. And now he’s calling for the same red team blue team process, even though the process that he presided over. Did not yield a result that that he liked, that he was comfortable with.” [50]

December 11, 2013

John Christy joined climate change denier Roger Pielke Jr. to testify before the US Congress Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, chaired by Lamar Smith. After their testimony, Chairman Smith summarized that “The fact is there is little evidence that climate change causes extreme weather events.” [23]

According toThe Guardian, “ Unfortunately, like many such hearings, the purpose of the event appeared to be more about reinforcing preconceived notions than educating committee members. This was made clear by a simple examination of the invited witnesses.” Christy’s opening statement was a often-used climate denier myth: “As the global temperature failed to warm over the past 15 years…” [24]

February 14, 2012

Christy released a study that claimed snowfall in the Sierra Nevada has remained consistent for 130 years, with no noticeable effect from climate change. [25]

James Taylor of the Heartland Institute penned a Forbes article where he claimed that Christy’s findings “refute frequent assertions by global warming alarmists that global warming is adversely affecting Sierra Nevada snowfall and snowpack.” The climate change skeptic blog Watts Up With That also publicized the story[26]

When asked about the reaction to his paper, Christy said “In general, it depends on what religion you have. If you believe Man is doing horrible things to the planet, then you can’t believe this report. If you believe the other way, then this is a chapter in your bible.”

David Pearce, one of John Christy’s colleagues, feels that Christy has gone beyond the data in his study, and that Christy is making claims in the media that have not been backed up by the study itself. Pearce adds that it “is unfortunate because peer-review is the process that filters out unsupported personal opinion from what is backed by evidence.” [27]

March 8, 2011

John R. Christy testified (PDF) at a hearing hosted by the Energy and Power Subcommittee to discuss “Climate Science and EPA‘s Greenhouse Gas Regulations.” [6], [7], [8]

Christy concluded that “if the country deems it necessary to de-carbonize civilization’s main energy sources, sound and indeed compelling reasons beyond human-induced climate change need to be offered. Climate change alone is a weak leg on which to stand for such a massive undertaking.” [6]

February 25, 2009

Testified (PDF) before the House Ways and Means Committee at the “Hearing on Scientific Objectives for Climate Change Legislation.” [28], [29]

The American Geosciences Institute offers a summary of Christy’s testimony:

“Dr. John Christy was skeptical whether there was any way for the U.S. to make detectable changes in global warming. He feared that the scale of carbon emissions is ‘simply too enormous,’ and the only possible solution is to start a large nuclear energy campaign. According to Christy, ‘The actions being considered to “stop global warming” will have an imperceptible impact on whatever the climate will do, while making energy more expensive, and thus have a negative impact on the economy as a whole’.” [29]

One source responded to Christy’s testimony, concluding that “John Christy has added to the science of atmospheric modeling, but he has undercut his credibility by making claims far exceeding his data and by ignoring findings that disagree with his arguments. Then he sins by distorting his testimony for a purely political agenda.” [30]

May 2, 2007

Appeared on the Glenn Beck Special, “Exposed: The Climate of Fear.”  Other  prominent climate skeptics featured in the film included: [31]

March 8, 2007

Christy appeared in The Great Global Warming Swindle documentary. [32]

The Great Global Warming Swindle also starred fellow skeptics:

July 27, 2006

John R. Christy testified (PDF) at a hearing hosted by the House Committee on Energy and Commerce on the subject of “Questions Surrounding the ‘Hockey Stick’ Temperature Studies: Implications for Climate Change Assessments Part II.[33], [34]

Christy cites his previous studies that concluded “greenhouse gases are increasing in concentration is clearly true and therefore the radiation budget of the atmosphere will be altered. In response, the surface temperature should rise due to this additional forcing. In our observational work however, we have not been able to show clear support for the manner or magnitude of this response as has been depicted by the present set of climate models (Christy, 2002, Christy et al. 2006a, Christy and Norris 2006, Christy et al. 2006b).” [33]

July 20, 2006

Testified before the House Committee on Government Reform in a Hearing titled “Climate Change: Understanding the Degree of the Problem.” [34]

April 17, 2006

John Christy and Roy Spencer presented at the George C. Marshall Institute’s Washington Roundtable on Science and Public Policy to discuss “Satellite Temperature Data” (PDF). [5]

According to the event moderator William O’Keefe, Spencer and Christy “pioneered the work in satellite measurements of the earth’s temperature.” 

“Someone described Roy and me as “swimming upstream against the climate change debate’,” Christy said in his introduction. “I corrected him on the air and said we are not swimming upstream; we are just swimming downstream a lot more slowly than everyone else. I reminded him that those who swim the fastest downstream always end up getting to the money and the media first.”

The presentation was followed with a Q&A session with Spencer and Christy. Christy argues that it would not be possible to measure the benefits of any carbon-dioxide-reducing regulations, as “ the scientific answer is you cannot detect the effect of such a regulation. Except perhaps in economic indicators, where you might see some downturn. But in terms of the climate, we could not detect such an effect.” [5]

“I showed some evidence that humans are causing warming in the surface measurements that we have, but it is not the greenhouse relation,” Christy said. “Are we going to return the Central Valley to a desert? Are we going to tell all the people in Africa they cannot burn wood anymore? Well, we could if we gave them coal-fired electricity, I suppose, which would be better for the environment because their forests are being destroyed. The habitat for the wild animals is going away because these people are chopping down the forests to survive.” [5]

August 12, 2005

According to a New York Times article, John Christy along with fellow skeptic Roy Spencer admitted they made a mistake in their satellite data research that they said demonstrated a cooling in the troposphere (the earth’s lowest layer of atmosphere). It turned out that the exact opposite was occurring and the troposphere was getting warmer. [35]

“These papers should lay to rest once and for all the claims by John Christy and other global warming skeptics that a disagreement between tropospheric and surface temperature trends means that there are problems with surface temperature records or with climate models,” said Alan Robock, a meteorologist at Rutgers University. [35]

July 28, 2003

John Christy was a co-author of the Independent Institute report “New Perspectives in Climate Change: What the EPA Isn’t Telling Us” that criticized the EPA‘s 2001 Climate Action Report. [36]

Other authors of the report included S. Fred Singer, Robert E. Davis, David R. Legates, and Wendy M. Novicoff. The report accused The IPCC‘s 2001 assessment on climate change of being “misleading, inaccurate, unreliable, or simply wrong.” [36]

December 12, 2003

Spoke at an event hosted by the Cato Institute titled “Global Warming: The State of the Debate.” [37]

According tot he Cato Institute, the event summarizes “what is known about the science and economics surrounding greenhouse gas concentrations and abatement. Moreover, it tackles squarely what is perhaps the most relevant policy issue at the moment—the potential costs and benefits involved in dealing with scientific uncertainty.”



Some sample publications (not a complete list) by John R. Christy below:

  • Christy, J.R. “When was the hottest summer? A state climatologist struggles for an answer.” Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc., 83, 723-734. 2002.
  • Christy, J.R. and R.W. Spencer. “Correcting temperature data sets.” Science, 310, 972. 2005.
  • Christy, J.R., W.B. Norris, K. Redmond and K.P. Gallo. “Methodology and results of calculating Central California surface temperature trends: Evidence of human-induced climate change.” J. Climate, 19, 548-563. 2006.
  • Christy, J.R. and W.B. Norris. “Satellite and VIZ radiosondes intercomparison for diagnosis of non-climatic influences.” J. Atmos. Oc. Tech. 2006
  • Christy, J.R., W.B. Norris, R.W. Spencer and J.J. Hnilo. “Tropospheric temperature change since 1979 from tropical radiosonde and satellite measurements.” J. Geophys. Res.2006.
  • S. Fred Singer, John R. Christy, Robert E. Davis, David R. Legates, Wendy M. Novicoff. “New Perspectives on Climate Change: What the EPA Isn’t Telling Us.” The Independent Institute
  • Satellite Temperature Data.” George C. Marshall Institute. Transcript from the Marshall Institute’s Washington Roundtable on Science and Public Policy. April 17, 2006.


  1. About John: Education,” University of Alabama in Huntsville. URL
  2. About John,” University of Alabama in Huntsville. URL:
  3. Contact Us,” Earth System Science Center. Archived November 15, 2012. Archived .pdf on file at Desmog.
  4. About Us,” The Alabama State Climatologist. Accessed September 15, 2016. URL
  5. John Christy and Roy Spencer. WASHINGTON ROUNDTABLE ON SCIENCE & PUBLIC POLICY: Satellite Temperature Data” (PDF), George C. Marshall Institute, April 17, 2006. Archived .pdf on file at Desmog.
  6. Written Statement of John R. Christy The University of Alabama in Huntsville Subcommittee on Energy and Power Committee on Energy and Commerce 8 March 2011” (PDF), The Energy and Commerce Committee, Subcommittee on Energy and Power, March 8, 2011. Archived .pdf on file at Desmog.
  7. Chris Mooney. “So Now They Call in the Scientists? Desmog, March 7, 2011.
  8. Climate Science and EPA‘s Greenhouse Gas Regulations,” House Energy & Commerce Committee, March 8, 2011. Archived March 16, 2011. URL:
  9. My Nobel moment.” November 1, 2007. The Wall Street Journal. Archived .pdf on file at Desmog. URL
  10. “Testimony of John R. Christy University of Alabama in Huntsville” (PDF), U.S. House Committee on Science, Space & Technology Feb 2, 2016. Archived .pdf on file at Desmog.
  11. John R. Christy. “Alabama climatologist Dr. John Christy questions Pope’s take on climate change: guest opinion,” Alabama Local News, June 22, 2015. Archived July 3, 2015. URL
  12. 7 questions with John Christy and Roy Spencer: Climate change skeptics for 25 years,”, April 1, 2015. Archived September 16, 2016. URL
  13. UN Scientists Who Have Turned on UNIPCC Man-Made Climate Fears – A Climate Depot Flashback Report,” Climate Depot, August 21, 2013. URL
  14. Nikki Wentling. “Legislature considering delays in renewable energy standards,” Lawrence Journal World, February 5, 2013. URL
  15. John R. Christy’s testimony (PDF) to the Subcommittee Energy and Power on March 8, 2011. Archived .pdf on file at Desmog.
  16. Jon Birger. “What if global-warming fears are overblown? Fortune Magazine, May 14, 2009. Archived September 16, 2016. URL
  17. Written testimony (PDF) of John R. Christy at the House Ways and Means Committee, February 25, 2009. Archived .pdf on file at Desmog.
  18. David Perlman. “Earth warming at faster pace, say top science group’s leaders / Statement by American Geophysical Union’s council warns temperature change is real and human-caused,” SFGate, December 18, 2003. Archived September 16, 2016. URL:
  19. Paul Gatis. “Climate expert John Christy to Congress: ‘I would not trust model projections‘,”, February 3, 2016. Archived September 16, 2016. URL:
  20. Data or Dogma? Promoting Open Inquiry in the Debate over the Magnitude of Human Impact on Earth’s Climateer,” U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, & Transportation. Archived December 4, 2015. URL
  21. “Testimony of John R. Christy” (PDF), U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, & Transportation Subcommittee on Space, Science and Competitiveness, Dec 8 2015. Archived .pdf on file at DeSmogBlog.
  22. Dana Nuccitelli. “A revealing interview with top contrarian climate scientists,” The Guardian, April 6, 2015. URL
  23. (Press Release). “Little Evidence Linking Climate Change to Extreme Weather Events,” Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, December 11, 2013. Archived December 30, 2013. URL
  24. Dana Nuccitelli. “Republicans in Congress got the testimony they wanted to keep playing climate Russian roulette,” The Guardian, December 26, 2013. URL
  25. Peter Fimrite. “Study: Sierra snowfall consistent over 130 years,” San Francisco Chronicle, February 15, 2012. URL
  26. James Taylor. “Dear Global Warming Alarmists: We’re Still Waiting for Declining Snowfall,” Forbes, February 29, 2012. URL
  27. Mark Robison. “News analysis: Does Sierra snow study buck fears of warming?,” Reno Gazette-Journal, April 7, 2012. Republished by Lake Tahoe News (Original no longer available online). Archived September 15, 2016. URL:
  28. House Ways and Means Committee 25 February 2009 Written Testimony John R. Christy, University of Alabama in Huntsville,” House Ways and Means Committee, February 25, 2009. Archived .pdf on file at Desmog.
  29. Summary of Hearings on Climate Change (12/7/10),” American Geosciences Institute, December 7, 2010. URL
  30. UAH‘s John Christy’s US House Ways & Means Committee testimony… examined,” Citizens’ Challenge, January 8, 2011. URL: 
  31. Exposed: The Climate of Fear,”, 2007. Archived video on file at Desmog. URL
  32. The Great Global Warming Swindle Full Movie,” YouTube Video uploaded by user Apollo, April 2, 2014.  Archived video on file at Desmog.
  33. Testimony of John R. Christy, Ph.D. (PDF), House Committee on Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations, July 27, 2006. Archived .pdf on file at Desmog.
  34. Summary of Hearings on Climate Change (12-8-06),” American Geosciences Institute, December 8, 2006. URL
  35. Andrew C. Revkin. “Errors Cited in Assessing Climate Data,” The New York Times, August 12, 2005. URL
  36. S. Fred Singer, John R. Christy, Robert E. Davis, David R. Legates, Wendy M. Novicoff. “New Perspectives on Climate Change: What the EPA Isn’t Telling Us,” (PDF), The Independent Institute, July 2003. Archived .pdf on file at Desmog.
  37. Global Warming: The State of the Debate,” Cato Institute. Archived June 15, 2006. URL:
  38. John Christy,” The Heartland Institute. Archived September 15, 2016. URL:
  39. Dr. John R. Christy,” Competitive Enterprise Institute. Archived September 16, 2016. URL:
  40. Nation’s Leading Global Warming Experts Unveil New Findings on Climate Change” (Press Release), The Independent Institute, July 28, 2003. URL
  41. Climate Science: Assumptions, Policy Implications, and the Scientific Method,” House Committee on Science, Space, & Technology, March 29, 2017. Archived March 31, 2017. Archived .mp4 on file at DeSmog.
  42. Ben Jervey. “House Science Committee Hearing Pits Three Fringe Climate Deniers Against Mainstream Climate Scientist Michael Mann,” DeSmog, March 29, 2017.
  43. CLIMATE SCIENCE: Assumptions, policy implications, and the scientific method” (PDF)Global Warming Policy Foundation (Report 24). Archived .pdf on file at DeSmog.
  44. John Abraham. “More errors identified in contrarian climate scientists’ temperature estimates,” The Guardian, May 11, 2017. Archived May 12, 2017. URL
  45. Timothy Cama. “EPA puts climate change skeptic, conservative think tank scholar on science board,” The Hill, January 31, 2019. Archived February 1, 2019. URL:
  46. Members of the Science Advisory Board.” Accessed February 1, 2019. Archived February 1, 2019. URL:
  47. Dr John Christy. “Putting Climate Change Claims to the Test,” Global Warming Policy Forum, June 18, 2019. Archived June 20, 2019. URL:
  48. Scott Waldman. “Trump White House recruited climate science critics to work at NOAA,” E&E News, September 28, 2020. Republished by Science. Archived October 27, 2020. Archive URL:
  49. AMERICAN PHYSICAL SOCIETY 4 CLIMATE CHANGE STATEMENT REVIEW WORKSHOP” (PDF), American Physical Society, January 8, 2014. Archived .pdf on file at DeSmog.
  50. Ben Santer on the Climate Red Team,” YouTube video uploaded by user “greenmanbucket,” October 5, 2020. Archived .mp4 on file at DeSmog.

Other Resources

Related Profiles

APCO Worldwide Background APCO has been described as “one of the world's most powerful PR firms.” [1], [2] According to its agency profile at O'Dwyers, “APCO Worldwide is a...
Hugh W. Ellsaesser Credentials Ph.D., Meteorology. [1] Background Hugh W. Ellsaesser, born in 1920, is a meteorologist by training and retired “guest scientist” at the Lawren...
Alfred (Al) Pekarek Credentials Ph.D., University of Wyoming (1974). [1]B.A. University of Minnesota-Twin (1965). [1] Background Alfred (Al) Pekarek is a former ass...
Benny Josef Peiser Credentials Ph.D. , University of Frankfurt (1993). Peiser studied political science, English, and sports science. [1], [2] Background Benny Peiser is a sports ...