Global Warming: Man or Myth?

Scientists can also wear their citizen hats

Don Easterbrook’s Academic Dishonesty

with 27 comments

The letter below was sent to The Bellingham Herald (local newspaper) and to Western Front Online (Western Washington University newspaper) on Monday January 9, 2011.  I also called and left a message with the Bellingham Herald News Editor.  I did not hear back from either newspaper.

Sir or Madam,

Don Easterbrook, a Professor Emeritus at Western Washington University  has been promoting his belief  that natural cycles of the sun and oceans are going to cause global cooling over the next few decades and this will offset the CO2-caused warming headed our way.  In 2001, he announced that global cooling was about to begin and would last for the next 25 years.  Of course, the previous decade was the warmest in over 150 years and 2010 is likely to be the warmest or second warmest year in that period.  Easterbrook wants to persuade us to ignore global warming despite the fact that most of his peers, climate scientists, military and intelligence experts, health officials, and insurance companies expect major societal disruptions due to the current and expected human-caused climate disruption.

It is ok to be wrong.  Science cannot prove an idea is true but only that it is false.  Correcting mistakes is how science moves forward.  But Easterbrook is not just wrong, he is playing fast and loose with the data.  He was caught red-handed using a doctored graph in a 2007 conference  (see and in subsequent articles and talks.  Easterbrook not only edited these graphics to change the information they contained, but did so in order to minimize the evidence of recent global warming. This is, at the very least, academic malpractice.  More recently (12/28/10) he incorrectly labeled a graph of temperatures for the previous 10,000 years to claim that most of these years were warmer than present.  His “current temperature” was really 1855 and not the much warmer present day.  He was notified of his mistake but refuses to issue a retraction (see  A good scientist corrects and learns from mistakes, but this seems foreign to Easterbrook.

WWU officials were notified of Easterbrook’s doctoring of data last May and again this January but have so far chosen to do nothing.  Academic freedom must be cherished and defended but dishonesty should never be condoned – whether at WWU or any other institution of higher education.

Scott Mandia and Gareth Renowden


Scott Mandia is a professor of physical sciences at Suffolk County Community College, Long Island, New York and has been teaching meteorology and climatology courses for 23 years.

Gareth Renowden is an NZ-based science writer and blogger, author of Hot Topic – Global Warming & The Future of New Zealand.  He has written extensively on Easterbrook’s cavalier approach to climate data.

Update 01/15/2010: I have been told that the entire geology department at WWU disagrees with Don Easterbrook and they have now declared their position on the departmental website:

Human-induced climate change

Decades of scientific research have shown that climate can change from both natural and anthropogenic causes. The Geology Faculty at WWU concur with rigorous, peer-reviewed assessments by the National Academies of Science (2005), the National Research Council (2006), and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC, 2007) that global climate has warmed significantly and that human activities (mainly greenhouse-gas emissions) account for most of the warming since the middle 1900s. If current trends continue, the projected increase in global temperature by the end of the twenty-first century will result in large impacts on humans and other species. Addressing the challenges posed by climate change will require a combination of adaptation to the changes that are likely to occur and global reductions of carbon dioxide emissions from anthropogenic sources.


Written by Scott Mandia

January 14, 2011 at 5:43 pm

Posted in Uncategorized

27 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. […] This post was mentioned on Twitter by The Bellingham Wire, Scott A Mandia. Scott A Mandia said: Don Easterbrook's Academic Dishonesty: […]

  2. Good work. I am glad that these letters are written by people with credibility. A sandbag against the flood of misinformation, but sandbags build a retaining wall that might somehow hold back the worst of the deluge.

    Byron Smith

    January 14, 2011 at 7:18 pm

    • lol he was right. they were wrong….now what?

      Craig Foti

      July 2, 2017 at 7:36 am

  3. […] did not hear back from either newspaper, so we’re reprinting the letter in full here and at Scott’s blog. Sir or […]

  4. I have to agree with Dr. Eastrerbrook. He is more in line with reality than most global warming alarmists as if global warming is bad.

    I have my work posted at October 2009 newsletter under my name.

    I should have titled the work, Global Warming and Global Cooling for Alarmists and Deniers.

    We are not going deep six yet, but the thinning of the herd has begun. The warmest year and decade on Earth just killed millions of animals and Elderly, homeless and poor over the last two years.

    So, who is lying?

    More to come.

    30 more years of theory can be deadly.

    Paul Pierett

    January 15, 2011 at 10:24 am

    • Dear Paul,

      30 more years of theory can indeed be deadly. Especially theories pursued and broadcasted by people with such a frighteningly limited understanding of science, such as yourself.

      I read your paper. There are so many questionable and absurd comments in your “work” I barely know where to begin. But just for fun, let’s look at your understanding of evolution.You state:

      ‘Recently in USA Today, Alaska government asked Colorado State University to
      look into manmade toxin in deer herds near Kodiak, Alaska. The bucks in the herds are
      looking more like the does.“The bucks lack a scrotum of evident testes, have the body conformation of does
      and have antlers with unusually sharp points and abnormal retention of velvet” (USA
      Today, April 21, 2009, p. 8A).If the cause is not manmade toxins, and there are no reasons as to why they are
      changing, then what is causing this? Maybe, this is the first observed precondition,
      evolutionary-adaptation taking place in herd of deer in preparation for a cold period.
      The first part would be for reproductive reasons.
      The second part, as man leaves due to severe cold year round, wolf packs will
      return. The bucks appear to be adapting to what is coming.’

      You don’t happen to explain how having minimized testes (and thus sperm capacity)could possibly be an advantagous reproductive adaptation for a species…perhaps because it doesn’t make sense.
      But more importantly, you are suggesting that the bucks are preemptively developing sharper antlers to defend themselves against future wolf invasions, which you suggest will happen when humans leave the area due to climate change.

      Firstly, this would indicate that the deer were cognizant of future events which is….not possible. Secondly, this in no way exemplifies an intance of evolution as defined by Darwin. Evolution by adaptation and natural selection can never happen “in preparation” for anything. Adaptations are responses over time to current conditions, not hypothetical future ones.

      Comments like this dilute any credibility you may have had.

      Your sunspot arguments would have more impact if your paper wasn’t filled with (incorrect) ramblings and opinions about a whole array of other topics.


      January 20, 2011 at 2:19 pm

      • Grab your ass. Stack your wood high. Buy plenty of canned food. It is a long way to 2035.

        Paul Pierett

        Paul Pieret

        April 2, 2013 at 4:34 pm

      • Uh, comment on your comment, from another scientist (another with respect to the person you criticized, not you) – YOUR comment on deer having to be “cognizant” (nice word, glad you have a good vocabulary at least) would no more be necessary for apparent evolutionary anticipation of future events than deer watching weather forecasts or reading Easterbrook. Cues in the environment that such animals respond to, and we cannot perceive, would be the cause of the apparent “anticipation” by advanced developments in their morphology. Cognizant? Really?

        Eldridge Cleaver

        January 30, 2014 at 11:39 am

  5. Did you look at page one?

    Summarized the drop in winter temperatures. We are back to 1984 in global USA winter Temperatures. Uh!Oh! Global Cooling.

    As for the deer, what happens before a earthquake in the Animal world? Did you know that wolves are moving south and invading populated areas south of Anchorage?

    Uh! Oh!

    Did you know Bison have left )Yellowstone National Park early for the last two winters and I had to inform bison herders that changes in Bison behavior in the last two years was due to global cooling

    Mongolia lost millions in live stock this past winter.,

    Scotland and New Zealand lost thousands of lambs due to the past winter.

    Poland has lost 300 citizens because they Froze to death. Cold deaths were not on the media.radar two years ago. Everything was hunky dorry on the global warming alarmist world. Now the thinning of the herd and adaptation of species has started and Alarmist have their head in the sand.

    By 2016 you will drop this madness.

    Turn to page 27 of the page in question, set Al Gore, your prophet aside and watch the. Fundamentals unfold be fore you.

    The flat sunspot cycle of 1964 to 1975 was your prelude, your media ad to what is coming. You will wish and pray for global warming.

    The years of fudged data are over. Your reality is here. Climate changes one season at a time.

    I also forcasted a 50 peak in the sunspot activity for this sunspot cycle. NASA just dropped their forecast to a peak or 50.

    Set my work on the back burner if you like. But buy some back up heat system, a winter comforter or sleeping bag and know how to set up a winter safe room in your home.



    Paul Pierett

    January 20, 2011 at 10:46 pm

  6. I checked Easterbrook’s data and found a consistent error of 0.5 degrees Kelvin. I also made some mistakes of my own but that is another story. However even if there are some errors in Easterbrook’s work they do not affect his conclusions. To suggest that he is “playing games” simply avoids addressing the facts.

    Here is my very amateur (but honest) analysis:


    January 21, 2011 at 1:46 am

  7. […] 14 Jan 2011: Don Easterbrook’s Academic Dishonesty « Global Warming: Man or Myth? […]

    My evil twin | Serendipity

    January 26, 2011 at 5:07 pm

  8. You accuse Don E of graphical malpractice but you still haven’t fixed your OHC y-axis, supplied by NASA, other than with a belated and indirect placement.
    Scott, Thousands have seen your graph and, like me, hundreds have been shaken while but a handful have read your correction.
    If you’re so certain in your beliefs then why, oh why, do you need to dissemble?
    This is not difficult is it? Facts should speak for themselves. They don’t need to be spun!


    February 2, 2011 at 9:15 pm

  9. […] why they felt the need to say that? Maybe someone was abusing their good name to push his own dodgy analysis? Remind me which esteemed journal has reviewed, refereed and published his claims? Or do they in […]

    Climate scientists

    August 8, 2011 at 7:33 am

  10. Don Easterbrook’s WWU Colleagues set the record straight:

    “Easterbrook’s views, as exemplified by his Senate presentation, are a stark contrast to that standard; they are filled with misrepresentations, misuse of data and repeated mixing of local vs. global records. Nearly every graphic in the hours-long presentation to the Senate was flawed, as was Easterbrook’s discussion of them.”

    Scott Mandia

    April 1, 2013 at 5:11 pm

  11. Actually Dr. Easterbrook is on track. We are in an overall post mini-ice age global warming period due to the return of normal, regular, sustained sunspot cycles. As Joseph D’Aleo pointed out about 6 years ago each 100 years of cycles have a pattern. The century begins small and builds up steam.

    We are in that new solar minimum for another 16 years. The next cycle should be greater and those that follow should increase until the latter part of the century.

    Now, if you take the next 17 years of minimum; a slow start up of the next cycle and throw in climate lag, you should have Dr. Easterbrook’s 25 years of cooling. The global cooling he speaks of causes a drop in upper atmosphere humidity and that creates drought, colder longer winters, winters without summers.

    All that together causes crop failure. Ranchers have less feed for their cattle and must sell th off to successful ranchers or to slaughter. We have less food and higher prices. The US and Russia have cut back in exports to feed their own. The US Homeland Security bought 45 million Meals ready to eat.

    Last year Britain lost 30k elderly to premature death last winter. South Dakota Ranchers lost 20k of cattle, not to mention sheep, horses and other farm animals on Oct. 4, 2013 to a snow blizzard.

    Hurricane seasons are in decline and farmers rushed into the fields in California this pass November to save crops from two snow storms. Global cooling is here for at least 20 more years.

    Study the 1970 period. That is the first stage of where we are heading in terms of coming winters.

    Man made global warming is a dangerous poor hypothesis to hang onto.

    My website is for more charts. See my Greece conference papers for latest updates.

    Most Sincerely and thank you you for your comments.

    Paul Pierett

    Paul Pierett

    January 30, 2014 at 12:08 pm

  12. You rock, Paul! I am staying warm up near a volcano in Hawaii LOL. Lake Superior is frozen, Lake Huron is frozen, Lake Erie is frozen … and I think Lake MIchigan will be frozen over this week! Epic winter in the Midwest … still have friends there as I grew up right on Lake Michigan.

    Mandia: I hope you are not implying that a cold/snowy winter in the US means anything about GLOBAL increases in temperature over DECADES. That would be silly.


    February 13, 2014 at 3:20 am

  13. As a major contributor to the WWU Foundation, I ended my contributions several decades ago. WWU is functionally about getting the money, big salaries, and promoting their progressive agendas. The funding from the state has decreased substantially by the same officials they elected. The CAGW groupies of course are applying for funding around CAGW research, so how dare anyone point out flaws in their Titanic mind set, especially one of their own. Thus the circled wagon approach to smear and defame.

    Mandia: You are free to choose where you send your money but that has nothing to do with this post. This post clearly points out how Dr. Easterbrook has doctored data. I am surprised that you appear to think this is an acceptable practice.


    August 3, 2014 at 2:59 pm

  14. […] ScienceBlog – Don Easterbrook hides the incline ScienceBlog – Don Easterbrook’s research misconduct SciBlogs – Don Easterbrook’s Academic Dishonesty SciBlogs – Don Easterbrook is a zombie Hot Topic – Easterbrook fakes his figures, hides the incline Profmandia – Don Easterbrook’s Academic Dishonesty […]

    TJ - Land

    September 7, 2014 at 7:48 am

  15. Let’s get this straight, You buy into man made global warming like a baby sucking on its mother’s breast, and someone comes along that questions it all a pick buggers off the hankie.

    Paul Pierett, Wall, SD

    September 8, 2014 at 9:56 pm

  16. […] red-handed doctoring this graph and refused to change it when he was called out. (See my blog post Don Easterbrook’s Academic Dishonesty for more information.) Instead, the REAL end point on Paul Clark’s plot is the year 1855! […]

  17. You are so challenge. Tell you what, go pick up a library of books on the last million years of ice ages, study the Geology, come out to the Badlands and study Glacier Deluge carvings and get whole different perspective on Melonkovich Cycles. You are picking away at the with of a Nat’s ….

    Paul Pierett, Wall, SD

    September 16, 2014 at 9:01 pm

  18. This is not an argument, it’s just a collection of off hand statements and outright false. Dr. Easterbrook is one of the few very honest climatologists, and I have not seen any of his work be disproven as of yet.

    Science et al

    August 1, 2016 at 8:15 pm

  19. Lol…its sad that all peoole want to do or get paid to do or do for funding is try to debunk scientist that try to get real information out there. I think all the good people should just stop trying to save ingnorant sheeple from themselves. Wh6 would Nasa or any of them lie lol? MONEY..ummm careers..just stupid not to look at data yourself which means not going off retarded peer reviews. .lets see is meat still good for us..according to many institutions for public safety it is. FDA ya why would they lie..monsanto? Nasa? The government lies everyday and they control the scientist…but if nasa wants money they need to pose a problem! How many companies get free money to study climate change? Who gets paid for false data? Grow up!


    July 1, 2017 at 12:20 pm

    • If government controls the scientists, it’s a bit weird that several Republican governments cannot get the scientists to say “CO2 is plant food! Climate change is a Chinese hoax!”

      In fact, under the presidency of oil-pusher Bush Jr, the evidence for the role of anthropogenic activity, and most importantly fossil fuel burning, became stronger and stronger.

      Not that these facts will change your mind, I’m sure you will find a way to fit it into your conspiracy, somehow.


      October 29, 2017 at 10:37 am

  20. […] a Professor Emeritus of geology at Western Washington University. He has been accused of academic dishonesty where he misrepresented IPCC predictions, and altered data and graphs to fit his preconceived […]


    Philip Cookson

    January 22, 2019 at 3:30 am

  22. After watching this presentation in 2017 I would say Professor Easterbrook’s prediction back at the time of these letters was spot on. Thank God we have someone that knows what’s really happening and isn’t afraid to go against the thousands of scientific hacks like the two authors of these letters

    Mike Stevens

    February 10, 2019 at 11:03 pm

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: