NOAA's 'Billion Dollar' Disasters Comes Back to Bite Them

The Telegraph has published a story about how NOAA's phony "billion dollar disasters" (BDD) opened the way for DOGE to come in. You'll find the story interesting. 

Example of "Billion Dollar Disasters" product

Given the peer-reviewed indictment of the BDD situation, it is so bad that NOAA would be better off retracting its years of billion dollar disaster data and cease issuing the product. The insurance industry, for all of its faults, publishes data that has been shown to be more faithful to reality than NOAA's. 

The climate rot has gotten so deep, they have a replacement product that is, in a way, worse. Published today:

At least on the old product, it said weather and climate events. It is shocking to me that NOAA believes “heavy snow and blizzard conditions,” two days of heavy rain (“an atmospheric river…”) and “tornadoes” are “climate” rather than weather. This may be a replacement to the BDD. If so, it isn't much of a step up. 

NOAA is so determined to be in the climate alarmist* camp, I guess they can no longer help themselves. At least they are no longer calling a four-day group of meteorologically unrelated events a "billion dollar disaster."

While on the topic NOAA and climate:

NOAA should stay out of global warming and politics. It should publish excellent quality data, only. Let others draw the collusions. Its climate grants are far outside of its mission and they, too, indicate the agency is highly biased in that no dollars that I can find have been sent to researchers not on the alarmist side. It Maine wants to run a climate program, let Maine pay for it. 

* To clarify, global warming is a significant problem that deserves serious solutions. And, because of its significance, the science (as Dr. Pielke says in the Telegraph article) should be top-quality.