One of America’s most trusted sources for climate information has been quietly gutted — and what follows may reshape how millions perceive the climate crisis.
Key Points at a Glance
- Climate.gov, a leading US climate education site, has halted new content after staff firings
- Experts fear the website may be repurposed to spread climate misinformation
- The decision is part of a broader trend of political interference in climate science communication
- Loss of the site leaves a major gap in public education on climate systems and change
In an unsettling move that could redefine public climate awareness, the US government’s premier climate science website — Climate.gov — has effectively gone dark. After quietly firing nearly all of the content staff by the end of May, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) has left the site without the personnel needed to produce or manage its information, according to former employees. The implications stretch far beyond a simple web shutdown — they hint at a deliberate strategy to silence science.
Launched to provide accessible, accurate, and nonpartisan information on climate science, Climate.gov was a rare digital stronghold of public trust. With hundreds of thousands of visitors each month, its content spanned everything from El Niño patterns to climate change impacts, all carefully maintained by a team of experienced communicators. Now, that team is gone — casualties of what former insiders describe as a targeted political purge.
“It was a very deliberate, targeted attack,” said Rebecca Lindsey, former program manager for the site, who was fired earlier this year despite strong performance reviews. Lindsey and others believe political appointees engineered the shutdown to eliminate a key venue for disseminating climate science. Their fear now? That the site could be co-opted to promote anti-science propaganda under the same trusted URL.
The implications are chilling. Climate.gov wasn’t just another government website — it was the flagship communications platform of NOAA’s Climate Program Office, part of the largest federally backed climate communication team in the United States. The site’s articles, graphics, and explainers were relied on by educators, journalists, and policymakers alike. Without new content or a trusted editorial team, that ecosystem is at risk of collapse — or worse, manipulation.
Some scheduled posts may still appear briefly in June, remnants of a once-thriving editorial calendar. But after that, the lights go out. And with the team gone, even the site’s social media presence — which helped debunk climate misinformation and answer public queries — will fall silent. That silence could be deafening as anti-science narratives rush in to fill the void.
Tom Di Liberto, a former NOAA spokesperson also dismissed this year, warned of the deeper strategic implications. “If they can’t kill the research,” he said, “they can kill public access to it.” By eliminating educators and communicators rather than scientists, the administration sidesteps scientific censorship while still crippling public understanding. It’s a maneuver both quiet and devastating.
Budget documents support these concerns. NOAA’s proposed 2026 budget includes significant cuts to education, outreach, and climate-related research — underlining a broader rollback of science-informed governance. The risk is not just academic. Without credible resources like Climate.gov, the public may be less equipped to understand — or prepare for — phenomena like extreme heat, hurricanes, or shifting rainfall patterns.
Former contractors also expressed concern that this is about more than just climate change. “Climate includes patterns like El Niño and La Niña,” one said. “Halting factual information is a disservice to everyone. Hiding climate science doesn’t stop it — it only leaves us vulnerable.”
What happens next is uncertain. The domain Climate.gov remains live, but its future — and its editorial direction — is unknown. Experts warn that an empty site can be just as dangerous as a misused one. Millions still trust the name. If that trust is leveraged by partisan actors, the consequences could be catastrophic.
In the battle against climate misinformation, silence isn’t neutral — it’s surrender. And one of the loudest, clearest voices in the climate conversation just went quiet.
Source: The Guardian
Enjoying our articles?
We don’t show ads — so you can focus entirely on the story, without pop-ups or distractions. We don’t do sponsored content either, because we want to stay objective and only write about what truly fascinates us. If you’d like to help us keep going — buy us a coffee. It’s a small gesture that means a lot. Click here – Thank You!
