Archive for July, 2009

"The carefully stacked cards are starting to fall"

07/30/2009

“The revolt by American Chemical Society members is one of the most important pieces of good news ever in the saga of anthropogenic global warming. When real scientists finally get a chance to vent their opposition to global warming mythology, and more importantly, to have it published in a widely read publication, it’s the beginning of the end of the alarmists’ stranglehold. Once the debate is truly joined, there will be so many holes revealed in standard AGW orthodoxy that it will sink without a trace alongside cold fusion, polywater and mental spoon bending. The ACS revolt also illustrates the classic divide between the views of the members of many large national organizations, who are generally normal people scattered across the heartland, and their leaders, who more often than not these days are housed in Washington, DC, and positioned far to the left of their constituents. The classic example is AARP, with a membership of generally conservative elderly folk and a leadership made up of flaming Maoists. The American Chemical Society’s headquarters is at 16th and M Streets, NW — across the street from the National Geographic Society, in the middle of the belly of the liberal beast. It’s filled from top to bottom with hand-wringing, knee-jerking, affirmative-acting Democrats who are probably all as shocked as the editor at the visceral outpouring against his absolutely ho-hum (to them) platitudes about the looming disaster of global warming and the implacable evil of those who would deny it. The carefully stacked cards are starting to fall” “Re: Chemists in Excited State

Naked emperor

07/30/2009

“It’s getting harder and harder [for] warmists to get away with their blanket statements that a “scientific consensus” on global warming exists. Now, an organization [American Chemical Society] that bills itself as “the world’s largest scientific society” is facing a grassroots rebellion from its scientist members. Marc Morano of Climate Depot has the exclusive story …

This incident may impress itself on other warmist scientists. No editor (or writer) wants to be upbraided in public this way, so casual claims of consensus are probably going to be coming our way less frequently in the future. Once the emperor is seen to have no clothes, pretending otherwise in public becomes difficult.” “Warmist editor faces blowback from scientists” h/t Climate Depot

Revolt at the American Physical Society

07/30/2009

“As physicists who are familiar with the science issues, and as current and past members of the American Physical Society, we the undersigned urge the Council to revise its current statement* on climate change as follows, so as to more accurately represent the current state of the science:

Greenhouse gas emissions, such as carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide, accompany human industrial and agricultural activity. While substantial concern has been expressed that emissions may cause significant climate change, measured or reconstructed temperature records indicate that 20th – 21st century changes are neither exceptional nor persistent, and the historical and geological records show many periods warmer than today. In addition, there is an extensive scientific literature that examines beneficial effects of increased levels of carbon dioxide for both plants and animals.

Studies of a variety of natural processes, including ocean cycles and solar variability, indicate that they can account for variations in the Earth’s climate on the time scale of decades and centuries. Current climate models appear insufficiently reliable to properly account for natural and anthropogenic contributions to past climate change, much less project future climate.

The APS supports an objective scientific effort to understand the effects of all processes – natural and human — on the Earth’s climate and the biosphere’s response to climate change, and promotes technological options for meeting challenges of future climate changes, regardless of cause.” “Regarding the National Policy Statement on Climate Change of the APS Council: An Open Letter to the Council of the American Physical Society” h/t IceCap today

Revolt at the American Chemical Society

07/30/2009

“An outpouring of skeptical scientists who are members of the American Chemical Society (ACS) are revolting against the group’s editor-in-chief — with some demanding he be removed — after an editorial appeared claiming “the science of anthropogenic climate change is becoming increasingly well established.”

The editorial claimed the “consensus” view was growing “increasingly difficult to challenge, despite the efforts of diehard climate-change deniers.” The editor now admits he is “startled” by the negative reaction from the group’s scientific members. The American Chemical Society bills itself as the “world’s largest scientific society.”

The June 22, 2009 editorial in Chemical and Engineering News by editor in chief Rudy Baum, is facing widespread blowback and condemnation from American Chemical Society member scientists. Baum concluded his editorial by stating that “deniers” are attempting to “derail meaningful efforts to respond to global climate change.”

Dozens of letters from ACS members were published on July 27, 2009 castigating Baum, with some scientists calling for his replacement as editor-in-chief.” Read the rest here: “Group ‘Startled’ By Outpouring of Scientists Rejecting Man-Made Climate Fears! Clamor for Editor to Be Removed!

"The carefully stacked cards are starting to fall"

07/30/2009

“The revolt by American Chemical Society members is one of the most important pieces of good news ever in the saga of anthropogenic global warming. When real scientists finally get a chance to vent their opposition to global warming mythology, and more importantly, to have it published in a widely read publication, it’s the beginning of the end of the alarmists’ stranglehold. Once the debate is truly joined, there will be so many holes revealed in standard AGW orthodoxy that it will sink without a trace alongside cold fusion, polywater and mental spoon bending. The ACS revolt also illustrates the classic divide between the views of the members of many large national organizations, who are generally normal people scattered across the heartland, and their leaders, who more often than not these days are housed in Washington, DC, and positioned far to the left of their constituents. The classic example is AARP, with a membership of generally conservative elderly folk and a leadership made up of flaming Maoists. The American Chemical Society’s headquarters is at 16th and M Streets, NW — across the street from the National Geographic Society, in the middle of the belly of the liberal beast. It’s filled from top to bottom with hand-wringing, knee-jerking, affirmative-acting Democrats who are probably all as shocked as the editor at the visceral outpouring against his absolutely ho-hum (to them) platitudes about the looming disaster of global warming and the implacable evil of those who would deny it. The carefully stacked cards are starting to fall” “Re: Chemists in Excited State

Naked emperor

07/30/2009

“It’s getting harder and harder [for] warmists to get away with their blanket statements that a “scientific consensus” on global warming exists. Now, an organization [American Chemical Society] that bills itself as “the world’s largest scientific society” is facing a grassroots rebellion from its scientist members. Marc Morano of Climate Depot has the exclusive story …

This incident may impress itself on other warmist scientists. No editor (or writer) wants to be upbraided in public this way, so casual claims of consensus are probably going to be coming our way less frequently in the future. Once the emperor is seen to have no clothes, pretending otherwise in public becomes difficult.” “Warmist editor faces blowback from scientists” h/t Climate Depot

Revolt at the American Physical Society

07/30/2009

“As physicists who are familiar with the science issues, and as current and past members of the American Physical Society, we the undersigned urge the Council to revise its current statement* on climate change as follows, so as to more accurately represent the current state of the science:

Greenhouse gas emissions, such as carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide, accompany human industrial and agricultural activity. While substantial concern has been expressed that emissions may cause significant climate change, measured or reconstructed temperature records indicate that 20th – 21st century changes are neither exceptional nor persistent, and the historical and geological records show many periods warmer than today. In addition, there is an extensive scientific literature that examines beneficial effects of increased levels of carbon dioxide for both plants and animals.

Studies of a variety of natural processes, including ocean cycles and solar variability, indicate that they can account for variations in the Earth’s climate on the time scale of decades and centuries. Current climate models appear insufficiently reliable to properly account for natural and anthropogenic contributions to past climate change, much less project future climate.

The APS supports an objective scientific effort to understand the effects of all processes – natural and human — on the Earth’s climate and the biosphere’s response to climate change, and promotes technological options for meeting challenges of future climate changes, regardless of cause.” “Regarding the National Policy Statement on Climate Change of the APS Council: An Open Letter to the Council of the American Physical Society” h/t IceCap today

Revolt at the American Chemical Society

07/30/2009

“An outpouring of skeptical scientists who are members of the American Chemical Society (ACS) are revolting against the group’s editor-in-chief — with some demanding he be removed — after an editorial appeared claiming “the science of anthropogenic climate change is becoming increasingly well established.”

The editorial claimed the “consensus” view was growing “increasingly difficult to challenge, despite the efforts of diehard climate-change deniers.” The editor now admits he is “startled” by the negative reaction from the group’s scientific members. The American Chemical Society bills itself as the “world’s largest scientific society.”

The June 22, 2009 editorial in Chemical and Engineering News by editor in chief Rudy Baum, is facing widespread blowback and condemnation from American Chemical Society member scientists. Baum concluded his editorial by stating that “deniers” are attempting to “derail meaningful efforts to respond to global climate change.”

Dozens of letters from ACS members were published on July 27, 2009 castigating Baum, with some scientists calling for his replacement as editor-in-chief.” Read the rest here: “Group ‘Startled’ By Outpouring of Scientists Rejecting Man-Made Climate Fears! Clamor for Editor to Be Removed!

California explained — must view video

07/29/2009

Thanks to reader/commenter Fred.

This socialist idiot is in charge of U.S. science policy

07/29/2009

“President Obama’s top science adviser, John P. Holdren, advocated the “de-development” of the United States in books he published in the 1970s.

“A massive campaign must be launched to restore a high-quality environment in North America and to de-develop the United States,” Holdren wrote in a 1973 book he co-authored with Paul R. Ehrlch and Anne H. Ehrlich. “De-development means bringing our economic system (especially patterns of consumption) into line with the realities of ecology and the global resource situation.”

In the vision expressed by Holdren and his co-authors, the Ehrlichs, the need for “de-development” of the United States demanded a redistribtuion of wealth.

“The need for de-development presents our economists with a major challenge,” they wrote. “They must design a stable, low-consumption economy in which there is a much more equitable distribution of wealth than in the present one. Redistribution of wealth both within and among nations is absolutely essential, if a decent life is to be provided to every human being.”” “White House Science Adviser Advocated ‘De-Development’ of the United States