Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Junk Science: Global Warming's New 'Consensus'
Fox News ^ | 5/23/2008 | Steven Milloy

Posted on 05/23/2008 12:44:44 PM PDT by markomalley

There’s a new global warming consensus in town.

It’s too bad the once-level-headed but now chicken-hearted Bush administration already has skedaddled, perhaps leaving our standard of living at the mercy of Barack Obama and his high regard for the international hate-America crowd.

The Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine this week announced that 31,072 U.S. scientists signed a petition stating that "… There is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane or other greenhouse gases is causing, or will cause in the future, catastrophic heating of the Earth’s atmosphere and disruption of the Earth’s climate..."

Eminent theoretical physicist Freeman Dyson is among the many distinguished signatories.

The OISM petition represents a direct challenge to the Al Gore-touted notion that a consensus of scientists has determined that catastrophic manmade global warming is real and that any debate over the science is pointless.

You might think that the Bush administration — which has been viciously attacked by Al Gore and the greens for pulling the U.S. out of the Kyoto Protocol and being generally skeptical of the science underlying global warming alarmism — would have embraced the new petition as support for its resistance to mandatory greenhouse gas emission caps.

But you’d be wrong. When given the chance to embrace vindication at a White House press briefing this week, deputy press secretary Dana Perino couldn’t run away fast enough.

A White House reporter asked Perino: "WorldNetDaily reports that more than 31,000 U.S. scientists, including 9,000 PhDs, now signed a petition rejecting global warming, the assumption that human production of greenhouse gases is damaging the Earth’s climate. My question: What is the White House reaction to these 31,000 scientists?"

(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Extended News; Government
KEYWORDS: climatechange; globalwarming
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-39 next last

1 posted on 05/23/2008 12:44:45 PM PDT by markomalley
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

The more ignorant a person is about a subject, the more likely they are to take the Liberal position.

And besides, who expects anything different from the Democrats-Lite White House?


2 posted on 05/23/2008 12:48:12 PM PDT by Badger1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: markomalley
Notice this report got virtually no publicity in the MSM.
3 posted on 05/23/2008 12:48:21 PM PDT by Uncle Hal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: markomalley
"… There is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane or other greenhouse gases is causing, or will cause in the future, catastrophic heating of the Earth’s atmosphere and disruption of the Earth’s climate..."

BUMP!

Has anyone told McCain?

4 posted on 05/23/2008 12:54:07 PM PDT by calcowgirl (Schwarzenegger and McCain are trying to castrate the elephant)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: markomalley

McCain is an idiot for buying into the AGW hoax. However I do like his insistance on building as many as 200 nuclear power plants. He may have bought into the false premise but his solution (more nukes) is something we should have been doing all along. In fact, as much as I hate to say it, we may even be smart to follow what the French have done with their nuclear program.


5 posted on 05/23/2008 12:54:29 PM PDT by Mogollon (Vote straight GOP for congress....our only protection against Obama-Clinton, or McCain.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Uncle Hal

“Notice this report got virtually no publicity in the MSM.”

That’s because their overlord, AlGore, said the time for debate is over.

Apparently, if AlGore says the sky is perpetually red, the MSM will comply.


6 posted on 05/23/2008 12:54:53 PM PDT by Slapshot68
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: markomalley

I pointed this out to my lib bro-in-law who responded, “I’ll bet they’re all paid by oil interests.”

I said, “Yes, you’re right, all 31,000....”

You can’t argue with stupid.


7 posted on 05/23/2008 12:55:47 PM PDT by Slapshot68
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: markomalley
A White House reporter asked Perino: "WorldNetDaily reports ... "

Mentioning something which appeared in World Net Daily isn't always a good way to get yourself taken seriously.

8 posted on 05/23/2008 12:55:48 PM PDT by JennysCool (They all say they want change, but they’re really after folding money.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: markomalley

Al Gore’s pity-party rolls on.


9 posted on 05/23/2008 12:57:06 PM PDT by JennysCool (They all say they want change, but they’re really after folding money.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: markomalley

I watched a stupid show on ten things that would destroy the earth and they focused part of it on Global Warming, when Gore was asked about the 19,000 signatures ten years ago he waived them off as paid for by big polluters who have everything to gain by no legislation on global squirming. I reallly wish someone would turn the table on them in a big way and explain to the public that Big Science is making billions on the continuation of this sham, that whole cottage industries depend on this scam and that Gores own wallet is packed with money made from this scam. But alas no one in any position with a big enough microphone dares to speak out against the Malthusian anti-humanists that are the global scare mongers.


10 posted on 05/23/2008 12:59:14 PM PDT by aft_lizard (born conservative...I chose to be a republican)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Badger1
who expects anything different from the Democrats-Lite White House?

I can't begin to express how much I loathe all politicians...doesn't matter what color they are or what party they belong to. I hate them all.

11 posted on 05/23/2008 12:59:18 PM PDT by GSWarrior
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: markomalley

For what it’s worth April and May here in the Sierra Foothills have been colder than normal. The vegetable plants are standing still, afraid to grow. It’s usually well into the 80s daily by this time of year, and it’s high 60s, low 70s and has been, except for a few high 90 days.


12 posted on 05/23/2008 1:04:00 PM PDT by Lizavetta
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mogollon
However I do like his insistance on building as many as 200 nuclear power plants

agreed - nuclear, for electricity generation, is the way to go...

13 posted on 05/23/2008 1:09:35 PM PDT by ghost of nixon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: aft_lizard
I reallly wish someone would turn the table on them in a big way

...unlike most liberal scams, global warming may soon be up-ended and discredited...by global cooling. Mother Nature to the rescue.

14 posted on 05/23/2008 1:12:01 PM PDT by ghost of nixon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: markomalley

I don’t like the claim that 31,000 “scientists” are on the list, even including 9,000 PhDs.

How many of them are “scintists in the field of climatology/meterology/paleoclimatology?”

How many of the 9000 hold a PhD in a related field?

How many of them have no friggin’ clue what they’re talking about because they’re biologists/chemists/physicists or in any of the slew of science related fields that have nothing to do with weather and climate?

“They” boost their numbers with “researchers” that are nothing more than environmental vilunteers/activists....how many of these 31,000 guys/gals are just as bogus?

Doesn’t REALLY matter to me as the science is either sound or it is not. The data is either real or it is not.


15 posted on 05/23/2008 1:14:32 PM PDT by ElectricStrawberry (27th Infantry Regiment...cut in half during the Clinton years.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Slapshot68

And the AGW supporting scientists are all paid by socialists/marxists....

oh, wait, it’s “not nice” to point out that liberals are Marxists at heart.


16 posted on 05/23/2008 1:15:57 PM PDT by MrB (You can't reason people out of a position that they didn't use reason to get into in the first place)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: markomalley

A Hearty BUMP!!!


17 posted on 05/23/2008 1:22:19 PM PDT by Scarchin (Romney for VEEP)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Slapshot68

I’m one of the 31,000.

I work entirely in the nuclear power industry. The industry has been promoting nuclear power as a source of energy that will fight global warming.

So I signed the petition knowing that it was against the position of my employer.


18 posted on 05/23/2008 1:22:32 PM PDT by kidd
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: ElectricStrawberry

Signatories are approved for inclusion in the Petition Project list if they have obtained formal educational degrees at the level of Bachelor of Science or higher in appropriate scientific fields. The petition has been circulated only in the United States.

The current list of 31,072 petition signers includes 9,021 PhD; 6,961 MS; 2,240 MD and DVM; and 12,850 BS or equivalent academic degrees. Most of the MD and DVM signers also have underlying degrees in basic science.

All of the listed signers have formal educations in fields of specialization that suitably qualify them to evaluate the research data related to the petition statement. Many of the signers currently work in climatological, meteorological, atmospheric, environmental, geophysical, astronomical, and biological fields directly involved in the climate change controversy.

The Petition Project classifies petition signers on the basis of their formal academic training, as summarized below. Scientists often pursue specialized fields of endeavor that are different from their formal education, but their underlying training can be applied to any scientific field in which they become interested.

Outlined below are the numbers of Petition Project signatories, subdivided by educational specialties. These have been combined, as indicated, into seven categories.

1. Atmospheric, environmental, and Earth sciences includes 3,697 scientists trained in specialties directly related to the physical environment of the Earth and the past and current phenomena that affect that environment.

2. Computer and mathematical sciences includes 903 scientists trained in computer and mathematical methods. Since the human-caused global warming hypothesis rests entirely upon mathematical computer projections and not upon experimental observations, these sciences are especially important in evaluating this hypothesis.

3. Physics and aerospace sciences include 5,691 scientists trained in the fundamental physical and molecular properties of gases, liquids, and solids, which are essential to understanding the physical properties of the atmosphere and Earth.

4. Chemistry includes 4,796 scientists trained in the molecular interactions and behaviors of the substances of which the atmosphere and Earth are composed.

5. Biology and agriculture includes 2,924 scientists trained in the functional and environmental requirements of living things on the Earth.

6. Medicine includes 3,069 scientists trained in the functional and environmental requirements of human beings on the Earth.

7. Engineering and general science includes 9,992 scientists trained primarily in the many engineering specialties required to maintain modern civilization and the prosperity required for all human actions, including environmental programs.

The following outline gives a more detailed analysis of the signers’ educations.

Atmosphere, Earth, & Environment (3,697)

1. Atmosphere (578)

I) Atmospheric Science (114)
II) Climatology (40)
III) Meteorology (341 )
IV) Astronomy (58)
V) Astrophysics (25)

2. Earth (2,148)

I) Earth Science (107)
II) Geochemistry (62)
III) Geology (1,601)
IV) Geophysics (334)
V) Geoscience (23)
VI) Hydrology (21)

3. Environment (971)

I) Environmental Engineering (473)
II) Environmental Science (256)
III) Forestry (156)
IV) Oceanography (86)

Computers & Math (903)

1. Computer Science (217)

2. Math (686)

I) Mathematics (575)
II) Statistics (111)

Physics & Aerospace (5,691)

1. Physics (5,106)

I) Physics (2,310)
II) Nuclear Engineering (215)
III) Mechanical Engineering (2,581)

2. Aerospace (585)

I) Aerospace Engineering (585)

Chemistry (4,796)

1. Chemistry ( 3,156)

2. Chemical Engineering (1,640)

Biochemistry, Biology, & Agriculture (2,924)

1. Biochemistry (768)

I) Biochemistry (703)
II) Biophysics (65)

2. Biology (1,365)

I) Biology (985)
II) Ecology (72)
III) Entomology (57)
IV) Zoology (145)
V) Animal Science (106)

3. Agriculture (791)

I) Agricultural Science (314)
II) Agricultural Engineering (111)
III) Plant Science (292)
IV) Food Science (74)

Medicine (3,069)

1. Medical Science (726)

2. Medicine (2,343)

General Engineering & General Science (9,992)

1. General Engineering (9,751)

I) Engineering (7,289)
II) Electrical Engineering (2,075)
III) Metallurgy (387)

2. General Science (241)


19 posted on 05/23/2008 1:31:59 PM PDT by kidd
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: ElectricStrawberry

Why is the Petition Project necessary?

In December 1997, then U. S. Vice-President Al Gore participated in a meeting in Kyoto, Japan during which he signed a treaty to ration world energy production based upon fear of human-caused global warming. This treaty was not, however, presented to the United States Senate for ratification.

Since before that Kyoto meeting and continuing to the present day, Mr. Gore and his supporters at the United Nations and elsewhere have claimed that the “science is settled’ – that an overwhelming “consensus” of scientists agrees with the hypothesis of human-caused global warming, with only a handful of skeptical scientists in disagreement.

Moreover, these proponents of world energy rationing have consistently argued for more than 10 years that, in view of this claimed scientific “consensus,” no further discussion of the science involved in this issue is warranted before legislative action is taken to heavily tax and ration hydrocarbon energy.

Since, however, these claims were not successful in convincing the United States government to initiate energy rationing, the United Nations has held a series of international meetings attended by a central group of about 600 scientists, some additional scientists outside of this group, and a large number of political and bureaucratic representatives – approximately 2,000 in all. The United Nations has also hosted larger meetings, including many non-scientist participants from environmental, business, and political organizations.

During and after each of these meetings, there have been further publicity campaigns claiming that the “science is settled” – that the “consensus” of scientists in favor of the hypothesis of human-caused global warming is so overwhelming that further examination of the science is unnecessary.

Realizing, from discussions with their scientific colleagues, that this claimed “consensus” does not exist, a group of scientists initiated the Petition Project in early 1998. Thousands of signatures were gathered in a campaign during 1998-1999. Between 1999 and 2007, the list of petition signatories grew gradually, without a special campaign. Between October 2007 and March 2008, a new campaign for signatures was initiated. The majority of the current listed signatories signed or re-signed the petition after October 2007. The original review article that accompanied the petition effort in 1998-1999 was replaced in October 2007 with a new review incorporating the research literature up to that date.

The renewed petition campaign in 2007 was prompted by an escalation of the claims of “consensus,” release of the movie “An Inconvenient Truth” by Mr. Al Gore, and related events. Mr. Gore’s movie, asserting a “consensus” and “settled science” in agreement about human-caused global warming, conveyed the claims about human-caused global warming to ordinary movie goers and to public school children, to whom the film was widely distributed. Unfortunately, Mr. Gore’s movie contains many very serious incorrect claims, which no informed, honest scientist could endorse.


20 posted on 05/23/2008 1:36:03 PM PDT by kidd
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-39 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson