Skip to comments.American Physical Society: The First Major Scientific Institution To Reject Global Warming ?
Posted on 03/21/2014 9:18:28 AM PDT by Innovative
The American Physical Society (APS) has signalled a dramatic turnabout in its position on "climate change" by appointing three notorious climate skeptics to its panel on public affairs (POPA).
If that list looks impressive, perhaps it's worth reminding ourselves of Hal Lewis's theory as to why so many scientific institutions have fallen for the scam.
There are indeed trillions of dollars involved, to say nothing of the fame and glory (and frequent trips to exotic islands) that go with being a member of the club. Your own Physics Department (of which you are chairman) would lose millions a year if the global warming bubble burst.
Yes the American Physical Society's change of heart is significant but we've a long way to go before that oil tanker turns round. Or, as Churchill might have said: "Now this is not the end. It is not even the beginning of the end. But it is, perhaps, the end of the beginning."
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
"American Physical Society Sees The Light: Will It Be The First Major Scientific Institution To Reject The Global Warming 'Consensus'?"
The journey of a thousand miles begins with one step -- let's hope this is a first major step in the direction of the rejection of the entire global warming scam.
Global warming ping
So government grants are the cause of global warming?
The essence of the the scientific problem solving process is constant research, revision and proving, not consensus
One small step for men, one giant leap for mankind.
Engineers would never dare step off into the world of speculation like this. They know that to do so would be to create designs that would fail.
Also, good mathematics and good theory.
“Consensus science” is the last refuge of a scoundrel. Even one scientist with the truth, trumps 100,000,000 scientists who have “faith” in error.
I like it.
BLASPHEMY! These evil earth killers need to locked up! ;>}
“notorious” climate change skeptics?
no bias here...
I always get peeved when Obama, et al, use the term ‘every’ when talking about economists, scientists, etc. It gives the aura of consensus but no actual statistic on agreement. Ironically, ‘every’ economist, scientist, etc, ‘agrees’ with whatever any Dem is promoting. And Big Media NEVER questions that ‘fact’. It is enough to make one’s blood boil.
“Consensus science is the last refuge of a scoundrel. Even one scientist with the truth, trumps 100,000,000 scientists who have faith in error.”
The claim of a scientific “consensus” is bad enough. Couple that with the intimidation of and retaliation against scientists who dare to dissent and the climate change proponents’ approach becomes something much worse.
Having worked with R-12, I positively knew that R-12 liquid molecules -- upon release and expanding from liquid to gas -- are heavier than air. That means the R-12 molecule drops down, not up.
Having worked aboard Naval ships, I knew released R-12 was heavier than air because releasing R-12 aboard a ship tends to fill the entire hull with R-12 molecules ... pushing out air and killing humans trying to escape.
NASA..........what a disastrous turn this agency has taken under the Bamster. They were the epitome of space exploration and now they are nothing but junk scientists. I weep for our once great country.
The physicists will be the first to turn.
When I was in grad school in physics, the APS was the most important of the physics organizations.
The USA Grant Programs need a serious overhaul because the billions/trillions? that make up the leftist fraudulent applications netting windfalls, in which Democrats/Republicans give away taxpayer dollars by the wheelbarrow full to install bad politicians and study things like ‘the effect of Marjuana on a Rhesus Monkey’ (1960s) to “a bug on a treadmill’ (2009?) are seriously in need of downsizing or elimination altogether.
The 'end of the beginning'...well, it's a start.
“So government grants are the cause of global warming?”
In essence, yes.
Physicists may be among the most clear-thinking when it comes to objective questions - I remember when Ivan Glaever, a Nobel Laureate in physics, resigned from the APS because of their stand on AGW:
The alarmists make a big deal out of all the scientific societies that support the AGW racket - what they don’t realize (or admit) is that the best scientists are in the lab doing science; in many cases the leadership of the professional societies are shot through with bureaucratic mediocrities whose real interests are more political than scientific.
I noticed that, too. I think they’ll pulling that one out of the oven too soon, though. Not even the European electorate has been conditioned enough to swallow that one. Maybe they don’t think they need to rely on popular support any more, and they can shove it down our collective throat.
“The American Physical Society (APS) is the world’s second largest organization of physicists,”
No climatologists so libs will say big deal.
If the science was settled, they would have a model with predictive power, and their models have been dreadfully wrong from the beginning. There is so much they don’t understand.
It has not been scientifically proven that these trace amounts of atmospheric CO2 are changing anything in the planet’s climate that is even remotely statistically relevant. Right now Global Warming has been put on hold as none of the AGW climate models have proven anything and the Earths temperature is not cooperating. Princeton mathematician Freeman Dyson back filled the models with actual CO2 numbers and the results diverged from the climatic history, so much for the accuracy of the models. The fact is that the scientists have not yet been born, nor the engineers yet been trained, nor the software designed nor the sensing equipment yet conceived that could create an interplanetary climate model that predicts the Earth’s climate with anything remotely resembling accuracy. They are attempting brain surgery in an operating room with no light, using garden tools, and armed only with a plumbing certificate. Who is on the table? The taxpayer!
That whole “Freon destroying the ozone layer” story seemed as credible as saying “Rocks at the bottom of the ocean are floating to the surface.”
Libs already ridicule the APS.
In the meantime Obama launched a new website promoting the issue of global warming and wants to spend another $1 BILLION!
Obama Turns to Web to Illustrate the Effects of a Changing Climate
I know several physicists. My education includes a Masters in Engineering with a focus on quantum mechanics. Not a single one of them (or me for that matter) ever bought into the AGW garbage. Why? Because we know what “absorption spectra” and “Plank’s Law” are.
Funny thing is, I’ve brought both of those topics up to AGW fanatics. Never had one understand what those terms even mean.
AGW is a fraud. PERIOD.
Looks like some of these folks have opted to resign from Algore’s Grant Money Whores Club.
For really bright people, some of them are a bit slow.
This isn’t a bigee. They review every 5 years.
How about their claim to be able to measure the average temperature of the entire Earth over the course of a year or even a decade to an accuracy of two places to the right of the decimal, 1/100th of one degree? I think that is totally out of all reason to claim such accuracy.
John Christy firmly believes human activity has altered Earth’s climate.
Richard Lindzen? His claim to fame is the cirrus cloud theory, which he now says was wrong.
“According to an April 30, 2012 New York Times article, “Dr. Lindzen accepts the elementary tenets of climate science. He agrees that carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas, calling people who dispute that point “nutty.” He agrees that the level of it is rising because of human activity and that this should warm the climate.” However, he believes that decreasing tropical cirrus clouds in a warmer world will allow more longwave radiation to escape the atmosphere, counteracting the warming. Lindzen first published this “iris” theory in 2001, and offered more support in a 2009 paper, but today “most mainstream researchers consider Dr. Lindzens theory discredited” according to the Times article. Dr. Lindzen acknowledged that the 2009 paper contained “some stupid mistakes” in his handling of the satellite data. “It was just embarrassing,” he said in the Times interview. “The technical details of satellite measurements are really sort of grotesque.”
Judith Curry? She’s not a ‘deniar’ either.
“While Judith Curry supports the scientific opinion on climate change, she has argued that climatologists should be more accommodating of those skeptical of the scientific consensus on climate change.”
The APS is one of the foremost science organizations in the world. If they challenged the “consensus,” they would be destroyed by the media and ridiculed worldwide. No way will they risk that.
It's the only data that hasn't been falsified.
What I ask my global warming acquaintances is how come the ice age ended before we had automobiles or electricity from coal? They never seem to know the answer.
It’s not so much the warming, per se. It’s about the SPEED of the warming. The ice age didn’t end in 20-30 years.
Guess what? The warming stopped about a decade ago. So it didn’t last much longer than that 20-30 years.