Chronology Current Month Current Thread Current Date
[Year List] [Month List (current year)] [Date Index] [Thread Index] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Prev] [Date Next]

Re: [Phys-L] Will APS be the first major scientific institution to reject the global warming 'consensus'?



No, I think the original response calling the global warming consensus a
fraud is much more jingoistic. The Piltdown man was a fraud because they
were conciously trying to pass it off as a genuine prehistoric find. Fraud
is conciously perpetrating a hoax usually with the expectation of gain.
While it may be that the global warming models may not be as accurate as
claimed, but fraud is way too strong a word for possible scientific error.

Now if the headline had just accurately said that the APS might retract
their statement on AGW, that is one thing, but using the term "sees the
light" is using a religious phrase to telegraph their particular stance or
bias.

As to the credibility, neither nuclear physicists nor meterologists are not
experts in climate science. Indeed only a small fraction of the
meterological scientists have actually read the relevant reports. It is
like the TX board of education where a dentist was pushing to put
creationism in the schools and cast doubt on evolution. Dentists are not
scientists. They are technicians. I would go to a dentist for teeth
problems, and MD for other body broblems, and a good mechanic to fix my car,
but none of these are scientists, so their opinions on AGW carry little
weight. I would not go to a physicist if I had cancer, again because they
are not experts in repairing human bodies.

So looking at the credentials of a spokesperson is a valid thing to do, not
a jingoistic passtime. "Jingoistic" is loaded pejorative term that should
not be used. I just shuts off debate, and diminishes the credibility of the
user. I looked at the words used to see the paradigm that the writer was
using. Nowhere did I speculate about motives. When a negative paradigm is
telegraphed, one can think that the writer is not being objective. And
indeed in the body of the article he admits one of the three so called
"notorious" skeptics is actually a fence sitter. So the article contradicts
the initial blurb. Such blurbs and headlines are designed to inflame
passions for people who never read the full article.

John M. Clement
Houston, TX

-----Original Message-----
From: Phys-l [mailto:phys-l-bounces@phys-l.org] On Behalf Of
Ze'ev Wurman
Sent: Friday, March 21, 2014 4:51 PM
To: Phys-L@Phys-L.org
Subject: Re: [Phys-L] Will APS be the first major scientific
institution to reject the global warming 'consensus'?

A classic propaganda response.

First, attack the credibility of the involved. Then, question
the motives of the source. Finally, just pooh pooh it.

Ahh, the intellectual purity of the brave defenders of
received wisdom.

Incidentally, did those jingoistic warmers object when the
American Chemical Society or the American Physical Society
subscribed to the received wisdom of AGW and denounced them
because "they are unqualified, so clearly their opinion
doesn't count"? Just wondering.

Ze'ev

On 3/21/2014 2:04 PM, John Clement wrote:
Of course Prof Hal Lewis is a nuclear physicist and I see no
credentials in climate science. Whether of not the APS
should take a
position on climate science is certainly debateable, but in
light of
the concensus of climate scientists it certainly should not
take a negative position.

The headline says it all. The first reference is from a
blog that is
obviously written by a denier, so it may not represent what
will happen.
Incidentally one of the so called skeptics is actually slightly
neutral, and not a denier. Another one of the skeptics is a
metereologist, not a climate scientist from what the blog said. I
think it is possibly a tempist in a hot tea pot.

John M. Clement
Houston, TX

-----Original Message-----
From: Phys-l [mailto:phys-l-bounces@phys-l.org] On Behalf Of
Strickert, Rick (Consultant)
Sent: Friday, March 21, 2014 12:25 PM
To: Phys-L@Phys-L.org
Subject: [Phys-L] Will APS be the first major scientific
institution
to reject the global warming 'consensus'?

Excerpted from "American Physical Society Sees The Light:
Will It Be The First Major Scientific Institution To Reject The
Global Warming 'Consensus'?"
(http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-London/2014/03/20/American
-Physical-Society-Sees-The-Light-Will-It-Be-The-First-Major-Sc
ientific-Institution-To-Reject-The-Global-Warming-Consensus):

"The American Physical Society (APS) has signaled a dramatic
turnabout in its position on 'climate change' by appointing three
notorious [global warming] climate skeptics to its panel on public
affairs (POPA).

"The reason it's so significant is that it comes only three years
after one of the APS's most distinguished members - Professor Hal
Lewis - resigned in disgust at its endorsement of what he
called 'the
global warming scam.'
[http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jamesdelingpole/100058265/u
s-physics-professor-global-warming-is-the-greatest-and-most-su
ccessful-pseudoscientific-fraud-i-have-seen-in-my-long-life/]

"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.'"

Rick Strickert
Austin, TX
_______________________________________________
Forum for Physics Educators
Phys-l@phys-l.org
http://www.phys-l.org/mailman/listinfo/phys-l
_______________________________________________
Forum for Physics Educators
Phys-l@phys-l.org
http://www.phys-l.org/mailman/listinfo/phys-l


_______________________________________________
Forum for Physics Educators
Phys-l@phys-l.org
http://www.phys-l.org/mailman/listinfo/phys-l