If you reply to this long (17 kB) post please don't hit the reply
button unless you prune the copy of this post that may appear in your
reply down to a few relevant lines, otherwise the entire already
archived post may be needlessly resent to subscribers.
*****************************************
ABSTRACT: The petitions circulated by the Oregon Institute of Science
and Medicine (OISM) and Fred Seitz in 1998 and again in 2007 urge the
United States government to "reject the global warming agreement that
was written in Kyoto, Japan in December, 1997, and any other similar
proposals." Despite (a) the disavowal of the 1998 petition by the
National Academy of Science, (b) the half-truths in the accompanying
pseudo-article "Environmental Effects of Increased Atmospheric Carbon
Dioxide," and (c) the extremist nature of the organizations with
which OISM and Seitz are associated (all the above are cogently
reported by Bob Park and SourceWatch); many scientists, politicians,
and newspaper editors have been deluded by Seitz's petitions - yet
another example of the science/math illiteracy of the general
population.
*****************************************
In response to my Phys-L post of 12 Oct 2007 titled "Re: Petition
Packet" [Hake (2007a), Dan MacIsaac> (2007) wrote [my insertion of
references and URL's; bracketed by lines "MMMMMM. . . . ."yes, I
realize that bracket lines are unorthodox, but they serve to: (a)
avoid (in most cases) awkward quotes within quotes ". . .
.'........'. . . .", and (b) "clearly indicate who said what,
unlike the ambiguous marginal angle brackets ">", ">>", ">>>". . . .
. that befoul many posts]]:
MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM
Well, if you judge situations by rating the reputation of those
commenting rather then the content of the comments, you can add Bob
Park's name <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bob_Park>; his "What's New"
newsletters of 10/12/07 and 3/13/98 [Park (2007, 1998)] suggest
Seitz's presently affiliated institution. . . .[George C. Marshall
Institute]. . . . is less than forthright. I encourage readers to
read Park's (2007) comment and do a little reading and
decision-making of their own before signing any petitions."
MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM
Park (2007) wrote [my inserts at ". . . . [insert]. . . ."; a few
typos in the original are corrected]:
PPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP
Petition: Have You Gotten The Card To Sign From Fred Seitz? Familiar?
. . . .[Park (1998)]. . . . Fred signs his note as "Past President,
NAS." That should be "Way Past." He now heads the Board of the George
C. Marshall Institute. . . .[<http://www.marshall.org/>]. . . . .
Look that up in Wikipedia . . . .
[<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_C._Marshall_Institute>]. . . ..
Click on its funding sources. . . . .[
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_C._Marshall_Institute#Funding_sources>].
. . - that will explain a lot. Also see the Oregon Institute of
Science and Medicine <http://www.oism.org/> . The OISM is supported
mostly by sale of home-schooling materials, including McGuffey
Readers, the 1911 Encyclopedia Britannica, and the 1913 Noah Webster
Dictionary. Don't trust your kids with anything more recent. The OISM
Home Page lists a faculty of six, but at least two of them are dead.
Well, who could tell?
PPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP
In addition to reading Parks's comments, I suggest that readers scan
the valuable list of references in Mallinckrodt's (2007) Physoc post.
Mallinckrodt wrote [my insert at ". . . . .[insert]. . . .":
MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM
People may or may not find Seitz' argument and the content of the
"peer reviewed research paper". . . . .[Robinson et al. (2007)]. . .
from "the Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine". . . . . [
<http://www.oism.org/>]. . . . . . . .compelling, but I certainly
hope nobody signs this petition without knowing a little more about
these folks.
Some information about the Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine,
the institutional affiliation of the authors of the "peer reviewed"
(but not as far as I can tell published) "research paper"
<http://tinyurl.com/qxyz9>.. . . .[ It's now been "published" as
Robinson et al. (2007) if you regard "The Journal of American
Physicians and Surgeons" as a legitimate publication - see e.g.,
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Association_of_American_Physicians_and_Surgeons>].
. . . .
SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS
The Oregon Petition, sponsored by the OISM, was circulated in April
1998 in a bulk mailing to tens of thousands of U.S. scientists. In
addition to the petition, the mailing included what appeared to be a
reprint of a scientific paper. Authored by OISM's Arthur B. Robinson,
Sallie L. Baliunas, Willie Soon, and Zachary W. Robinson, the paper
was titled "Environmental Effects of Increased Atmospheric Carbon
Dioxide" and was printed in the same typeface and format as the
official "Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences." Also
included was a reprint of a December 1997, Wall Street Journal
editorial, "Science Has Spoken: Global Warming Is a Myth, by Arthur
and Zachary Robinson. A cover note signed "Frederick Seitz/Past
President, National Academy of Sciences, U.S.A./President Emeritus,
Rockefeller University", may have given some persons the impression
that Robinson's paper was an official publication of the academy's
peer-reviewed journal. The blatant editorializing in the pseudopaper,
however, was uncharacteristic of scientific papers.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
"The mailing is clearly designed to be deceptive by giving people the
impression that the article, which is full of half-truths, is a
reprint and has passed peer review," complained Raymond
Pierrehumbert, a meteorologist at the University of Chicago. NAS
foreign secretary F. Sherwood Rowland, an atmospheric chemist, said
researchers "are wondering if someone is trying to hoodwink them."
NAS council member Ralph J. Cicerone, dean of the School of Physical
Sciences at the University of California at Irvine, was particularly
offended that Seitz described himself in the cover letter as a "past
president" of the NAS. Although Seitz had indeed held that title in
the 1960s, Cicerone hoped that scientists who received the petition
mailing would not be misled into believing that he "still has a role
in governing the organization."
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
The NAS. . . . [<http://www.nas.edu/>]. . . issued an unusually
blunt formal response to the petition drive. "The NAS Council would
like to make it clear that this petition has nothing to do with the
National Academy of Sciences and that the manuscript was not
published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences or
in any other peer-reviewed journal," it stated in a news release.
"The petition does not reflect the conclusions of expert reports of
the Academy." In fact, it pointed out, its own prior published study
had shown that "even given the considerable uncertainties in our
knowledge of the relevant phenomena, greenhouse warming poses a
potential threat sufficient to merit prompt responses. Investment in
mitigation measures acts as insurance protection against the great
uncertainties and the possibility of dramatic surprises."
Notwithstanding this rebuke, the Oregon Petition managed to garner
15,000 signatures within a month's time. S. Fred Singer. . .
.[<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S._Fred_Singer>]. . . . called the
petition "the latest and largest effort by rank-and-file scientists
to express their opposition to schemes that subvert science for the
sake of a political agenda."
Nebraska senator Chuck Hagel called it an "extraordinary response"
and cited it as his basis for continuing to oppose a global warming
treaty. "Nearly all of these 15,000 scientists have technical
training suitable for evaluating climate research data," Hagel said.
Columns citing the Seitz petition and the Robinson paper as credible
sources of scientific expertise on the global warming issue have
appeared in publications ranging from "Newsday", the "Los Angeles
Times" and "Washington Post" to the "Austin-American Statesman,"
"Denver Post," and "Wyoming Tribune-Eagle."
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
As of the Fall of 2007, OISM continued to mail petition cards along
with a reprint of "Environmental Effects of Increased Atmospheric
Carbon Dioxide,". . . .[Robinson et al. (2007)]. . . now cited as
having been published in the Journal of American Physicians and
Surgeons (2007) 12, 79-90, with Arthur B. Robinson, Noah E. Robinson,
and Willie Soon listed as the authors. Also included is a copy of a
Wall Street Journal Op-Ed article entitled "Global Warming is
300-Year-Old News" authored by Arthur and Noah Robinson and dated
January 18, 2000. . . .[see <http://www.oism.org/pproject/>]. . . . .
.
SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS
SUBSCRIBERS TO AP-PHYSICS, PHYSHARE, PHYS- L, AND PHYSLRNR MAY ASK
"WHAT'S THE SEITZ PETITION GOT TO DO WITH PHYSICS EDUCATION?
In my view, deficient science/math education is one reason why a
majority of the U.S. population is scientifically illiterate [Hake
(2000)] and why many scientists, politicians, and newspaper editors
and reporters have been deluded by Seitz's petition.
Hake, R.R. 2000. "The General Population's Ignorance of Science
Related Societal Issues: A Challenge for the University," AAPT
Announcer 30(2): 105; online at
<http://www.physics.indiana.edu/~hake/GuelphSocietyG.pdf> (2.1 MB).
Mallinckrodt, J. 2007. "Re: petition packet," PHYSOC post of 11 Oct
2007 19:54:15 -0700; online at <http://tinyurl.com/2wnd92>. To access
the archives of Physoc one needs to subscribe, but that takes only a
few minutes by clicking on
[<http://listserv.uark.edu/archives/physoc.html> and then clicking on
"Join or leave the list (or change settings)." If you're busy, then
subscribe using the "NOMAIL" option under "Miscellaneous." Then, as a
subscriber, you may access the archives and/or post messages at any
time, while receiving NO MAIL from the list!
Robinson, A.B, N.E. Robinson, & W. Soon. 2007. "Environmental Effects
of Increased Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide," The Journal of American
Physicians and Surgeons 12(3): 79-90, online at
<http://www.jpands.org/vol12no3/robinson.pdf> (872 kB)
Wells, H.G. 1920. "The Outline of History." For Amazon.com information on a two
volume set published in 1974 by Scholarly Press see
<http://tinyurl.com/yjs83d>.