Notice

I am working on the template of this blog today in order to chase down some problems that have developed with my template and widgets.

nullspace for future use

nullspace for future use

About

Thursday, July 17, 2008

The American Phsyical Society Reverses View On Global Warming,
Will Sponsor Debates To Test Validity


The American Physical Society, an organization representing nearly 50,000 physicists, has reversed its stance on climate change and is now proclaiming that many of its members disbelieve in human-induced global warming. The APS is also sponsoring public debate on the validity of global warming science. The leadership of the society had previously called the evidence for global warming “incontrovertible.”

In a posting to the APS forum, editor Jeffrey Marque explains,”There is a considerable presence within the scientific community of people who do not agree with the IPCC conclusion that anthropogenic CO2 emissions are very probably likely to be primarily responsible for global warming that has occurred since the Industrial Revolution.”

Source: Watts Up With That?



Commentary


I note that today is the 74th day in a row without a sunspot, and what may be a Cycle 23 spot is coming around the western limb of the sun. And for all you lefties that keep quoting the various IPCC Reports, read this devastating analysis [pdf download] of that flawed organization:


The IPCC is a single-interest organisation, whose charter presumes a widespread human influence on climate, rather than consideration of whether such influence may be negligible or missing altogether. Though the IPCC’s principles also state that a wide range of views is to be sought when selecting lead authors and contributing authors, this rule has been honored more in the breach than in the observance. More than two-thirds of all authors of chapter 9 of the IPCC’s 2007 climate-science assessment are part of a clique whose members have co-authored papers with each other and, we can surmise, very possibly at times acted as peer-reviewers for each other’s work.

Of the 44 contributing authors, more than half have co-authored papers with the lead authors or coordinating lead authors of chapter 9.It is no surprise, therefore, that the majority of scientists who are skeptical of a human influence on climate significant enough to be damaging to the planet were unrepresented in the authorship of chapter 9. Many of the IPCC authors were climate modelers - or associated with laboratories committed to modeling - unwilling to admit that their models are neither accurate nor complete.

0 comments :