Human-Caused Global Warming Myth Implodes

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.

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."

As we've mentioned time and again, there is no basis for the media-induced panic over global warming, and there are no reliable scientific data indicating that humans have the capacity to influence planetary global warming or global cooling cycles.  And the APS clearly agrees with our position.

This of course failed to impress the high priest of the Anthropogenic Global Warming Religion, AlGore, who issued a warning from his private Gulfstream jet:  the planet will die unless you turn away from "fossil fuels" and produce 100% of your energy needs by solar and wind within the next ten years".  Self-styled "experts" such as Oregon SoS Billy Bradbury and Davey Afpel are undoubtedly waiting for additional marching orders from the high priest before weighing in on the issue.

Comments

[Bobkat49]

Max, check out this on nuclear energy from
http://oregonstate.edu/dept/ncs/newsarch/2008/Jul08/nukes.html OSU.

[Max]

BK, thanks for the link! I've been aware of Reyes' work for perhaps 5 years, but was unaware that it's hit the commercial stage.

[Ken]

They're backtracking now. From the APS home page:

The American Physical Society reaffirms the following position on climate change, adopted by its governing body, the APS Council, on November 18, 2007:

"Emissions of greenhouse gases from human activities are changing the atmosphere in ways that affect the Earth's climate."

An article at odds with this statement recently appeared in an online newsletter of the APS Forum on Physics and Society, one of 39 units of APS. The header of this newsletter carries the statement that "Opinions expressed are those of the authors alone and do not necessarily reflect the views of the APS or of the Forum." This newsletter is not a journal of the APS and it is not peer reviewed.

[Max]

Thanks, I've been tracking updates. APS acknowledges that carbon dioxide is 97% non-human in origin, which is a step away from their previous stance. Most people, it seems, can recognize that when carbon dioxide amounts to less than 3% of greenhouse gases and that anthropogenic origins amount to less than 3% of that 3%, a human effect is insignificant.

By the way, I wouldn't put a whole lot of stock into "peer review". What that means is that if you don't agree, you don't get published. As one example:

In the early 1980's Dr. L.E.L. Rasmussen had the audacity to note a flehmen response in elephants; her article eventually made the cover of SCIENCE magazine, but only after she mollified the "peer reviewers" by changing the term to a "flehmen-like response". You see, the "peers" "knew" that elephants don't flehmen.

Well, it turns out that, in fact, they do. And this is now recognized. At the time, however, Dr. Rasmussen's work was rejected until she sort of "got in line". If you don't get published, you don't get grants.

I ran into the same issue when I discussed my discovery of pacinian corpuscles in the upper palate of elephants and tied them to specific behaviors exhibited by the animals. The "peer reviewers" hooted at the time, though it is now recognized that specific behaviors are tied to the organelles, which function as a gating mechanism.