All -
I imagine many of the denizens of this board are invested in debunking global warming and took comfort and solace in the report posted here about the "mathematical proof that there is no 'climate crisis'" posted here recently (post #22229). I doubt that what I have to say will change anybody's mind, but I will posit that leaning on unsubstantiated statements is a shaky - and ultimately self-defeating - way to support one's views.
The report mentioned from a Forum of the American Physical Society (APS) was quite the buzz today around my lab today. I am an APS member, and although I do not speak for the APS, the report was clearly contrary to the long-held position of the APS.
From the APS website: aps.org
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 This newsletter is not a journal of the APS and it is not peer reviewed.
The full statement of the APS is linked from there:
Emissions of greenhouse gases from human activities are changing the atmosphere in ways that affect the Earth's climate. Greenhouse gases include carbon dioxide as well as methane, nitrous oxide and other gases. They are emitted from fossil fuel combustion and a range of industrial and agricultural processes.
The evidence is incontrovertible: Global warming is occurring. If no mitigating actions are taken, significant disruptions in the Earth’s physical and ecological systems, social systems, security and human health are likely to occur. We must reduce emissions of greenhouse gases beginning now.
Because the complexity of the climate makes accurate prediction difficult, the APS urges an enhanced effort to understand the effects of human activity on the Earth’s climate, and to provide the technological options for meeting the climate challenge in the near and longer terms. The APS also urges governments, universities, national laboratories and its membership to support policies and actions that will reduce the emission of greenhouse gases.
For the record:
- The publication in which the cited report appeared is NOT a peer-reviewed journal. It is a 'forum', a discussion, the physicists' equivalent of a message board. The Forum in which the report appeared is dedicated to the intersection between physics and society. (The other five are: Graduate Student Affairs, History of Physics, Industrial and Applied Physics, Education, and International Physics.) Ironically, this current issue of Physics and Society is to be the last to appear in print before becoming all electronic.
- Monckton is not a physicist. He is a journalist. His undergraduate degree was in classics. He has no academic affiliation. I don't know of any physicists - and I know plenty - who take him as anything other than a crank. He has also held very public and similarly ill-informed views on AIDS, views which he himself eventually came to retract. See:
en.wikipedia.org
- Anyone who pays the dues can join APS - although it's beyond me why a non-physicist would want to - and so anyone who wants to submit a paper to a Forum may do so, just like anyone who pays for membership can post on SI's message boards. We have all kinds here at SI, and we have all kinds at APS. That said, the overwhelming majority of APS members whom I know personally support the APS position. I would be very surprised if as many as 1 in 20 do not.
- The article published by Monckton does not come anywhere near "mathematical proof". It is an opinion piece only, written by someone who is neither a physicist, a mathematician, nor an atmospheric scientist.
Sorry, folks - but the salivating over the article on this board is as overdone as is awarding Gore the Nobel Peace Prize. There may be legitimate disagreement between scientists on aspects of global climate change, but this article is not an example of that.
nrg |
