As I said there's been a major outbreak of heresy in the American Physical Society:
Message 24765664
i>Editor's Comments
With this issue of Physics & Society, we kick off a debate concerning one of the main conclusions of the International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the UN body which, together with Al Gore, recently won the Nobel Prize for its work concerning climate change research. 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 the global warming that has occurred since the Industrial Revolution. Since the correctness or fallacy of that conclusion has immense implications for public policy and for the future of the biosphere, we thought it appropriate to present a debate within the pages of P&S concerning that conclusion. This editor (JJM) invited several people to contribute articles that were either pro or con. Christopher Monckton responded with this issue's article that argues against the correctness of the IPCC conclusion, and a pair from Cal Poly San Luis Obispo, David Hafemeister and Peter Schwartz, responded with this issue's article in favor of the IPCC conclusion. We, the editors of P&S, invite reasoned rebuttals from the authors as well as further contributions from the physics community. Please contact me (jjmarque@sbcglobal.net) if you wish to jump into this fray with comments or articles that are scientific in nature. However, we will not publish articles that are political or polemical in nature. Stick to the science! (JJM)
......
aps.org
---------------------------------------
the report was clearly contrary to the long-held position of the APS.
Thank you for assuring us the APS as an institution hasn't gone over to the heresy. Its merely allowed a debate to begin. Thats bad enough of course.
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.
Only one of 39 units is allowing the heresy to be debated. Great! It can probably be contained and stamped out then. Getting a new newsletter editor would be job one, I'm sure.
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 ..
Aha! That is proof that any heretical statements contained therein are false!
The American Physical Society reaffirms the following position on climate change, adopted by its governing body, the APS Council, on November 18, 2007:
The APS responded to the outbreak of heresy by reaffirming its official orthodox position. Very good. Thats a good start. But you can't have too many reaffirmations of loyalty, fidelity and orthodoxy. Oh, good, here's more reaffirmation:
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.
Now lets see if we can belittle the forum where the heresy broke out.
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.
Very good. You could have gone a bit further - you could have likened the journal to graffiti scrawled on a bathroom wall, for instance.
Monckton is not a ..
Ah, the ritual personal attack begins. Good, you called him a crank. Attaway.
the overwhelming majority of APS members whom I know personally support the APS position.
Thank Gaia for that! |
