JustOneMinute: How Green Was My Scientific Consensus?
From Daily Tech:
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.
Wow. From the APS editors comments (emphasis added):
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.
UPDATE: lots more conversation about trying to stop the conversation here
July 19th, 2008 10:23 pm
The article is a bit misleading. The APS has not changed it’s position, they’ve simple allowed one of their members to post an article in their online forum. The link to the article:
http://www.aps.org/units/fps/newsletters/200807/monckton.cfm
Note, at the top, in red letters:
“The following article has not undergone any scientific peer review. Its conclusions are in disagreement with the overwhelming opinion of the world scientific community. The Council of the American Physical Society disagrees with this article’s conclusions.”
July 19th, 2008 10:43 pm
I think it’s more of a trial balloon. Global warming is getting harder and harder to sell, given that 1934 and 1998 are the hottest years on record, respectively. The ten cooler years since 1998 are hard to ignore. Which is why “climate change”, the vague buzz term, has come into vogue.
Anyway, it isn’t just a member’s blog post, it’s the editor’s.
http://www.aps.org/units/fps/newsletters/200807/editor.cfm
They do indeed appear to be inviting debate, and the invitation refers to the controversy AS a controversy, not a single blog poster’s opinion.
I have more on the skeptics here:
http://www.aps.org/units/fps/newsletters/200807/editor.cfm
and the lighter side here:
http://www.harmonicminer.com/wordpress/2008/07/10/someone-to-watch-over-my-carbon-credits/