Myth of Consensus Explodes: APS Opens Global Warming Debate

A group representing 50,000 physicists has reversed course. Not long ago the groups position was that Man Made Global Warming was incontrovertible…now they’re saying the IPCC models were flawed and that they no longer subscribe to Man Made Global Warming…common sense has come home.

dailytech.com/Myth+of+Consensus+Explodes+APS+Opens+Global+Warming+Debate/article12403.htm

This is also from a website that denies peak oil too:

dailytech.com/Myth+of+Consensus+Explodes+APS+Opens+Global+Warming+Debate/article12403.htm

Your point?

I think his point is that it should be disregarded at the minimum because opposes the left’s agenda that man is evil and must not only be controlled but reduced.

In my opinion, it is significant because there is a growing voice that “man made global warming” is a criminal fraud.

To bad the post is an outright lie. From the front page of the APS website:

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 This newsletter is not a journal of the APS and it is not peer reviewed.

Please don’t lie by claiming that the Physicists of the APS (of which I am one) are saying something that they clearly are not.

That was an astounding post. If the American Physical Society actually changed it’s stance, it would indeed mean that the consensus of 50,000 physicists would have changed to denying anthropogenic global warming.

A huge change in the scientific consensus to say the least. But then, your link has this disclaimer, apparently added after the article was published:

After publication of this story, the APS responded with a statement that its Physics and Society Forum is merely one unit within the APS, and its views do not reflect those of the Society at large.

So 50,000 physicists don’t deny global warming after all. Nice try, though. Had me going for a moment.

edit: Sorry, I see someone else caught the scam before I did. I do think the question on the table is “Why do we see so many of these frauds by deniers?” It’s one thing to have an honest difference of opinion, but dishonesty is not beneficial to the public discussion of the issue. And it tends to make all deniers look dishonest. I would suggest to those of you who don’t agree with warming that you might want to do some housecleaning.

That was an astounding post. If the American Physical Society actually changed it’s stance, it would indeed mean that the consensus of 50,000 physicists would have changed to denying anthropogenic global warming.

A huge change in the scientific consensus to say the least. But then, your link has this disclaimer, apparently added after the article was published:

After publication of this story, the APS responded with a statement that its Physics and Society Forum is merely one unit within the APS, and its views do not reflect those of the Society at large.

So 50,000 physicists don’t deny global warming after all. Nice try, though. Had me going for a moment.

Peak oil is Ribeyes cause of a week. If you were to start a thread about Lance Berkman’s batting average he would reply with “what is Lance Berkman position on Peak oil” and give you a website to look at

Apparently SOME of the APS members all calling the idea of man made global warming silly. THE EDITOR of the APS Forum was the guy making the statement…but he’s a nobody…right?

Must be another “denier”. That being the smug, condesceding term those who beleive in global warming use to describe anyone who disagrees with them.

Please share with me which “frauds by deniers” we should be aware of. I have not heard of any. In fact, I only see that this article contained an error, not a fraud.

Apparently SOME of the APS members all calling the idea of man made global warming silly. THE EDITOR of the APS Forum was the guy making the statement…but he’s a nobody…right?

He speaks for himself, since he has no authorization to speak for other members of the APS.

I don’t think he attempted to give any other impression. The lie seems to have started with whoever took his statement and pretended it represented the ideas of the APS.

Really? The deliberately dishonest claim that a statement by one member of the APS constitutes a change in the opinion of the entire organization is an error, not a fruad? Really?

Please share with me which “frauds by deniers” we should be aware of.

There was the classic “revised warming figures show warming is false” story. Many bloggers and others opposed to science posted long declarations that it overturned everything. Then (as you saw here if you were reading posts) it became clear that the revised data was not significantly different from the old data, and in fact couldn’t be distinguished from one another on a graph.

And then the “temperature sensing stations are wrong” scam, in which the ones called by the deniers as “bad” were no different than the ones they called good. In fact many were cooler than the “bad” ones. The classic “proof” offered showed a jet aircraft right next to a sensor. Gotta be bad, right? But I noticed the aircraft was a gutted MIG on display, that generated no heat at all, cropped to hide the fact.

Stuff like that.

have not heard of any.

Now you have.

In fact, I only see that this article contained an error, not a fraud.

Hard to picture someone dumb enough. There was a disclaimer on the site, for example. And all they had to do was check the APS site itself to check.

Apparently, I’ve violated Hanlon’s Razor:
“Never attribute to malice, that which is adequately explained by stupidity.”

I’m afraid you cant just dismiss this as there not being a significant difference between the old data and the new data:

Let’s take a look…

http://vortex.accuweather.com/adc2004/pub/includes/columns/community/2008/Fig4_correction.gif

As you see, the corrected data and the old data are so close together, they can’t be distinguished. So yes, that is the first point; the much-ballyhooed correction is practically nothing.

Note also one of the ways that the frauds are perpetrated. The global warming, averaging over the entire earth, shows a very strong upward trend, while sampling in a smaller area gives a less reliable result. The deniers frequently switch back and forth between the US and global results, depending on what they want to “prove” at the time.

Notice, however, that even though the US had a strong warming trend in the 30s, the present trend is greater.

Of course, the “scientists thought the earth was cooling” scam is another major dishonesty:

**Study: Global cooling a 1970s myth
Asheville, N.C. (UPI) Feb 21, 2008
A U.S. climatologist said there was no consensus in the 1970s that the Earth was headed for a new ice age.

Thomas Peterson of the National Climatic Data Center said a survey of scientific journals of the era showed that only seven supported global cooling, 44 predicted warming and 20 others were neutral, USA Today reported Thursday.**
terradaily.com/reports/Study_Global_cooling_a_1970s_myth_999.html

And the data on sampling locations is here:
http://www.inturnsoftware.com/downloads/crn12_crn5_giss_20yr_trend.GIF
Notice that the “good” stations (red) are often hotter than the “bad” ones (green). Notice also that the difference between the good and bad ones has been reduced in recent decades.

If your point is that increasing urbanization means that many formerly rural stations are closer to urban areas (and therefore more heat), that’s probably true. But that would be anthropogenic heating, um?

Barbarian on the “APS changed it’s stance on warming” scam:
Hard to picture someone dumb enough. There was a disclaimer on the site, for example. And all they had to do was check the APS site itself to check.

Apparently, I’ve violated Hanlon’s Razor:
“Never attribute to malice, that which is adequately explained by stupidity.”

Not as cut n dried as you would leave us to believe

Afraid so. The APS has put out a statment pointing out the scam, and has reiterated that their position remains that anthropogentic warming is the primary cause of elevated temperatures.

Not that all 50,000 physicists agree with that. Just the great majority of them. And that’s a huge problem for the deniers. And now, this dishonesty is just one more black eye for them. Not all deniers are dishonest, of course. But they need to quickly distance themselves from the ones who are promoting these scams.

N ice document dumps but you refuted nothng i posted nor have you or anyone else proved conclusiely that we are experiencing manmade gloabl warming. Far from being settled more and more scientists are becomong skeptical everyday.

N ice document dumps but you refuted nothng i posted

As you see, the argument that corrections changed the picture was false.

The argument that faulty stations skewed the results is false, as the denier’s “good” stations were often warmer than their “bad” ones.

And of course, the “global cooling scam” hit the wall when someone went back and did a literature search.

What’s left?

nor have you or anyone else proved conclusiely that we are experiencing manmade gloabl warming.

It’s over. Even skeptics with an economic or political stake in denial are coming around.

George Bush now admits that it’s a fact.
**Bush admits U.S. has big role in global warming

Tuesday, June 12, 2001

By Ann McFeatters, Post-Gazette National Bureau

WASHINGTON – After the White House admitted badly handling its abrogation of the global warming treaty, President Bush yesterday conceded as he left for his first diplomatic trip to Europe that the United States is a major player in heating up the Earth.

Calling for more scientific research into how carbon dioxide emissions damage worldwide climate patterns, the president said: “Our country, the United States, is the world’s largest emitter of man-made greenhouse gases; we account for almost 20 percent of the world’s man-made greenhouse emissions. We also account for about one-quarter of the world’s economic output. We recognize the responsibility to reduce our emissions.”**

And corporate America is joining in:

Corporate America, which once regarded cries of “global warming” about as favorably as The Communist Manifesto, increasingly is embracing the need for reducing human contributions to the planet’s rising temperatures. Forty companies — including Boeing, IBM, John Hancock and Whirlpool — have publicly endorsed the notion that climate change is real by joining a business council organized by the Pew Center on Global Climate Change.
usatoday.com/weather/climate/2006-05-31-business-globalwarming_x.htm

Far from being settled more and more scientists are becomong skeptical everyday.

Don’t see any evidence of that. The most recent list by deniers shows less than 500 meteorologists, climatologists, or atmospheric scientists denying global warming. And there are tens of thousands of them.

This is a serious problem for deniers. Their political allies are falling away, corporations are realizing they must do something, and of course, fewer and fewer scientists are willing to deny the evidence.

That’s how it is.

Gee, the data they claim to be talking about doesn’t seem to support these claims.

  • The top 21 years have happened since 1980. (1944 taps in at #22)
  • 1900 taps in at #72!
  • 1921 taps in at # 80!

Oh wait, your source deceptively selected to do a bait and switch by talking about US temperatures and ignoring global temperatures. What were you saying about fraud?

By the way, here’s the top 20 based on the NASA data (that’s global, not US):
2005, 2007, 1998, 2002, 2003, 2006, 2004, 2001, 1997, 1995, 1990, 1991, 2000, 1999, 1988, 1996, 1987, 1981, 1983

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.