Noted Scientist Resigns from the Prestigious American Physical Society–Blows Lid off Global Warming Scam

Posted: October 11, 2010 in global warming fraud, global warming hoax
Tags: , , ,

First a little background:  Last December a group of scientists from The American Physical Society (APS) voiced its concern about a political statement issued by the APS council.  Policy statements are often done in professional organizations but, as here, usually without the consent of the rank and file members of the institution.  When the leaked emails from East Anglia surfaced and it became clear that the science upon which the APS based its statement was fraudulent, this group of scientist first tried to get the management of APS to at least review their policy statement but to no avail.  It then obtained the email addresses of several APS members and sent off this email:

________________________________________________

Dear fellow member of the American Physical Society:

This is a matter of great importance to the integrity of the Society. It is being sent to a random fraction of the membership, so we hope you will pass it on.

By now everyone has heard of what has come to be known as ClimateGate, which was and is an international scientific fraud, the worst any of us have seen in our cumulative 223 years of APS membership. For those who have missed the news we recommend the excellent summary article by Richard Lindzen in the November 30 edition of the Wall Street journal, entitled “The Climate Science isn’t Settled,” for a balanced account of the situation. It was written by a scientist of unquestioned authority and integrity.

We have asked the APS management to put the 2007 Statement on ice until the extent to which it is tainted can be determined, but that has not been done. We have also asked that the membership be consulted on this point, but that too has not been done.

None of us would use corrupted science in our own work, nor would we sign off on a thesis by a student who did so. This is not only a matter of science, it is a matter of integrity, and the integrity of the APS is now at stake. That is why we are taking the unusual step of communicating directly with at least a fraction of the membership.

If you believe that the APS should withdraw a Policy Statement that is based on admittedly corrupted science, and should then undertake to clarify the real state of the art in the best tradition of a learned society, please send a note to the incoming President of the APS ccallan@princeton.edu, with the single word YES in the subject line. That will make it easier for him to count.

Bob Austin, Professor of Physics, Princeton
Hal Lewis, emeritus Professor of Physics, University of California, Santa Barbara
Will Happer, Professor of Physics, Princeton
Larry Gould, Professor of Physics, Hartford
Roger Cohen, former Manager, Strategic Planning, ExxonMobil

________________________________________________

Fast forward ten months:  Hal Lewis, one of the original signatures of the aforementioned email has taken the bold step of resigning his long time membership in the APS for reasons delineated in his letter of resignation reproduced below.  The whole global warming scandal is falling apart with hardly a week going by without some new revelation documenting the disgraceful misuse of science to perpetuate the scam.  On a regular basis, scientists, who should have been more critical to begin with, are quietly backing out of the “consensus” because they realize they too were duped.

________________________________________________

From: Hal Lewis, University of California, Santa Barbara
To: Curtis G. Callan, Jr., Princeton University, President of the American Physical Society

6 October 2010

Dear Curt:

When I first joined the American Physical Society sixty-seven years ago it was much smaller, much gentler, and as yet uncorrupted by the money flood (a threat against which Dwight Eisenhower warned a half-century ago).

Indeed, the choice of physics as a profession was then a guarantor of a life of poverty and abstinence—it was World War II that changed all that. The prospect of worldly gain drove few physicists. As recently as thirty-five years ago, when I chaired the first APS study of a contentious social/scientific issue, The Reactor Safety Study, though there were zealots aplenty on the outside there was no hint of inordinate pressure on us as physicists. We were therefore able to produce what I believe was and is an honest appraisal of the situation at that time. We were further enabled by the presence of an oversight committee consisting of Pief Panofsky, Vicki Weisskopf, and Hans Bethe, all towering physicists beyond reproach. I was proud of what we did in a charged atmosphere. In the end the oversight committee, in its report to the APS President, noted the complete independence in which we did the job, and predicted that the report would be attacked from both sides. What greater tribute could there be?

How different it is now. The giants no longer walk the earth, and the money flood has become the raison d’être of much physics research, the vital sustenance of much more, and it provides the support for untold numbers of professional jobs. For reasons that will soon become clear my former pride at being an APS Fellow all these years has been turned into shame, and I am forced, with no pleasure at all, to offer you my resignation from the Society.

It is of course, the global warming scam, with the (literally) trillions of dollars driving it, that has corrupted so many scientists, and has carried APS before it like a rogue wave. It is the greatest and most successful pseudoscientific fraud I have seen in my long life as a physicist. Anyone who has the faintest doubt that this is so should force himself to read the ClimateGate documents, which lay it bare. (Montford’s book organizes the facts very well.) I don’t believe that any real physicist, nay scientist, can read that stuff without revulsion. I would almost make that revulsion a definition of the word scientist.

So what has the APS, as an organization, done in the face of this challenge? It has accepted the corruption as the norm, and gone along with it. For example:

1. About a year ago a few of us sent an e-mail on the subject to a fraction of the membership. APS ignored the issues, but the then President immediately launched a hostile investigation of where we got the e-mail addresses. In its better days, APS used to encourage discussion of important issues, and indeed the Constitution cites that as its principal purpose. No more. Everything that has been done in the last year has been designed to silence debate

2. The appallingly tendentious APS statement on Climate Change was apparently written in a hurry by a few people over lunch, and is certainly not representative of the talents of APS members as I have long known them. So a few of us petitioned the Council to reconsider it. One of the outstanding marks of (in)distinction in the Statement was the poison word incontrovertible, which describes few items in physics, certainly not this one. In response APS appointed a secret committee that never met, never troubled to speak to any skeptics, yet endorsed the Statement in its entirety. (They did admit that the tone was a bit strong, but amazingly kept the poison word incontrovertible to describe the evidence, a position supported by no one.) In the end, the Council kept the original statement, word for word, but approved a far longer “explanatory” screed, admitting that there were uncertainties, but brushing them aside to give blanket approval to the original. The original Statement, which still stands as the APS position, also contains what I consider pompous and asinine advice to all world governments, as if the APS were master of the universe. It is not, and I am embarrassed that our leaders seem to think it is. This is not fun and games, these are serious matters involving vast fractions of our national substance, and the reputation of the Society as a scientific society is at stake.

3. In the interim the ClimateGate scandal broke into the news, and the machinations of the principal alarmists were revealed to the world. It was a fraud on a scale I have never seen, and I lack the words to describe its enormity. Effect on the APS position: none. None at all. This is not science; other forces are at work.

4. So a few of us tried to bring science into the act (that is, after all, the alleged and historic purpose of APS), and collected the necessary 200+ signatures to bring to the Council a proposal for a Topical Group on Climate Science, thinking that open discussion of the scientific issues, in the best tradition of physics, would be beneficial to all, and also a contribution to the nation. I might note that it was not easy to collect the signatures, since you denied us the use of the APS membership list. We conformed in every way with the requirements of the APS Constitution, and described in great detail what we had in mind—simply to bring the subject into the open.

5. To our amazement, Constitution be damned, you declined to accept our petition, but instead used your own control of the mailing list to run a poll on the members’ interest in a TG on Climate and the Environment. You did ask the members if they would sign a petition to form a TG on your yet-to-be-defined subject, but provided no petition, and got lots of affirmative responses. (If you had asked about sex you would have gotten more expressions of interest.) There was of course no such petition or proposal, and you have now dropped the Environment part, so the whole matter is moot. (Any lawyer will tell you that you cannot collect signatures on a vague petition, and then fill in whatever you like.) The entire purpose of this exercise was to avoid your constitutional responsibility to take our petition to the Council.

6. As of now you have formed still another secret and stacked committee to organize your own TG, simply ignoring our lawful petition.

APS management has gamed the problem from the beginning, to suppress serious conversation about the merits of the climate change claims. Do you wonder that I have lost confidence in the organization?

I do feel the need to add one note, and this is conjecture, since it is always risky to discuss other people’s motives. This scheming at APS HQ is so bizarre that there cannot be a simple explanation for it. Some have held that the physicists of today are not as smart as they used to be, but I don’t think that is an issue. I think it is the money, exactly what Eisenhower warned about a half-century ago. There are indeed trillions of dollars involved, to say nothing of the fame and glory (and frequent trips to exotic islands) that go with being a member of the club. Your own Physics Department (of which you are chairman) would lose millions a year if the global warming bubble burst. When Penn State absolved Mike Mann of wrongdoing, and the University of East Anglia did the same for Phil Jones, they cannot have been unaware of the financial penalty for doing otherwise. As the old saying goes, you don’t have to be a weatherman to know which way the wind is blowing. Since I am no philosopher, I’m not going to explore at just which point enlightened self-interest crosses the line into corruption, but a careful reading of the ClimateGate releases makes it clear that this is not an academic question.

I want no part of it, so please accept my resignation. APS no longer represents me, but I hope we are still friends.

Hal

==========================================================

Harold Lewis is Emeritus Professor of Physics, University of California, Santa Barbara, former Chairman; Former member Defense Science Board, chmn of Technology panel; Chairman DSB study on Nuclear Winter; Former member Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards; Former member, President’s Nuclear Safety Oversight Committee; Chairman APS study on Nuclear Reactor Safety Chairman Risk Assessment Review Group; Co-founder and former Chairman of JASON; Former member USAF Scientific Advisory Board; Served in US Navy in WW II; books: Technological Risk (about, surprise, technological risk) and Why Flip a Coin (about decision making)

Advertisements
Comments
  1. Yair says:

    holy crap!!!! How deep is this damn thing?! I can not help but feel sick to my stomach about how the ASP bureaucracy have decided to say “hey f*** whatever everyone things, lets keep hiding the science and just say every mistake is actually good science.”

    Oh by the way, thanks to all those a**holes theres stupid ugly hybrids everywhere now.

  2. Mr. Xyz says:

    MSM will try to keep this quiet just like last week’s global warming scandal.

    If you aren’t familiar with the 10:10 dust up, see the videos below.

    While watching the first one, ask yourself if it’s sincere or if it’s a spoof.

    Keep watching until you’re sure, and then watch more.
    http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=7C79DEF1EE25E880

    Note: the resignations of Chris Landsea and Roger A Pielke SR. both hint at conspiracy.

    Landsea resigned because of an unethical press conference that was likely used by Al Gore as a green light to build his movie around Hurricane Katrina.

    Pielke resigned because while lead author for a major climate report, scientists worked behind his back to undermine him. These incidents are well known and not hard to research.
    ———
    Even if you are familliar with the 10:10 thing, there’s much over the top eco stuff at the link.

  3. Altair Maine says:

    It’s so peculiar to argue that the money behind climate change research drives the AGW hypothesis… when there is orders of magnitude more money tied up in corporations invested in existing energy infrastructure.

    I’m the last man to demonize the fossil fuel industry. Indeed, I think AGW is well-founded in science, but I also think that it’s probably unavoidable and is not necessarily the end of the world. We can’t and shouldn’t run out and stop burning coal tomorrow, because there simply isn’t an adequate alternative to sustain industrial civilization. Modern society is founded on the burning of fossil fuels, and radical anthropogenic climate change is probably a suitable price to pay.

    But the “trillions” of dollars are those behind existing oil, coal, and power companies. Add up all the money spent each year at every university in the world, on ANYTHING, and it is dwarfed by the annual revenues of the fossil fuel industry. So if we’re looking at the potential of money to corrupt the scientific process, I think you’re looking in the wrong place.

    Tobacco companies once bought a lot of scientists with fancy degrees to argue endlessly that smoking was harmless. That business amounts to chump change when compared with Exxon or its ilk.

    Dr. Lewis almost certainly has a good point in many regards. The APS has no business stifling dissent. But allegations that the AGW theory is founded in “trillions of dollars” of spending are simply bizarre. They detract from the credibility of his seemingly saner passages.

    • Actually, you have things backwards. Energy companies fund a smidgen of climate research. Billions and billions of GOVERNMENT research dollars are going into climate research and you better tow the line or the funds dry up. And what have they got to show for all this wasted cash? Their computer models? They are demonstrably flawed. That is the sad POLITICAL reality. If the politicians have their way, then it will be TRILLIONS of dollars that are sucked out of our economy in the form of carbon taxes, increased energy costs, cap and trade and other such nonsense.
      Billions and billions are going to subsidize alternate energy programs like the stupid “volt” car from GM. The market place will decide when and how we move away from fossil fuels, not cash giveaways by the government. Research should be going into the real pollutants associated with burning fossil fuels–particulates for example. It is estimated that world-wide over 1 million premature deaths are associated with particulates and aerosols in the atmosphere and almost all of it is coming from 3rd world countries burning dirty fuels like coal and dessicated cow dung and burning down forests. Not one single premature death can be attributed to carbon dioxide. This preoccupation with carbon dioxide is a smoke screen (no pun intended) meant to punish the wealthy industrialized west.

      • E=MC2 says:

        Mr. Hatem, I don’t think people realize just how true is your assessment.

      • Mary T says:

        Seriously, imagine where we could be if all those resources had gone into research about the real pollutants, this bullshit scam is, among many other things, such an UNBELIEVABLE waste.

  4. t_fish says:

    You are right, sir. This thing just keeps getting bigger and bigger. It is self-imploding if you ask me.

  5. calistolite says:

    Biggest hoax, EVER!

  6. johnathan_is_here says:

    I wonder how long it will be before this entire scandal loses favor with the popular press? I am sick of all the nonsense being perpetuated and I am so sorry I was originally taken in by the propoganda.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s