Do the Al Gore blind followers know what the APS is?

Question

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. The leadership of the society had previously called the evidence for global warming "incontrovertible."

Holy Cr@p! What are the Al Gore Fools going to use as an excuse now?

Here is a link to the entire article

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

Answer 1

The APS's views are clearly stated on their homepage

http://www.aps.org/

The only question seems to be can the people at dailytech make a truthfull statement, it would seem not.

Answer 2

You're either wrong or lying:

http://aps.org/

EDIT:  Oops, Grant already set the record straight.

Let me just say they are not "calling for debate."  Rather,  they were providing the "debate" that others called for by publishing both this:   http://www.aps.org/units/fps/newsletters... and this:  http://www.aps.org/units/fps/newsletters...

Answer 3

The APS Council has officially come out against the statement that appears in dailytech.  However, their official position being what it is, their opinion is subject to change.  There is growing tension in the scientific community that should be cause for them to rethink their decision, and one insider's voice may have relfected albeit prematurely that they are due to make an announcement like this in due course.  It may well be imminent, but until it is made official their current position stands.  

J. Marque, editor of the APS forum where the article was posted, had this to say (in part)  "There is a considerable presence within the scientific community of people who do not agree with the IPCC conclusion that anthropogenic CO2 emissions are..." which makes clear that there is a high level of skepticism in APS over AGW.

Larry Gould, another APS member and Professor of Physics at the University of Hartford and Chairman of the New England Section of the APS, says that the IPCC has numerous exaggerations and "extensive errors" in it's data.

I believe that the APS will soon officially become a non-supporter of AGW and the announcement should come as no surprise to anyone.

Answer 4

For Immediate Release                         

Contact: Tawanda W. Johnson

Press Secretary

American Physical Society

                                                                                                                  Tel: [phone]

                                                                                                                Email: [e-mail]

American Physical Society Reaffirms Its Position that Human-Caused Greenhouse Gas Emissions Contribute to Climate Change

WASHINGTON, DC, July 22, 2008 -- The American Physical Society http://www.aps.org/ (APS) today reaffirmed its position on climate change issued last November, releasing the following statement:

"Emissions of greenhouse gases from human activities are changing the atmosphere in ways that affect the Earth's climate.  The evidence is incontrovertible: Global warming is occurring.

“Global warming and energy use have been on the minds of many Americans for quite some time.  Recognizing the importance of these issues, the governing body of the American Physical Society announced its position on Climate Change on November 18, 2007.  The Society’s position has not changed, and APS remains engaged in this issue that has considerable international consequences.

“APS is reaffirming its policy on global warming because an article at odds with the official APS position recently appeared in an online newsletter of the APS Forum on Physics and Society, one of 39 units of APS.  This newsletter is not a scientific journal of the APS, and it is not peer reviewed.  

“Online reports erroneously implied an APS policy change.  These reports did not include the disclaimer, ‘Opinions expressed are those of the authors alone and do not necessarily reflect the views of the APS or of the Forum,’ which was attached to the newsletter article.”

Read the full APS Council statement on climate change:

http://www.aps.org/policy/statements/07_...  

About APS

The American Physical Society is the world’s leading professional body of physicists, representing more than 46,000 physicists in academia and industry in the U.S. and internationally. It has offices in College Park, Md., Ridge, N.Y., and Washington, D.C.

# # #

Answer 5

This must be an important topic.  

When all the professional global warming promoters answer.

That is a lot of effort to suppress information.

Good job.

Answer 6

This isn't the first time Daily Tech has completely bungled a climate change story, and I'm sure it won't be the last.

I recommend we all contact the article's author (link below) and let him know what we think about the shoddy quality of his reporting.  Personally I've already done so.

Answer 7

No I don't know what the APS is, but I don't follow Al Gore, It seems to be the sceptics who have an obsession with Al.

Nice hat Bob.

Answer 8

Lord Monckton’s letter in response to APS web page statement

Dear Dr. Bienenstock,

Physics and Society

The editors of Physics and Society, a newsletter of the American Physical Society, invited me to submit a paper for their July 2008 edition explaining why I considered that the warming that might be expected from anthropogenic enrichment of the atmosphere with carbon dioxide might be significantly less than the IPCC imagines.

I very much appreciated this courteous offer, and submitted a paper. The commissioning editor referred it to his colleague, who subjected it to a thorough and competent scientific review. I was delighted to accede to all of the reviewer’s requests for revision (see the attached reconciliation sheet). Most revisions were intended to clarify for physicists who were not climatologists the method by which the IPCC evaluates climate sensitivity - a method which the IPCC does not itself clearly or fully explain. The paper was duly published, immediately after a paper by other authors setting out the IPCC’s viewpoint. Some days later, however, without my knowledge or consent, the following appeared, in red, above the text of my paper as published on the website of Physics and Society:

“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.”

This seems discourteous. I had been invited to submit the paper; I had submitted it; an eminent Professor of Physics had then scientifically reviewed it in meticulous detail; I had revised it at all points requested, and in the manner requested; the editors had accepted and published the reviewed and revised draft (some 3000 words longer than the original) and I had expended considerable labor, without having been offered or having requested any honorarium.

Please either remove the offending red-flag text at once or let me have the name and qualifications of the member of the Council or advisor to it who considered my paper before the Council ordered the offending text to be posted above my paper; a copy of this rapporteur’s findings and ratio decidendi; the date of the Council meeting at which the findings were presented; a copy of the minutes of the discussion; and a copy of the text of the Council’s decision, together with the names of those

present at the meeting. If the Council has not scientifically evaluated or formally considered my paper, may I ask with what credible scientific justification, and on whose authority, the offending text asserts primo, that the paper had not been scientifically reviewed when it had; secundo, that its conclusions disagree with what is said (on no evidence) to be the “overwhelming opinion of the world scientific community”; and, tertio, that “The Council of the American Physical Society disagrees with this article’s conclusions”? Which of my conclusions does the Council disagree with, and on what scientific grounds (if any)?

Having regard to the circumstances, surely the Council owes me an apology?

Yours truly,

THE VISCOUNT MONCKTON OF BRENCHLEY

Answer 9

Sure I know who they are.  And I know they haven't changed (much less reversed) their position that global warming is real, and mostly caused by us.  The dailytech article is utter nonsense.

The Science and Policy Forum of the APS (one of 39 subgroups) has an online newsletter.  The editor of the newsletter decided it would be fun to publish a "debate" about global warming.  He asked a noted "skeptic" and some global warming scientists to write a letter, each explaining their position.  The letters were published unedited.

That's ALL that happened.  The APS has been quite dismayed about the spin that was applied to this by global warming denier websites.  After all, the newsletter has an upfront statement that what's in it is NOT the official position of the APS.  They have issued a statement on their home page that their position has not changed at all, and that the "skeptics" letter does not represent the position of the APS.

The whole incident mostly shows how very desperate the deniers are, to make this ridiculous, easily refuted claim.  They've now retracted it (check the website), although even their retraction is still misleading.

What Al Gore says or does has nothing to do with the scientific proof that global warming is real, and mostly caused by us.

Answer 10

LOL.  Perhaps a blog by Michael Asher isn't "fact-checked" quite as thoroughly as you assumed ;-)

Here's what the APS really says about global warming:

http://www.aps.org/policy/statements/07_...

"The evidence is incontrovertible: Global warming is occurring."

Here's what the APS says about the article your "news" story has confused for a position statement:

http://www.aps.org/units/fps/newsletters...

"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."

Here's a news story (from an actual reputable news organization) about the false rumor spreading like a disease through the anti-GW blogsphere:

http://www.livescience.com/environment/0...

Edit:

eric c - The original paper was never anything but an opinion piece that the APS published.  Do you actually think your local paper agrees with every guest column they print?  How about a little intellectual honesty? A right-wing think tank took this story and deceptively put out a PR, which many blindly believed.  It's time to admit you were duped by the right wing think-tank.

Edit 2:

bob326: I used to consider you a reasonable skeptic who simply hadn't had time to digest the evidence. I didn't feel the need to post the entire APS position statement (few read long posts on here), because I posted a direct link to it. Their position is quite clear.

Here it is in full:

"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."

I'm sorry if you don't find their statement alarmist enough, but their clear attribution of the global warming to greenhouse gases (including CO2) and stating that we must reduce emissions now to avoid significant disruptions is exactly in line with my position. If you disagree (as you seem too), then you are clearly the one outside of mainstream science.

Answer 11

We APS members haven't changed our stance on anything.  We always look at what the science tells us in order to make informed decisions on climate and other issues.   You, on the other hand, seem to make your decisions by looking at what Al Gore says and making sure you're on the other side.

You might follow the example of the APS and study the science of global warming and forget about Al Gore.  Then you might learn how much evidence there is for anthropogenic global warming.

Answer 12

Al Gore has nothing to do with Global Warming.  He's just a messenger who came after 35 years of research and before much of the better research.  Nobody who knows anything about Al Gore cites him, he is just a messenger.  The research is there with or without him.

Answer 13

Yes. I do know who they are and no, they have not reversed its stance on climate change. Go to their site and they say

'APS Climate Change Statement

APS Position Remains Unchanged

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."

Is that clear enough for you? I agree It is better to do your own research and that applies whatever your views on climate change  are. So why didn't you go the APS website and find out if the report was correct?

Answer 14

This is about the 3rd or 4th time deniers have posted this one in just a couple of days it getting a bit sad really it doesn't seem to matter it was a two sided debate in a minor "newsletter" or that the writer of the article in question is not a scientist at all.

The statement on the Dailytech link about this being the view of APS is a straight out lie deniers like to say those who think AGW is happening are part of a religion, but the way this silly story is being pushed, shows clearly which side of this debate is grasping at straws.

Edit:

Any question that this is peer reviewed or the view of the APS is now put to rest, with the red text added to the top of the document.

http://www.aps.org/units/fps/newsletters...

I have a feeling the editor who wrote the nonsense intro for this piece might be looking for a new job soon.

Answer 15

Ken said

"Here's what the APS really says about global warming:

http://www.aps.org/policy/statements/07_...

"The evidence is incontrovertible: Global warming is occurring.""

This is a fairly innocuous statement, wouldn't you agree? The evidence for a warming Earth is incontrovertible. What extent was the APS willing to give to CO2? Like me, they are not willing to give an extent.

Dailytech's sensationalism will cause the APS to think twice before allowing any more "debate" in their forums.

Grant M wrote

"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.'

Is that clear enough for you?"

Do you understand what it means? I, as a skeptic, would agree with it. APS doesn't go into any detail as to extent, probably because current understanding is not sufficient enough to do so.