Does anybody know the site that proves 32,000 scientists say in writing Global Warming is FAKE??

Question

I need this link real quick for my other question, we need to stop these people who say Global Warming is real because it is why our economy is getting worse. Please help thanks

Oh, and if you know other sites or facts which prove or help to prove how Global Warming isn't real, please share them with me, thanks.

Answer 1

Yes, I am well aware the site is fake.

Answer 2

Read it and weep....            

http://globalwarminghoax.wordpress.com/2...

Answer 3

That quiz gets a failing grade...from itself. It presents well-documented fallicies as though they were facts. My favorites :

Several environmental groups questioned dozens of the names: "Perry S. Mason" (the fictitious lawyer?), "Michael J. Fox" (the actor?), "Robert C. Byrd" (the senator?), "John C. Grisham" (the lawyer-author?). And then there's the Spice Girl, a k a. Geraldine Halliwell: The petition listed "Dr. Geri Halliwell" and "Dr. Halliwell."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oregon_Peti...

...

Scientific American took a sample of 30 of the 1,400 signatories claiming to hold a Ph.D. in a climate-related science. Of the 26 we were able to identify in various databases, 11 said they still agreed with the petition —- one was an active climate researcher, two others had relevant expertise, and eight signed based on an informal evaluation. Six said they would not sign the petition today, three did not remember any such petition, one had died, and five did not answer repeated messages.

See also: Oregon Institute of Science and Malarkey

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/arc...

This petition is really really old news. And I hope you want some cigarettes with it.

The Institute mails it out with a letter from Frederick Seitz.

While working for R.J. Reynolds, Seitz oversaw

the funding of tens of millions of dollars

worth of research.92 Most of this research was

legitimate. For instance, his team looked at the

way stress, genetics, and lifestyle issues can contribute

to disease.93 But the program Seitz oversaw

served an important dual purpose for R.J.

Reynolds. It allowed the company to tout the

fact that it was funding health research (even

if it specifically proscribed research on the health

effects of smoking) and it helped generate a

steady collection of ideas and hypotheses that

provided “red herrings” the company could use

to disingenuously suggest that factors other than

tobacco might be causing smokers’ cancers and

heart disease.

Aside from giving the tobacco companies’

disinformation campaign an aura of scientific

credibility, Seitz is also notable because he has

returned from retirement to play a prominent role

as a global warming contrarian involved in organizations

funded by ExxonMobil. Consider, for

instance, one of Seitz’s most controversial efforts.

In 1998, he wrote and circulated a letter asking

scientists to sign a petition from a virtually

unheard-of group called the Oregon Institute

of Science and Medicine calling upon the U.S.

government to reject the Kyoto Protocol.94 Seitz

signed the letter identifying himself as a former

NAS president. He also enclosed with his letter a

report co-authored by a team including Soon and

Baliunas asserting that carbon dioxide emissions

pose no warming threat.95 The report was not peer

reviewed. But it was formatted to look like an article

from The Proceedings of the National Academy of

Sciences (PNAS), a leading scientific journal.

The petition’s organizers publicly claimed that

the effort had attracted the signatures of some

17,000 scientists. But it was soon discovered that

the list contained few credentialed climate scientists.

For example, the list was riddled with the

names of numerous fictional characters.96 Likewise,

after investigating a random sample of the

small number of signers who claimed to have a

Ph.D. in a climate-related field, Scientific American

estimated that approximately one percent of the

petition signatories might actually have a Ph.D.

in a field related to climate science.97 In a highly

unusual response, NAS issued a statement disavowing

Seitz’s petition and disassociating the

academy from the PNAS-formatted paper.98

None of these facts, however, have stopped organizations,

including those funded by ExxonMobil,

from touting the petition as evidence of widespread

disagreement over the issue of global

warming. For instance, in the spring of 2006,

the discredited petition surfaced again when it

was cited in a letter to California legislators by

a group calling itself “Doctors for Disaster Preparedness,”

a project of the Oregon Institute

of Science and Medicine.

http://www.ucsusa.org/news/press_release...

The Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine actually  makes most of their money selling home-schooling kits based on the 1911 Encyclopedia Brittanica (i.e., pre-socialism) and videos on how to survive a nuclear war ( http://www.oism.org/nwss/ ). Arthur Robinson, head of the Oregon Institute, is a conservative Christian along with his co-founder of the Insititue, Gary North, who is also a prolific author of doomsday books with titles such as None Dare Call It Witchcraft; Conspiracy: A Biblical View; Rapture Fever; and How You Can Profit From the Coming Price Controls.

Basically, the petition was mailed to an enormous number of scientists (the OISM will not reveal how many) with a paper formatted to look as though it had been published in PNAS, the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (NAS).

The NAS first heard of the petition when its members began calling to ask about it:

"The mailing is clearly designed to be deceptive by giving people the impression that the article, which is full of half-truths, is a reprint and has passed peer review," complained Raymond Pierrehumbert, a meteorlogist at the University of Chicago. NAS foreign secretary F. Sherwood Rowland, an atmospheric chemist, said researchers "are wondering if someone is trying to hoodwink them." NAS council member Ralph J. Cicerone, dean of the School of Physical Sciences at the University of California at Irvine, was particularly offended that Seitz described himself in the cover letter as a "past president" of the NAS. Although Seitz had indeed held that title in the 1960s, Cicerone hoped that scientists who received the petition mailing would not be misled into believing that he "still has a role in governing the organization."

The NAS issued an unusually blunt formal response to the petition drive. "The NAS Council would like to make it clear that this petition has nothing to do with the National Academy of Sciences and that the manuscript was not published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences or in any other peer-reviewed journal," it stated in a news release. "The petition does not reflect the conclusions of expert reports of the Academy." In fact, it pointed out, its own prior published study had shown that "even given the considerable uncertainties in our knowledge of the relevant phenomena, greenhouse warming poses a potential threat sufficient to merit prompt responses. Investment in mitigation measures acts as insurance protection against the great uncertainties and the possibility of dramatic surprises."

...

In addition to the bulk mailing, OISM's website enables people to add their names to the petition over the Internet, and by June 2000 it claimed to have recruited more than 19,000 scientists. The institute is so lax about screening names, however, that virtually anyone can sign, including for example Al Caruba, a pesticide-industry PR man and conservative ideologue who runs his own website called the "National Anxiety Center."

Answer 4

I am a geologist and environmental consultant and just for the record, nobody asked me, but  I would have signed it too but honestly there is still a huge amount I don't know or understand.  I do get pretty annoyed at some of the nonsense from some people that pretend to understand the vagaries of the climate.

Answer 5

The fact that they use the terms "scientists", and not "climate scientists" basically says that anyone in any science field who doubts global warming theory was allowed to sign. That means, to be fair, we could take a petition of anyone from *any* science field who DOES believe in global warming theory and compare them. The result, though predictable, would tell us nothing about what actual climate science experts say, which is all that is really important. And we already do know what actual climate science experts say.

Answer 6

Sorry, it is not a fake. Live with the reality.

Answer 7

Hi,

A quick whois check reveals that the petition website is run by one Arthur B Robinson. Arthur B Robinson is the head of the Oregon Institute for Science and Medicine, which sounds like it ought to be a legitimate source. However, on reading a little further, it turns out that it isn't ( http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?t*t... )

Furthermore, it appears from here ( http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/20... ) that the institute has been funded to the tune of over $600,000 dollars by ExxonMobil. So its oil company propaganda.

As to the petition itself, these leading climate scientists have been shown to include fake people (including Perry S. Mason), and celebrities who are certainly not scientists, such as "Michael J Fox" (actor), "Dr. Geri Halliwell" (not a doctor but a spice girl). Whenever any of the signatories of this petition have been asked why they signed, they have denied in fact ever having done so, raising very strongly the possibility that almost all of the entries on the petition are in fact fraudulent.

In addition, there is well-established scientific consensus on global warming, as can be seen from wikipedia (among other sources, as here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_... )...

Answer 8

Do you have any sources to prove your point that global warming action hurts the economy?

How is it even possible that it is the present source of ecomic troubles in the US while climate action has not been enforced yet?

Are one of these people who blame the local factory for their bad health before it even starts operating?

Answer 9

ah, the infamous 1999 'oregon petition'.

"these dissenting scientists - over 9,000 of whom hold Ph.Ds "

hmmm. i wonder what in? and what qualifications the rest have?

it doesnt say 'Global Warming is FAKE', it says;

"We urge the United States government to reject the global warming agreement that was written in Kyoto, Japan in December, 1997, and any other similar proposals. The proposed limits on greenhouse gases would harm the environment, hinder the advance of science and technology, and damage the health and welfare of mankind.

There is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane, or other greenhouse gasses is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth's atmosphere and disruption of the Earth's climate. Moreover, there is substantial scientific evidence that increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide produce many beneficial effects upon the natural plant and animal environments of the Earth. "

so, in short, 'please mr. pres. dont sign kyoto (oh! you didnt! good oh) because the global warming caused by human activities is not gong to be bad.'

this is not quite the same as 'fake' now is it?

and do remember, this was compiled 8 years ago, things have moved on a bit since then.