Does the findings from The American Physical Society signal the end of the consensus of global warming?

Question

The 50,000 strong membership of The American Physical Society is now questioning the belief of man made global warming.

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

The organization of the best American Physicians once said that he evidence for AGW was "incontrovertible" is now saying that the science has numerous exaggerations and "extensive errors".

Are the skeptics now vindicated for doing their job of demanding the best of science and for showing global warming for the total fraud that it was?

Should all skeptics now be given awards, maybe from the Noble Committee?

Answer 1

"Does the findings from The American Physical Society signal the end of the consensus of global warming?"

No. It might signal that there may be more debate in the future instead of the tired old "the debate is over" c**p.

This is the APS's stance that "remains unchanged":

"Emissions of greenhouse gases from human activities are changing the atmosphere in ways that affect the Earth's climate."

I think everyone would agree with this, even the vast majority of skeptics and "denialists". It doesn't say that CO2  is the cause of 90% of recent warming, just that human produced GHGs have had an effect on the climate.

Here is the direct quote of what the APS finds incontrovertible:

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

Yes, the Earth is warming.

Based purely upon what the APS wrote in their "Climate Change Statement", I don't know how you could come to the conclusion that they are fully in agreement with the IPCC and/or the "consensus".

----------

Edit:

Davem said

"50,000 physicists speaking out about their own back yards can't be ignored, not even by Al Gore and his flock."

APS didn't endorse the skeptic viewpoint, and even if they had, that doesn't mean all the members agree with their endorsement. This statement by an editor at APS just means that a little more debate on the subject of AGW will be allowed, which obviously, is a good thing.

------

Edit2:

Bob said

"Let's take the most easily dismissable statement (otherwise this would be very long).

'In the past 70 years the Sun was more active than at almost any other time in the past 11,400 years'

Solar 'activity' (ie sunspots) has very little to do with how much solar RADIATION is received on Earth. Proof:"

Wow, you weren't even close to "dismissing" that particular statement. Not only does this sentence:

"Solar "activity" (ie sunspots) has very little to do with how much solar RADIATION is received on Earth"

Make very little sense, but the Lockwood paper you cite does not refute Monckton's statement whatsoever.

And Bob, you said:

"Let's take the most easily dismissable statement (otherwise this would be very long)."

This implies that you can thoroughly "dismiss" Monckton's article. Go ahead and email me with what you think is wrong, including equations. I have my own problems with the article (and the Schwartz article as well), but I would like to hear what you have to say.

-------

Edit3:

Sorry, I had to look at this sentence by Bob again:

"Solar "activity" (ie sunspots) has very little to do with how much solar RADIATION is received on Earth"

Try sending this into APS Bob--see how it work out.

Answer 2

Don't you get anything right?  These are PHYSICISTS, not physicians.  Also, it's Nobel, not Noble.

Geez, you guys are so inept.  There are not "50,000 physicists speaking out..."  How do I know this?  Well the answers by Rasputin, Benjamin, and Richard spell it out pretty well...Oh, and also, I'M A MEMBER OF APS, and Jello is trying to pawn off an extreme minority opinion as representative of the society in general.  However, it is nice to know that I'm one of the best American Physicians now! I guess I'm just as much a doctor as Dr Jello.

And then there's dumdum who says that it makes her "angry when real science is suppressed and fake science is pushed to further agendas."  Just why do you think that you can recognize real science when apparently science organizations like the APS, AGU, AMS, etc. don't recognize it? As I recall, you didn't graduate from college, so I'm thinking those guys with the Ph.D.'s in scientific fields might be better judges than you are.

Answer 3

This is not a findings by the APS. The article that you are referring to is an OPINION that's part of a point, counter-point type debate.

On the scientists side is "A Tutorial on the Basic Physics of Climate Change." http://www.aps.org/units/fps/newsletters...

On the deniers side is Christopher Monckton. http://www.aps.org/units/fps/newsletters... Monckton is a journalist who's arguments against global warming are well known to be "cherry-picking, downright misrepresentation and pseudo-scientific gibberish."[1]

Read through his new article and I think that you'll find further giberish.

Answer 4

THIS WASN"T THE FINDINGS OF THE APS.  It wasn't even a scientific article.  The APS let two groups post pro and con arguments in their NEWSLETTER, without editing them.  The "debate" people keep wanting.

This half is just denier nonsense.  Old discredited arguments rehashed.  There's a reason this isn't front page news, and it's not some mythical "conspiracy".

Note that Monckton isn't even a scientist, he's a journalist.  No doubt they had trouble finding a credible scientist who could spout the denier line with a straight face.

Let's take the most easily dismissable statement (otherwise this would be very long).

"In the past 70 years the Sun was more active than at almost any other time in the past 11,400 years"

Solar "activity" (ie sunspots) has very little to do with how much solar RADIATION is received on Earth.  Proof:

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

"Recent oppositely directed trends in solar

climate forcings and the global mean surface

air temperature", Lockwood and Frolich (2007), Proc. R. Soc. A

doi:10.1098/rspa.2007.1880

http://www.pubs.royalsoc.ac.uk/media/pro...

News article at:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6290228.st...

Answer 5

I find this statement to be the most telling:

"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"

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

That is exactly what the skeptics have been saying all along.  The debate is not over.  The real fraud or scam is the notion that there is an overwhelming consensus (people on this forum say 98%).  Talk to any fanatical about global warming, and when they can not answer the science, they then start to give you the "it can't hurt  argument".  The it can not hurt argument is the real agenda.

Answer 6

Yes its true after we've known that for such a long time but all those equations fail to add pollution as an "accelorator" to the natural events.  So shall we say its a double whammy.

Answer 7

Gelatin, just hang it up. The APS are PHYSICISTS, not physicians! Their AGW policy has not changed. As a matter of fact, they posted a counter-point on their front page to the very article you cite...

"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."

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."

Under that is the link to their position. How bad are you that you couldn't cross-check the source.

The only signal I see is the one for you to retire.

DUMDUM - hehe, you should go to the APS website and READ as well! You sit in front of your computer and feign outrage when you have no clue.

Answer 8

Maybe some of the skeptics should be skeptical about that blog you sent a link to.  The APS official stance is still that global warming exists and is caused by human pollution.  They suggest the evidence of this is "incontrovertible.  It's on the front page of their website, including a note indicating reports to the contrary, like yours, are false.

http://www.aps.org/

Why is it so hard to believe 100 years of pollution by billions of people has an impact on the natural world?

Answer 9

note that the bottom of the article states:

"Update 7/17/2008:  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.  "

and Lord Monckton, giving the presentation in your article, is a nut himself, with quite a track record

http://www.monbiot.com/archives/2007/10/...

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

he's identified himself as " a member of the Upper House of

the United Kingdom legislature" http://www.rawstory.com/news/2006/Monckt... when in fact he isn't; http://www.parliament.uk/directories/hou... (Nowadays, the House of Lords is actually elected by the hereditary peers; Monckton ran for a seat, and got ZERO  votes. http://www.parliament.uk/documents/uploa... maybe he just forgot.)

you guys are REALLY scraping the bottom of the barrel.

Answer 10

It makes me angry when real science is suppressed and fake science is pushed to further agendas.  Angry and disgusted!  Especially when the solutions are guaranteed to make pollution and scarcity much worse while making a few very rich.

pegminer: You asked me if I "did go to college" and I said "Did I? No...I didn't." because it's true (because I'm presently in it, lol)!  Not that it's fair to judge others on their education that seems elitist!

Answer 11

it doesn't matter anyway, read The Book regarding the end of this age. it's close as  evidenced by what has and is transpiring.

gw is just getting folks ready for when their arses are gonna be perpetually burning anyway is it not?

Answer 12

Yeah...it's true isn't it?  Al Gore's machine is finally breaking and very quickly.  The wheels are flat and falling off.

I like this part:  "Larry Gould, Professor of Physics at the University of Hartford and Chairman of the New England Section of the APS, called Monckton's paper an "expose of the IPCC that details numerous exaggerations and "extensive errors"

50,000 physicists speaking out about their own back yards can't be ignored, not even by Al Gore and his flock.  Seems NASA is involved in this scam too...apparently falsifying historic temperature data to support the myth.

*Rasputin...is it false, or just not ready to be made public yet?  The fact that the article is written by one of the APS officers lends weight to it being an official view of APS but not yet released.  

**Dr. Jello...I think a Nobel prize would be in order, plus a cut of Al's AGW cash stash.

Answer 13

I guess Bob will have to change his post about every scientific establishment endorsing AGW.