Muscatine

32,000 scientists dissent from global-warming "consensus"

May 20th, 2008

At a press conference on May 19, Arthur Robinson, Ph.D., announced the release of the names of 32,000 scientists who have signed a strongly worded petition dissenting from the alarmist assertions of Al Gore and the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Fears of catastrophic human-caused global warming, requiring draconian energy rationing, are the basis for policies supported by all three leading Presidential candidates: Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, and John McCain.

Al Gore claims that "the debate is over," and that there are only a "few" remaining "skeptics."

"In Ph.D. scientist signers alone, the project already includes 15-times more scientists than are seriously involved in the United Nations IPCC project. The very large number of petition signers demonstrates that, if there is a consensus among American scientists, it is in opposition to the human-caused global warming hypothesis rather than in favor of it," states Robinson. Signers include more than 9,000 Ph.Ds.

Most signatures were obtained by mailing to lists of university professors and a compendium that constitutes a "Who's Who" of American scientists.

"How many scientists does it take to establish that a consensus does not exist on global warming?" asks Lawrence Solomon (Financial Post 5/17/08). He reviews the history of previous petitions, including the Heidelberg Appeal, which ultimately obtained 4,000 signatures, including 72 Nobel Prize winners. In numbers, the Oregon Petition Project vastly exceeds all others, having gathered some 17,800 signatures in 2001-"all the more astounding because of the unequivocal stand these scientists took."

"Not only did they dispute that there was convincing evidence of harm from carbon dioxide emissions, they asserted that Kyoto itself would harm the global environment because ‘increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide produce many beneficial effects upon the natural plant and animal environments of the earth.'"

Robinson was urged to renew the effort to collect signatures by scientists who were "outraged at the way Al Gore and company were abusing the science to their own ends" (ibid.).

"Proposed political actions to severely reduce hydrocarbon use now threaten the prosperity of Americans and the very existence of hundreds of millions of people in poorer countries," Robinson writes in the Frequently Asked Questions on a website that posts the Petition, a description of the Project, the list of signatories, and their qualifications.

Additional information:

• "Environmental Effects of Increased Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide" by Arthur B. Robinson, Noah E. Robinson, and Willie Soon, J Am Phys Surg, Fall 2007.
• "Human Rights, Science, and the Energy Emergency," by Arthur Robinson, Human Events 5/19/08.
• "China Claims One-Child Policy Helps to Protect Climate," AAPS News of the Day 12/15/07.

And Al Gore and his cronies have a degree in Du.H.

A few words on Arthur Robinson, Ph.D (from SourceWatch):

The Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine (OISM) describes itself as "a small research institute" that studies "biochemistry, diagnostic medicine, nutrition, preventive medicine and the molecular biology of aging." It is headed by Arthur B. Robinson, an eccentric scientist who has a long history of controversial entanglements with figures on the fringe of accepted research. OISM also markets a home-schooling kit for "parents concerned about socialism in the public schools" and publishes books on how to survive nuclear war.

[...]

The Oregon Petition, sponsored by the OISM, was circulated in April 1998 in a bulk mailing to tens of thousands of U.S. scientists. In addition to the petition, the mailing included what appeared to be a reprint of a scientific paper. Authored by OISM's Arthur B. Robinson, Sallie L. Baliunas, Willie Soon, and Zachary W. Robinson, the paper was titled "Environmental Effects of Increased Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide" and was printed in the same typeface and format as the official Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. Also included was a reprint of a December 1997, Wall Street Journaleditorial, "Science Has Spoken: Global Warming Is a Myth, by Arthur and Zachary Robinson. A cover note signed "Frederick Seitz/Past President, National Academy of Sciences, U.S.A./President Emeritus, Rockefeller University", may have given some persons the impression that Robinson's paper was an official publication of the academy's peer-reviewed journal. The blatant editorializing in the pseudopaper, however, was uncharacteristic of scientific papers.

Robinson's paper claimed to show that pumping carbon dioxide into the atmosphere is actually a good thing. "As atmospheric CO₂ increases," it stated, "plant growth rates increase. Also, leaves lose less water as CO₂ increases, so that plants are able to grow under drier conditions. Animal life, which depends upon plant life for food, increases proportionally." As a result, Robinson concluded, industrial activities can be counted on to encourage greater species biodiversity and a greener planet:

As coal, oil, and natural gas are used to feed and lift from poverty vast numbers of people across the globe, more CO₂ will be released into the atmosphere. This will help to maintain and improve the health, longevity, prosperity, and productivity of all people.

Human activities are believed to be responsible for the rise in CO₂ level of the atmosphere. Mankind is moving the carbon in coal, oil, and natural gas from below ground to the atmosphere and surface, where it is available for conversion into living things. We are living in an increasingly lush environment of plants and animals as a result of the CO₂ increase. Our children will enjoy an Earth with far more plant and animal life as [sic] that with which we now are blessed. This is a wonderful and unexpected gift from the Industrial Revolution.

In reality, neither Robinson's paper nor OISM's petition drive had anything to do with the National Academy of Sciences, which first heard about the petition when its members began calling to ask if the NAS had taken a stand against the Kyoto treaty. Robinson was not even a climate scientist. He was a biochemist with no published research in the field of climatology, and his paper had never been subjected to peer review by anyone with training in the field. In fact, the paper had never been accepted for publication anywhere, let alone in the NAS Proceedings. It was self-published by Robinson, who did the typesetting himself on his own computer. (It was subsequently published as a "review" in Climate Research, which contributed to an editorial scandal at that publication.)

None of the coauthors of "Environmental Effects of Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide" had any more standing than Robinson himself as a climate change researcher. They included Robinson's 22-year-old son, Zachary, along with astrophysicists Sallie L. Baliunas and Willie Soon. Both Baliunas and Soon worked with Frederick Seitz at the George C. Marshall Institute, a Washington, D.C., think tank where Seitz served as executive director. Funded by a number of right-wing foundations, including Scaife and Bradley, the George C. Marshall Institute does not conduct any original research. It is a conservative think tank that was initially founded during the years of the Reagan administration to advocate funding for Reagan's Strategic Defense Initiative--the "Star Wars" weapons program. Today, the Marshall Institute is still a big fan of high-tech weapons. In 1999, its website gave prominent placement to an essay by Col. Simon P. Worden titled "Why We Need the Air-Borne Laser," along with an essay titled "Missile Defense for Populations--What Does It Take? Why Are We Not Doing It?" Following the collapse of the Soviet Union, however, the Marshall Institute has adapted to the times by devoting much of its firepower to the war against environmentalism, and in particular against the "scaremongers" who raise warnings about global warming.

***************************

I realize that SourceWatch is a Wiki and thereby open to editing by pretty much anybody, but Robinson is not new to the anti-climate change scene and he has been roundly discredited a number of times. Although I have not personally seen the 32,000 names allegedly on the list, I know that many of these kinds of lists have been debunked in the past including, most recently, a list of over 400 scientists put forth by Sen. Inhofe of Oaklahoma. Many of the alleged "signees" were shocked to find their names on the list as they had never signed on to it.

I guess what I'm saying is that I don't put a lot of credence in Mr. Robinson's assertions (or his list) when it comes to matters of climate change.

(BTW - Not as though it should be a big surprise to anyone considering the source, but Arthur Robinson, Ph.D , is a supporter of Ron Paul for president.)

Nicely done response.

Besides, whether or not global warming exists is no rational not to take some good advice, such as building more efficient power plants and using more wind and solar energy. Coal and oil still pollute with other particles, not just the carbon dioxide. (*cough* we all know how clean MPW and the Louisa plant are). Wind energy is actually on-par with coal these days. I'm surprised we haven't realized that here... I mean, we have the wind most days. We won't get MUCH energy from wind, maybe enough to power 1/8 of the town, but that's also 1/8 less coal to use, and 1/8 less pollution.