It’s shameful the way that scientific societies have become politicized.
9 thoughts on “The AGU Statement On Climate Change”
It’s the way the left have worked for generations. Let someone else build something, then infiltrate and take it over.
They didn’t built it, so they don’t care when they destroy it.
There’s some quote on that, but I do not remember from whom, that all such organizations tend to be coopted by those with liberal agendas approaching probability 1 over time. I would be much obliged if anyone has any idea where it can be found and who said it.
A classic example of a scientific society becoming politicized is the American Physical Society opposing the Reagan Strategic Defense Initiative. The APS actually claimed that such a system would violate the laws of physics, then proceeded to construct strawman systems that would. The opposition included those physicists suffering from the nuclear guilts plus those who were sympathetic to socialism (and thought communism and the Soviet Union were socialist).
You mean like [cough]Kosta [cough]Tsipis?
BTW, Jim, are you planning to go to the DC-X event?
Talking of ‘nuclear guilt’, I’ve often thought that ‘Nuclear Winter’ was the original ‘Global Warming’: computer models that produced scary results supporting the modellers’ political position but bore no resemblance to the real world. I remember media scare stories claiming that Kuwait’s burning oil wells in the first Gulf War were going to kill millions from ‘Nuclear Winter’-style cooling, yet, bizarrely, that didn’t happen at all.
That’s because a couple of private companies such as Red Adair put out the oil well fires far faster than the models predicted would be possible. Yet another lesson in “the map is not the territory”.
Technologically competent science has discovered:
Any credible change to the level of non-condensing greenhouse gases doesn’t have, has never had and will never have significant effect on average global temperature.
It’s the way the left have worked for generations. Let someone else build something, then infiltrate and take it over.
They didn’t built it, so they don’t care when they destroy it.
There’s some quote on that, but I do not remember from whom, that all such organizations tend to be coopted by those with liberal agendas approaching probability 1 over time. I would be much obliged if anyone has any idea where it can be found and who said it.
You may be thinking of O’Sullivan’s First Law.
That was probably it. Thanks.
A classic example of a scientific society becoming politicized is the American Physical Society opposing the Reagan Strategic Defense Initiative. The APS actually claimed that such a system would violate the laws of physics, then proceeded to construct strawman systems that would. The opposition included those physicists suffering from the nuclear guilts plus those who were sympathetic to socialism (and thought communism and the Soviet Union were socialist).
You mean like [cough]Kosta [cough]Tsipis?
BTW, Jim, are you planning to go to the DC-X event?
Talking of ‘nuclear guilt’, I’ve often thought that ‘Nuclear Winter’ was the original ‘Global Warming’: computer models that produced scary results supporting the modellers’ political position but bore no resemblance to the real world. I remember media scare stories claiming that Kuwait’s burning oil wells in the first Gulf War were going to kill millions from ‘Nuclear Winter’-style cooling, yet, bizarrely, that didn’t happen at all.
That’s because a couple of private companies such as Red Adair put out the oil well fires far faster than the models predicted would be possible. Yet another lesson in “the map is not the territory”.
Technologically competent science has discovered:
Any credible change to the level of non-condensing greenhouse gases doesn’t have, has never had and will never have significant effect on average global temperature.
GW ended before 2001. http://endofgw.blogspot.com/
AGW never was. http://climatechange90.blogspot.com/2013/05/natural-climate-change-has-been.html