« Who at Justice put the kibosh on the Black Panther prosecution? | Rasmussen Poll Watch: New Lows for Obama »
July 30, 2009
Warmist editor faces blowback from scientists
It's getting harder and harder to warmists to get away with their blanket statements that a "scientific consensus" on global warming exists. Now, an organization that bills itself as "the world's largest scientific society" is facing a grassroots rebellion form its scientist members. Marc Morano of Climate Depot has the exclusive story:
An outpouring of skeptical scientists who are members of the American Chemical Society (ACS) are revolting against the group's editor-in-chief -- with some demanding he be removed -- after an editorial appeared claiming "the science of anthropogenic climate change is becoming increasingly well established."The editorial claimed the "consensus" view was growing "increasingly difficult to challenge, despite the efforts of diehard climate-change deniers." The editor now admits he is "startled" by the negative reaction from the group's scientific members. The American Chemical Society bills itself as the "world's largest scientific society."The June 22, 2009 editorial in Chemical and Engineering News by editor in chief Rudy Baum, is facing widespread blowback and condemnation from American Chemical Society member scientists. Baum concluded his editorial by stating that "deniers" are attempting to "derail meaningful efforts to respond to global climate change."Dozens of letters from ACS members were published on July 27, 2009 castigating Baum, with some scientists calling for his replacement as editor-in-chief.The editorial was met with a swift, passionate and scientific rebuke from Baum's colleagues. Virtually all of the letters published on July 27 in castigated Baum's climate science views. Scientists rebuked Baum's use of the word "deniers" because of the terms "association with Holocaust deniers." In addition, the scientists called Baum's editorial: "disgusting"; "a disgrace"; "filled with misinformation"; "unworthy of a scientific periodical" and "pap."
This incident may impress itself on other warmist scientists. No editor (or writer) wants to be upbraided in public this way, so casual claims of consensus are probably going to be coming our way less frequently in the future. Once the emperor is seen to have no clothes, pretending otherwise in public becomes difficult.
Hat tip: Susan L.