Leading scientific body to review its support for global warming 'consensus'
The so-called “consensus” among scientists supporting anthropogenic
global warming climate change may take a fatal hit.
The American Physical Society, a leading scientific organization in the field of physics with 50,000 members, has appointed a balanced panel to review its stance. Investors Business Daily reports:
At the risk of being accused of embracing what alarmists call the flat-earth view of climate change, the American Physical Society has appointed a balanced, six-person committee to review its stance on so-called climate change that includes three distinguished skeptics: Judith Curry, John Christy and Richard Lindzen. Their credentials are impressive.
Christy is director of the Earth System Science Center at the University of Alabama, Huntsville, and was a lead author of the 2001 report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.
Curry is a professor and chairwoman of the School of Earth & Atmospheric Sciences at the Georgia Institute of Technology.
Lindzen, an Alfred P. Sloan professor of meteorology at MIT from 1983 to 2013, is currently a distinguished senior fellow in the Center for the Study of Science at the Cato Institute.
A question the American Physical Society panel will address is one we ask repeatedly: Why wasn't the current global temperature stasis, with no discernible change in the past 15 years, not predicted by any of the climate models used by the IPCC, part of the United Nations?
Usually, when a scientific theory makes a prediction and that prediction fails to come true, the theory is considered to have been proven false. The warmists argue that something they call a “pause” is underway, but the problem is that nobody predicted such a pause cold be possible.
Other questions the panel will be asked to address:
The APS announcement lists among its questions to be answered: "How long must the stasis persist before there would be a firm declaration of a problem with the models?"
In a nod to the likelihood that nature, not man, calls the shots, another APS audit question asks the panel: "What do you see as the likelihood of solar influences beyond TSI (total solar irradiance)? Is it coincidence that the stasis has occurred during the weakest solar cycle (i.e., sunspot activity) in about a century?"
Stay tuned. This could be the Waterloo of the warmists.