I smell a law suit
Published April 30th, 2008 in climate change Tags: climate skeptics, heartland institute, libel. Scoopit Share it del.icio.us |Digg it |Furl |Netscape |reddit |StumbleUpon | ScoopitThe Heartland Institute (a very dodgy outfit it seems ) recently issued a lit of 500 scientists they say have “Documented Doubts of Man-Made Global Warming Scares”. That’s a lot of scientists and a lot of doubt if it were true. The list includes several New Zealanders including Jim Salinger from NIWA.
Heartland funded [and] the NZ pseudo scientists Bryan Leyland and Owen McShane to go to International Climates talks in Bali.
The article, by Hudson Institute director and Heartland “Senior Fellow” Dennis T. Avery claims to be a list of scientists whose work contradicts the overwhelming scientific agreement that human-induced climate change is endangering the world as we know it.
But it seems they’re on shaky ground. Dozens of scientists are now demanding that their names be removed from the list since desmogblog.com wrote to many of the scientists asking them to clarify their position.
DeSmogBlog manager Kevin Grandia emailed 122 of the scientists calling their attention to the list. So far - in less than 24 hours - three dozen of those scientists had responded in outrage, denying that their research supports Avery’s conclusions and demanding that their names be removed.
You can see some of their replies over at desmogblog.com
I wonder how long before the lawyers get it removed so here’s the article in full:
Abstract:
The following list includes more than 500 qualified researchers whose research in professional journals provides historic and/or physical proxy evidence that:
1) Most of the recent global warming has been caused by a long, moderate, natural cycle rather than by the burning of fossil fuels;
2) The sun’s varying radiance impacts the Earth’s climate as more or fewer cosmic rays create more or fewer of the low, wet clouds that act as the Earth’s thermostats, deflecting more or less solar heat out into space.
3) Sea levels are not rising rapidly nor are they likely to;
4) Wild species are not being driven to extinction but rather are increasing the biodiversity of our wildlands;
5) Fewer human deaths are likely rather than more as the current warming continues, since cold is far more dangerous and the Earth is always warming or cooling;
6) Food production is likely to thrive during the decades ahead, rather than collapsing due to climate overheating;
7) Our storms are likely to be fewer and milder as the declining temperature differential between the equator and the poles reduces their power.
The list includes researchers from many of the world’s top research institutions, such as the Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory affiliated with Columbia University, the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysical Research, the Woods Hole and Scripps Oceanographic Institutes, Sweden’s Upsala University, Australia’s Waikato University, South Africa’s Witwatersrand University, and the Chinese Academy of Sciences.
The key dispute, of course, is whether the recent global warming has been due to humans burning fossil fuels or to the natural, moderate 1,500 year cycle discovered in the Greenland and Antarctic ice cores in the 1980s. Willi Dansgaard of Denmark and Hans Oeschger of Switzerland discovered the climate cycle, in the first long Greenland ice cores. Claude Lorius of France led the Antarctic team that reported on the first long Antarctic ice core in 1985. They shared the Tyler Prize–the environmental version of the Nobel–in 1996.
Dansgaard-Oeschger cycles have since been found in seabed and lake sediments, ancient tree rings, boreholes, cave stalagmites, glacier movements, and archeological artifacts all over the world. We rejoice that their work is now supported by hundreds of peer-reviewed research reports, with more than 1,000 authors and co-authors, from research institutions around the world.
This partial listing is derived primarily from the citations in our book, Unstoppable Global Warming Every 1,500 Years. As the time of our small staff permits, we will publish additional studies and their authors to support the very important view that the Modern Warming is natural and no more dangerous than were the Medieval Warming, the Roman Warming and the Holocene Warming before it.
The list of scientists is here.
2 Responses to “I smell a law suit”
Leave a Reply
Folksonomy
climate change greenpeace activism youtube zeitgeist whaling blogging transport social networking save happy valley myspace ajax web 2.0 google folksonomy wordpress whales tagging spoof rss renewable energy internet humour climate skeptics china censorship video TV trademe the oceans technorati steve abel spy solid energy sms skeptics scoopit roads Rio Tinto real estate protest open source media mac John McCain greenpeacebuzz glacier forests fisheries firefox exxon environment del.icio.us carbon credits bottom trawling blog action day beer apple APEC amnesty al gore wrestlemania wordpress plugins widgets widget webcam web design web 2.0 tools water shortages utw trains time magazine tea sets tea taxonomy talleys tag switch off streaming spell check space software six steps to hell shopping sewerage seals scooter report radio puerh puer public transport property PR power consumption poo polar bears plugins plastic bags pink floyd peter talley pet food recall perth personal action patio heaters pandora northland mobil michael tritt mapping logging lightbulbs light bulbs kleenex keith richards IPCC interactive insurance impacts idiots huntly heat pump HD DVD key hack digg web2.0 activism greenwash greenmyapple global warming george bush genetic engineering genesis energy fuel prices flash fidel castro facebook evidence energy efficiency energy consumption elections 2008 cuba css court ruling computer coal climate blogsphere biodiesel australia auckland Asides ascii art anthony hopkins
Search
Latest
- Coal finger
- John Key gets punked
- Vote for the Environment
- YouTube - Concerned Arctic Citizen
- YouTube / Google NZ election debate channel
- Project 10 to the 100th from Google
- Warning: This may wake you up and freak you out
- NZ First advocates more sustainable fishing management and marine reserves
- It’s the McCain and Palin show!
- Ubuntu and firefox tweaks for faster web browsing


I suggest you read the article you have posted. The abstract states “…500 qualified researchers whose research in professional journals provides historic and/or physical proxy evidence”.
This does not claim that they support any particular viewpoint. It states that their peer-reviewed publications provide evidence that may be used to support a view. I would suggest that a law-suit would be interesting - as as far as I can tell the named authors have published the papers associated with their names. Are you suggesting that they having been claiming authorship of material that they haven’t written?
I’m no legal expert but I can smell a law-suit because the scientists are threatening legal action … presumably because they feel misrepresented.
Your argument is spurious … if you published some research on the extensive level areas to be found in Nevada could I then use that as evidence of my belief that the earth is flat?