Dear Lions’ Pride editors,
Greetings from the frozen north! Here in northeast Indiana, we seldom get to enjoy a white Christmas. As I write this letter, we are anticipating an even rarer event: a white Thanksgiving. So much for global warming.
During the 2008 Focus the Nation seminars, I presented several skeptical arguments against man-made global warming theory to a classroom full of students, faculty, and administrators. Following my presentation, I attempted to take questions from the audience. After fielding a few questions, most of which were skeptical of my skeptical presentation, Saint Leo University Assistant Professor of Biology, Dr. Chris Miller, began answering the audience’s questions for me. However, he did so with the aim of setting the record straight, ultimately attempting to reinforce the science upon which I had attempted to cast doubt. One of his gambits was to impugn the work of several climate experts whose skeptical opinions I had cited, among them Dr. William M. Gray, Emeritus Professor of Atmospheric Science at Colorado State University. The gist of Dr. Miller’s argument against the experts I cited was that they were only offering opinions, rather than publishing peer-reviewed studies in respectable scientific journals. If skeptics had legitimate findings that put into question man-made global warming theory, where were the peer-reviewed journal articles?
As the recent release of private emails among scientists at the Hadley Climatic Research Unit at Britain’s University of East Anglia show, perhaps there are few skeptical articles in climate science journals because skeptics had been systematically ousted from editorial positions. Even worse, it turns out that when the ouster of skeptics could not be achieved, journals with skeptical editors on staff were blacklisted by scientists pushing the idea of man-made global warming.
It is my hope that people, especially university students, continue to question the assumptions provided as fact by those who may be altering data to push a political agenda. The climate models that warned of runaway global warming have been proven incorrect by ten full years of global cooling. The CRU emails reveal a systematic attempt to hide that truth from the public. Too much is at stake for us to accept without question ‘evidence’ that comes from flawed computer models.
Dr. Miller had another argument against skeptics like me during the question and answer segment of my presentation. He said, “We only have one chance to get this right,” meaning we only have one Earth, suggesting that the consequences of underestimating the threat of global warming trump unproven (and unpublished) skeptical arguments.
I would like to expand upon that sentiment: We only have one future, and that future should be based on sounds science driven not by any political agenda but on reality, fact, and empirically verifiable evidence. When computer models predict global warming but the actual data show global cooling, theories based on those flawed computer models are wrong, period.
Joshua M. Smith Lions’ Pride Online Editor 2006-2009
Saint Leo University Class of 2009
4 responses so far ↓
1 Edward Saint-Ivan // Dec 18, 2009 at 2:24 pm
I recently had a conversation with a friend about global warming. He presented a research paper to further his point that man made global warming is bad science.
Since I know nothing about science I decided to check out his research paper.
First of all, they published this gem in a medical journal that didn’t even have an ISSN# or any connection to PubMed and reputable medical journals have both not to mention the obsurdity of talking about climate change in a medical journal.
The Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons claims to be a peer reviewed journal but I found NOTHING to support this claim.
The article was written by scientists at The Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine as opposed to a more respected organization and not one of the scientists at OISM is a climatologist!
I don’t pretend to understand global warming but if the right wing nuts can’t do better than an obscure medical journal that doesn’t even qualify for the shelve of a medical library because it lacks an ISSN# they are in bad shape!
2 Edward Saint-Ivan // Dec 19, 2009 at 3:47 pm
I submitted an article to a peer reviewed journal that has an ISSN#, expert review panel, connection to PubMed, and is avialable at The Shimberg Health Science Library of USF.
I can’t reveal more information for four to six weeks from the date of submission {12/6/09}.
3 Joshua M. Smith // Jan 6, 2010 at 2:24 am
Hi Edward.
I think you missed the point of my letter. Part of the reason skeptical scientists have not published is because scientists like those at the Climate Research Unit in East Anglia have worked very hard to keep their papers out of respectable, peer-reviewed journals.
Furthermore, you mentioned climatologists, which make up the bulk of global warming believers. Scientists in other fields, such as physical science and geology, disagree with the findings of climatologists based on their own research. The atmosphere may (and I stress *may*) be telling us the globe is warming, but the geological evidence is telling us that the earth has warmed and cooled for millions of years regardless of the carbon content of the atmosphere.
At any rate, my hope is that the debate on global warming can become more reasoned and respectful over time. The condescending and dismissive attitude of the believers does nothing to advance their arguments in a positive way. Declaring ‘consensus’ to a group of skeptics does not a great rhetorical argument make.
Peace.
4 Edward Saint-Ivan // Jan 11, 2010 at 9:27 pm
I am honored you took the time to reply. If a conspiracy at peer-reviewed journals is keeping out skeptics, that doesn’t justify a rag like the Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons.
The sceptics are perfectly capable of creating a peer reviewed journal just like scholars of Palestine did.
Pro-Israel journals are so stacked with bias against anything Pro-Palestine/Anti-Israel they had to find an alternative.
By the same token, some Arab universities could never publish a journal that does justice to Israeli studies and there are venues for Zionist scholars too.
Leave a Comment
(Comments with bogus names or email addresses will not be approved.)