30,000 Scientists Rejecting Anthropogenic Global Warming Hypothesis

Wow, – this kinda sounds like what I have been saying over and over. (emphasis mine)

…the Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine (OISM) will announce that more than 31,000 scientists have signed a petition rejecting claims of human-caused global warming. The purpose of OISM’s Petition Project is to demonstrate that the claim of “settled science” and an overwhelming “consensus” in favor of the hypothesis of human-caused global warming and consequent climate damage is wrong. No such consensus or settled science exists. As indicated by the petition text and signatory list, a very large number of American scientists reject this hypothesis.

It is evident that 31,072 Americans with university degrees in science – including 9,021 PhDs, are not “a few.” Moreover, from the clear and strong petition statement that they have signed, it is evident that these 31,072 American scientists are not “skeptics.”

Go Oregon! Here’s the link to the press release.

And here’s a picture of Al Gore who will almost certainly launch ad hominem attacks on these scientists to try to discredit them. Mark these words (or some variation of them): “They (or maybe a few of them) received money from oil companies.

29 Responses to “30,000 Scientists Rejecting Anthropogenic Global Warming Hypothesis”

  1. Jennifer Says:

    I’m sure the world would drop a few degrees if he would stop spewing his own hot air. At least he’s recycling his arguments.

    • beggarz Says:

      ha ha ha!! Bet you’re having a blast with his new business partner David Blood!!

      ‘Blood and Gore’?!? I’m not sure I have the heart to say it!

      It’s almost surreal.

  2. rodney Says:

    Al Gore and all of his tree hugger friends are going to do nothing but put this economy in an even worse position than what it is already. Lots of people are going to lose their jobs in the process.

  3. Thomas Says:

    One should not trust those who dress in $5,000.00 suits, globe hop in Business jets, have air conditioned mansions sprinkled over the planet and tell the rest of us to drive 2 cylinder 80 MGP death traps.

  4. New Cars in California Must Display Global Warming Score « What The Crap? - whatthecrap.us Says:

    […] happy I am NOT to live in such a basket-case Nanny-State like California. Apparently this study (30,000 Scientists Rejecting Anthropomorphic Global Warming Hypothesis) was missed by the governing […]

  5. Bob Says:

    “happy I am NOT to live in such a basket-case Nanny-State like California. Apparently this study (30,000 Scientists Rejecting Anthropomorphic Global Warming Hypothesis) was missed by the governing”

    Uh guys. It’s not human shaped, its human generated. You know, anthropogenic. Anthropomorphize is what you do when you assume a nonhuman animal or object has human attributes; like the ability to think critically. A mistake I may be making by bothering to post here.

    And this little bit of propaganda you seem so pleased about, well, here’s the good news; the signatories are scientists. Sadly that is where happy times for crazies end. If you look at the petition itself, you’ll see that their areas of expertise are not listed. This means that they may very well be using the scientific method to determine how to put a better knob on a television set. They would still qualify as scientists, and that is, apparently, the only criteria that were deemed necessary to sign this petition.

    Further, kids, this is a petition. That means it has zero capacity for communicating anything other than that there are 31000 people out there that have an opinion about the suggestion that global warming is anthropogenic. Again, nice but so what? I’m sure if someone cared to or had enough funds they could find 31k scientists to support the claim that beer is better than soda pop. So what?

    By the way, you might want to check out the Nuclear War Survival Guide” on the Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine (OISM) web site. I’m just hoping they add a flying saucer abductee’s guide. You see, my ass hurts and I’m wondering if it’s because of those pesky aliens or because I voted Bush.

    I wonder what Little Billy of Ockham would say.

    • beggarz Says:

      “StarFleet Command : Ensign’s Handbook

      Initial sensor evidence : Mindless Drone attack indicated.

      Confirmation of Contact : First paragraph – immediate ad hominem attack, followed quickly with specious argument, characterized by increased atmospheric humidity.

      This particular unit type of The Borg is specifically programmed to emit such behaviour as mentioned above, in fact applying the AGW principle to their actual arguments themselves (sometimes referred to colloquially as ‘The Khan Principle’, although no direct association exists in StarFleet history).

      Thus you will frequently find these partially lobotomized creatures trolling message boards espousing intellectually weak yet purposely condescending hypotheses, overcompensated for and obscured by the large cloud of heavily corrupted steam emitted every time they open their minds to communicate.

      Typical of this particular program profile are arguments such as “You can pay anyone to say anything”, which are only applied to emerging consciousnesses – especially collective ones that threaten their tortured complacency – that they seek to destroy, yet are not applied elsewhere. Common also are assertions such as, for example, that no matter what common ground different scientific disciplines may have, reasoned and logical observations of reality can only be conclusively made after the commensurate Borg Unit has been assigned its requisite ‘Field Study Identification Tag’ by its Central Command Station (CCS).

      There is little purpose to this unit, and it may be terminated without notice by its requisite CCS, should any need arise. Certain programs need only report such action to their CCS, although prior confirmation of Unit Necessity Quotient should be accomplished as circumstances dictate.

      When encountered, engagement is not advised, as noxious clouds of fractured, distorted, and incomplete ideation can result in considerable loss of faith in the future of humanity as a whole, and negative philosophical processes regarding the point of it all.

      • beggarz Says:

        I’d like to add that if you paid these folks $100.- each to allegedly adopt this as a false position, it would cost you 3.1 million dollars.

    • freddyeddy Says:

      In my subjective attempt to be objective, I hope I’ve not offended the subjective position you’re convinced you hold objectively.

  6. John Says:

    Bob seems to have missed the fact that virtually none of the scientists that signed on to the IPCC report have any expertise in the relatively narrow field of atmospheric science. It is little more than a petition itself. One whose main argument, the hockey stick graph, is based on the Mann study which has been discredited as academic fraud. His methodology would create a hockey stick pattern out of random noise. Billy would say that the simplest answer is ususally the correct one, the sun changes its output……….

  7. Gordon Says:

    Has anybody wondered who OISM actually are? I suggest you look them up in Sourcewatch. They’re led by Arthur B Robinson, a conservative Christian. Their activities include a dodgy attempt to associate themselves with the National Academy of Sciences. They won’t release figures on how many copies of the petition they’ve mailed, and they have been rather lax in confirming the actual scientific credentials of the signatories. A listing I read includes 114 Atmospheric Scientists and 40 Climatologists, but 1601 Geologists and 9751 General Engineers. All names are listed, but their qualifications are not.

  8. joe blow Says:

    Oh my. Any group headed up by one of those EVIL christians must be bad. It would be much better if the study had come from a Pro Choice Group. Because they have compassion

  9. Sara DiNicola Says:

    “All names are listed, but their qualifications are not”

    Outlined below are the numbers of Petition Project signatories, subdivided by educational specialties. These have been combined, as indicated, into seven categories.

    1. Atmospheric, environmental, and Earth sciences includes 3,697 scientists trained in specialties directly related to the physical environment of the Earth and the past and current phenomena that affect that environment….NOTE HOW THIS NUMBER COMPARES TO THE ORGINAL SCIENTIFIC TEAM SUPPOSEDLY “FOR” THE GLOBAL WARMING THEORY—EXCEPT THAT HALF OF THEM TRIED TO HAVE THEIR NAMES REMOVED WHEN THEY SAW HOW THEIR RESEARCH WAS BEING TWISTED….THOSE IN CHARGE REFUSED TO REMOVE THEIR NAMES AND MANY OF THE SCIENTISTS WENT TO THE LENGTH OF SUING TO DISSOCIATED THEMSELVES!!!!!!!!!!!!

    2. Computer and mathematical sciences includes 903 scientists trained in computer and mathematical methods. Since the human-caused global warming hypothesis rests entirely upon mathematical computer projections and not upon experimental observations, these sciences are especially important in evaluating this hypothesis.

    3. Physics and aerospace sciences include 5,691 scientists trained in the fundamental physical and molecular properties of gases, liquids, and solids, which are essential to understanding the physical properties of the atmosphere and Earth.

    4. Chemistry includes 4,796 scientists trained in the molecular interactions and behaviors of the substances of which the atmosphere and Earth are composed.

    5. Biology and agriculture includes 2,924 scientists trained in the functional and environmental requirements of living things on the Earth.

    6. Medicine includes 3,069 scientists trained in the functional and environmental requirements of human beings on the Earth.

    7. Engineering and general science includes 9,992 scientists trained primarily in the many engineering specialties required to maintain modern civilization and the prosperity required for all human actions, including environmental programs.

    The following outline gives a more detailed analysis of the signers’ educations.
    Atmosphere, Earth, & Environment (3,697)
    1. Atmosphere (578)
    I) Atmospheric Science (114)
    II) Climatology (40)
    III) Meteorology (341 )
    IV) Astronomy (58)
    V) Astrophysics (25)
    2. Earth (2,148)
    I) Earth Science (107)
    II) Geochemistry (62)
    III) Geology (1,601)
    IV) Geophysics (334)
    V) Geoscience (23)
    VI) Hydrology (21)
    3. Environment (971)
    I) Environmental Engineering (473)
    II) Environmental Science (256)
    III) Forestry (156)
    IV) Oceanography (86)
    Computers & Math (903)
    1. Computer Science (217)
    2. Math (686)
    I) Mathematics (575)
    II) Statistics (111)
    Physics & Aerospace (5,691)
    1. Physics (5,106)
    I) Physics (2,310)
    II) Nuclear Engineering (215)
    III) Mechanical Engineering (2,581)
    2. Aerospace (585)
    I) Aerospace Engineering (585)
    Chemistry (4,796)
    1. Chemistry ( 3,156)
    2. Chemical Engineering (1,640)
    Biochemistry, Biology, & Agriculture (2,924)
    1. Biochemistry (768)
    I) Biochemistry (703)
    II) Biophysics (65)
    2. Biology (1,365)
    I) Biology (985)
    II) Ecology (72)
    III) Entomology (57)
    IV) Zoology (145)
    V) Animal Science (106)
    3. Agriculture (791)
    I) Agricultural Science (314)
    II) Agricultural Engineering (111)
    III) Plant Science (292)
    IV) Food Science (74)
    Medicine (3,069)
    1. Medical Science (726)
    2. Medicine (2,343)
    General Engineering & General Science (9,992)
    1. General Engineering (9,751)
    I) Engineering (7,289)
    II) Electrical Engineering (2,075)
    III) Metallurgy (387)
    2. General Science (241)

  10. Karl Kunker Says:

    Don’t confuse people with details. Keep the picture big, ominous, and scary so someone can be portrayed as evil and responsible for the mess we’re in.

    So what that the UN has its own nay sayers about global warming.

    So what that the reports discrediting AGW aren’t the real facts of the scientific experts who were given millions of dollars to provide the grant contribuitors with what they wanted to hear.

    So what that the next round of lobbyist will all be wearing green.

    I for one find any one who questions the experts of any field of science simply a media blip on the radar with little hope of convincing anyone of anything until the political winds of fortune shift. This will be about 5 years into our next coming “Ice Age.”

  11. Jeremy Says:

    Yeah, you really need to analyse the qualifications before making too much noise about this petition.

    There are 3,000 doctors on there, 7,800 engineers. There are zoologists, mathematicians and nuclear physicists on the list. All more educated people than me, but not qualified to speak for something as complex and specific as climate studies. Do you know how many actual climatologists signed that petition? – 39.

    It really isn’t worth the paper its printed on.

    According to the University of Illinois’ research from earlier this year, 82% of earth scientists (the people that matter) agree with anthropogenic global warming. Among climatologists (the people that matter the most!) the consensus is 97%.

    See for yourself and choose who you want to believe:



  12. Jim Says:

    Religion: The belief in something in the absence of physical proof that the thing exists, or continued belief in spite of evidence contrary to the thing’s existence.
    Fact:No “scientist” has ever received a grant to study the status quo! They must have a disaster, even if they and their cohorts in the media have to creat it!
    Fact: “climatologists” have no idea what the weather is going to be like tomorrow, much less in a hundred years, and to what do they attribute the warming climate after the last three ice ages? Pre-historic industrialization?
    Fact: greenhouse gasses in order of effectivness; Water vapor, Ozone, Methane, CO2.
    Fact: Man is only the fourth or fifth largest producer of so called “greenhouse gases” after the oceans (water vapor is 95-97% of all green house gases), volcanoes (methane, CO2, sulfer dioxide,…) , termites (methane) , cows and other herbivores (Methane), and possibly frozen methane deposits. Oh, and CO2 is one of the least effective green house gases. Man’s total contribution 1/10th of 1%!
    Fact: The magnetic fields surrounding the earth keep the solar wind from incinerating the earth and guess what, the field has weakened approximately 10% during the period the “Global Warmists” claim man has influenced world temperatures.
    Fact: “Global Warmists” will never admit to any of this because it flies in the face of their beliefs that “man is bad”!
    But they are still flying and driving to the global warming conventions and rallies! All the while Al Gore gets richer selling bogus “Carbon credits” to weak willed CEOs.

    • Larry Steimle Says:

      Amen Jim!

    • Peter Says:

      Weather is not climate. Meteorologists don’t know shit, but CLIMATOLOGISTS are much better able to predict long-term CLIMATE patterns.
      Also your math is a wee bit wrong, water vapor only accounts for about 40-60% of the world’s greenhouse effect. And the difference is, water vapor RAPIDLY decays as a force within the atmosphere, whereas CO2 emissions take much longer to scrub naturally. When we pump more CO2 into the atmosphere than can be scrubbed in a balanced way, then we create an imbalance and thus a warming, this causes positive feedback effects which in turn release things like METHANE from frozen tundra.
      Doing your homework and researching the science is ABSOLUTELY NOT the same thing as reading some half-assed pseudo-scientific skeptic’s report on a right-wing blog.

  13. Peter Says:

    To share a quote with you guys:

    “So what does it take to be included among the 31,000 “experts” on the petition? Well, according to the OISM criteria, any undergraduate science degree will do just fine. Bet you never thought that BS you earned 20 years ago made you a qualified climatologist. Congratulations!

    OISM also wants to let you know that 9,021 of the signers hold PhDs. They don’t specify what the doctorates are in, but they repeat that figure quite a bit, as if it means something. Since the group was nice enough to list all 31,000 signers, including the dead people, let’s take a look at the qualifications of three randomly-selected “climate experts.”

    W. Kline Bolton, M.D. is a professor of medicine and Nephrology Division Chief at the University of Virginia. Nephrology deals with the study of the function and diseases of the kidney.
    Zhonggang Zeng is one of the 9,000 with a PhD. He is a professor of mathematics at Northeastern Illinois University. His most recent publication is entitled “Computing multiple roots of inexact polynomials.”
    Hub Hougland is a dentist in Muncie, Indiana. He was inducted into the Indiana Basketball Hall of Fame last year.”

    The fraud is obviously with the petition and NOT with Al Gore’s claims.

  14. SAKELLARIS Says:


  15. Mike Says:

    I am not a scientist.

    Now that the elitist have stopped reading this, I will continue to say that I am no stranger to science. My father taught Biology as a PhD for forty years. This fact does not lend one shred of credibility to what I say. Not one shred. That being said, I am not imbecile either.

    I know that man has not monitored the climate long enough to KNOW many things about it. You may dig about in the dirt and extrapolate a hypothesis about the Earth’s climate due to pollen, etc., but you know very little. Statistics can be manipulated and make a lie sound as though it were the truth. Certainly the climate does change. That doesn’t require an advanced degree to understand or believe.

    What impact man’s activities have or have had on the global climate are a guess at best. Man was not around for the last Ice Age, yet it occurred, nonetheless. Shall we accept the blame for that anyway? Polar ice caps are in a constant state of flux as is the location of the Earth’s magnetic fields.

    Al Gore is a boob when it comes to science and a crass vaudevillianistic huckster; a manipulator, when it comes to political agendas. Don’t ask me to drink the climate change Kool-Aid. It won’t happen. The science doesn’t support the claim.

  16. goodtallviking Says:

    As a Ph.D. and a signer among the 30,000, I must say I am really proud of what we “deniers” are doing.
    Just remember, 1975 was going to be the start of an ice age !!

  17. EricFromAbeno Says:

    I applaud people who wish to leave the world in a better state than they found it. I just wish I could believe that any group of people, no matter how large, or how SPECIFICALLY educated, actually KNOWS what “better” is, in terms of messing with the contents of the atmosphere. Also, perhaps this is completely unimportant, but I feel that people who argue in a forum about the accuracy of the language used in another person’s post… well, it detracts from the power of your own position.

    My position is one that I am sure has been stated before, and probably more eloquently: there are too many variables for any person or group of people to make an accurate forecast concerning global climate change, whether that forecast is positively or negatively skewed. (except perhaps by sheer luck) Greenhouse gases, yes, good, atmospheric decay, fine, industrialization, geological contributors, the magnetic field, solar radiation, meticulous (ha!) historical temperature records… and this insane assumption that people make that goes “if the current trend continues indefinitely”…. the thing about “trends” is that even if the end-point is fixed to the “present” you can generally pick a starting point at any time in the past so that it supports the position you want to make. Add to that the fact that trends generally do NOT “continue indefinitely”… Basically, with a situation containing as many vaguely understood variables as this issue with the planetary climate, I distrust ANYONE who says “this is the way it is, and this is what we need to do about it”. Anyone with that much certainty has either been dogmatically educated by one camp, or they are lying for their own benefit, somehow. OH, and if you are one of the people who KNOWS that human beings are DEFINITELY responsible for global warming, what you need to do RIGHT NOW is learn Chinese and start flooding China with your environmental message, because in less than 10 years, IF THE CURRENT TRENDS CONTINUE, (wink) China will be responsible for the overwhelming majority of all ANTHROPOGENIC (wink wink) greenhouse gasses. Good luck and God bless you, Don Quixote. And when solar flares and the sudden pole-reversal flood the planet with deadly ultraviolet radiation, (wink wink wink) I’m sure the survivors will thank you for all your efforts to keep China pre-industrially impoverished for the sake of the climate. the atmospheric conditions of the planet really only matter to the surface dwellers, anyway… it’s not like the IMPORTANT creatures will die out… just unimportant ones like homo sapiens. Heck, if you believe in anthropogenic environmental effects, and you really wish to leave the world in a better place than you found it, you should just let that particular species cause its own extinction. Problem solved.

  18. Question on Science and Technology Says:

    […] oh by the way: 30,000 Scientists Rejecting Anthropogenic Global Warming Hypothesis […]

  19. longshanks Says:

    Strangely, most Americans seem to still be in stubborn denial of global warming.

    No scientific body of national or international standing disagrees with the anthropogenic global warming hypothesis.

    Listen to NASA, your own space agency:
    1. Global sea level rose about 17 centimeters (6.7 inches) in the last century. The rate in the last decade, however, is nearly double that of the last century.
    2. The 20 warmest years having occurred since 1981 and with all 10 of the warmest years occurring in the past 12 years.
    3. Data from NASA’s Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment show Greenland lost 150 to 250 cubic kilometers (36 to 60 cubic miles) of ice per year between 2002 and 2006, while Antarctica lost about 152 cubic kilometers (36 cubic miles) of ice between 2002 and 2005.
    4. Glaciers are retreating almost everywhere around the world — including in the Alps, Himalayas, Andes, Rockies, Alaska and Africa.
    5. The number of record high temperature events in the United States has been increasing, while the number of record low temperature events has been decreasing, since 1950. The U.S. has also witnessed increasing numbers of intense rainfall events.
    6. The carbon dioxide content of the Earth’s oceans has been increasing since 1750, and is currently increasing about 2 billion tons per year. This has increased ocean acidity by about 30 percent.

    Please, don’t tell me some crap about solar radiation cycles. The brightness of the sunlight reaching earth has been pretty constant throughout the last 2,000 years, with variations of around 0.1-0.2%

    For the past 650,000 years, carbon dioxide has never exceeded 300 parts per million in the air. Right now it is about 390 parts per million. Doesn’t seem normal to me.

    Why should we care? ‘Cos if we don’t, soon there will be much more than just extra natural hazards. Sure, nobody’s gonna care when some species die out, but soon it will turn into some serious shit. Ocean rises could flood half of the Netherlands and many major cities. Ocean acidification, desertification and disease will plague many parts of the world.

    We do have the technology to stop global warming. For example, it would only take 0.5% of the US’s land to power the entire fleet of vehicles, or about 144,000 5mW wind turbines. In comparison, the US manufactured around 300,000 aircraft during WWII alone. This is just one of the examples of the new technologies that we can use to reduce emissions. How’s that for crating jobs? Even the EU is outperforming the US in terms of climate change.

    Sure, there’s some tough times if we go green, but this is a better option than a screwed up Earth. We need to get off fossil fuels anyway, since they’re going to run out soon.

    To be honest, I believe that skeptics of climate change are just plain lazy.

  20. Max Says:

    Those aren’t climate scientist, and why should I care what a zoologist thinks about climate change?

  21. pjclark Says:

    I always thought those who signed up for “earth science” degrees where those whose hight school qualifications were too low to be accepted by a legitimate science course.

  22. Chris Gilbert Says:

    So, 9,000 PhDs signed the petition. It would be helpful to know what percentage this is of total PhDs. If it’s 1% it insignificant, if it’s 97% it’s significant. 97% of climatologists agree that global warming is man-made (to use the vernacular.)

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: