US Physics Professor: 'Global Warming Is the Greatest and Most Successful Pseudoscientific Fraud I Have Seen in My Long Life'

Email Print
FacebookTwitterShare

Recently
by James Delingpole: Global
Cooling and the NewWorldOrder

 

 
 

Harold Lewis
is Emeritus Professor of Physics at the University of California,
Santa Barbara. Here is his letter of resignation to Curtis G. Callan
Jr, Princeton University, President of the American Physical Society.

Anthony
Watts
describes it thus:

This is
an important moment in science history. I would describe it as
a letter on the scale of Martin Luther, nailing
his 95 theses to the Wittenburg church door
. It is worthy
of repeating this letter in entirety on every blog that discusses
science.

It’s so
utterly damning that I’m going to run it in full without further
comment. (H/T GWPF,
Richard Brearley).

Dear Curt:

When I first
joined the American Physical Society sixty-seven years ago it
was much smaller, much gentler, and as yet uncorrupted by the
money flood (a threat against which Dwight Eisenhower warned a
half-century ago).

Indeed, the
choice of physics as a profession was then a guarantor of a life
of poverty and abstinence — it was World War II that changed all
that. The prospect of worldly gain drove few physicists. As recently
as thirty-five years ago, when I chaired the first APS study of
a contentious social/scientific issue, The Reactor Safety Study,
though there were zealots aplenty on the outside there was no
hint of inordinate pressure on us as physicists. We were therefore
able to produce what I believe was and is an honest appraisal
of the situation at that time. We were further enabled by the
presence of an oversight committee consisting of Pief Panofsky,
Vicki Weisskopf, and Hans Bethe, all towering physicists beyond
reproach. I was proud of what we did in a charged atmosphere.
In the end the oversight committee, in its report to the APS President,
noted the complete independence in which we did the job, and predicted
that the report would be attacked from both sides. What greater
tribute could there be?

How different
it is now. The giants no longer walk the earth, and the money
flood has become the raison d'être of much physics research,
the vital sustenance of much more, and it provides the support
for untold numbers of professional jobs. For reasons that will
soon become clear my former pride at being an APS Fellow all these
years has been turned into shame, and I am forced, with no pleasure
at all, to offer you my resignation from the Society.

It is of
course, the global-warming scam, with the (literally) trillions
of dollars driving it, that has corrupted so many scientists,
and has carried APS before it like a rogue wave. It is the greatest
and most successful pseudoscientific fraud I have seen in my long
life as a physicist. Anyone who has the faintest doubt that this
is so should force himself to read the ClimateGate documents,
which lay it bare. (Montford's book organizes the facts very well.)
I don't believe that any real physicist, nay scientist, can read
that stuff without revulsion. I would almost make that revulsion
a definition of the word scientist.

So what has
the APS, as an organization, done in the face of this challenge?
It has accepted the corruption as the norm, and gone along with
it. For example:

1. About
a year ago a few of us sent an e-mail on the subject to a fraction
of the membership. APS ignored the issues, but the then President
immediately launched a hostile investigation of where we got the
e-mail addresses. In its better days, APS used to encourage discussion
of important issues, and indeed the Constitution cites that as
its principal purpose. No more. Everything that has been done
in the last year has been designed to silence debate

2. The appallingly
tendentious APS statement on Climate Change was apparently written
in a hurry by a few people over lunch, and is certainly not representative
of the talents of APS members as I have long known them. So a
few of us petitioned the Council to reconsider it. One of the
outstanding marks of (in)distinction in the Statement was the
poison word incontrovertible, which describes few items in physics,
certainly not this one. In response APS appointed a secret committee
that never met, never troubled to speak to any skeptics, yet endorsed
the Statement in its entirety. (They did admit that the tone was
a bit strong, but amazingly kept the poison word incontrovertible
to describe the evidence, a position supported by no one.) In
the end, the Council kept the original statement, word for word,
but approved a far longer "explanatory" screed, admitting
that there were uncertainties, but brushing them aside to give
blanket approval to the original. The original Statement, which
still stands as the APS position, also contains what I consider
pompous and asinine advice to all world governments, as if the
APS were master of the universe. It is not, and I am embarrassed
that our leaders seem to think it is. This is not fun and games,
these are serious matters involving vast fractions of our national
substance, and the reputation of the Society as a scientific society
is at stake.

Read
the rest of the article

October
11, 2010

Email Print
FacebookTwitterShare