Russ Maatman (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Thu, 27 Jun 1996 13:11:10 -0500 (CDT)
To the ASA group:
Dennis Sweitzer wrote a very long rebuttal to my citation of
Frederick Seitz's complaint re the published summary of the
IPCC report on environmental studies.
I realize that sometimes in debates it is necessary to bring in
lengthy quotes from several other persons, and desirable to untangle
the he-said/she-said arguments. I have read Dennis's rather complicated
post, and I still have this rather simple question: Were the following
three statements, which Seitz says were in the *summary* he saw,
reflected in the *published* summary?
*"None of the studies cited above has shown clear evidence that we
attribute the observed [climate] changes to the specific cause of
increases in greenhouse gases."
*"No study to date has positively attributed all or part [of the climate
change observed to date] to anthropogenic [man-made] causes."
*"Any claims of positive detection of significant climate change are
likely to remain controversial until uncertainties in the total natural
variability of the climate system are reduced."
This is a very important matter. We are talking about conclusions made
by a world-famous scientific panel about *many* scientific studies--not
just one study--made over a period of several years. It is not
relevant that Seitz is associated with such-and-such a society, and
that another society disagrees. It is not relevant that someone else
attempted to defend Seitz. The question remains:
Were these three statements in the summary to which Seitz lent his
name reflected in the published summary?
e-mail: email@example.com Home address:
Russell Maatman 401 Fifth Ave. SE
Dordt College Sioux Center, Iowa 51250
Sioux Center, Iowa 51250 Home phone: (712) 722-0421