Re: [asa] Climate Progress

From: John Walley <>
Date: Sun Dec 13 2009 - 19:52:46 EST

I am certain there are some of ICR an AIG caliber that justly deserve the use of the term as they deny a lot of science. However it is unclear to me who that might apply to when it is use on this list. I have seen it in a few emails that looks like it might be directed toward me, thus prompting my response. I don't see the need or value in using it to describe AIG or ICR on this list as they are not represented and no one here shares those views to my knowledge.

I'm curious, if a person held to the views below from the minority of climate scientists, would you consider them in the denialist or skeptic camp, or something else?  And if a skeptic, is this reasonable skepticism or unreasonable?  Just would like to know where I stand. I think this is pretty close to my position at the moment.

Specifically, we challenge supporters of the hypothesis of dangerous human-caused climate change to demonstrate that:
        1. Variations in global climate in the last hundred years are significantly outside the natural range experienced in previous centuries;

        2. Humanity’s emissions of carbon dioxide and other ‘greenhouse gases’ (GHG) are having a dangerous impact on global climate;
        3. Computer-based models can meaningfully replicate the impact of all of the natural factors that may significantly influence climate;
        4. Sea levels are rising dangerously at a rate that has accelerated with increasing human GHG emissions, thereby threatening small islands and coastal communities;
        5. The incidence of malaria is increasing due to recent climate changes;
        6. Human society and natural ecosystems cannot adapt to foreseeable climate change as they have done in the past;
        7. Worldwide glacier retreat, and sea ice melting in Polar Regions , is unusual and related to increases in human GHG emissions;
        8. Polar bears and other Arctic and Antarctic wildlife are unable to adapt to anticipated local climate change effects, independent of the causes of those changes;
        9. Hurricanes, other tropical cyclones and associated extreme weather events are increasing in severity and frequency;
        10. Data recorded by ground-based stations are a reliable indicator of surface temperature trends.


----- Original Message ----
From: John Burgeson (ASA member) <>
To: John Walley <>
Cc: asa <>
Sent: Sun, December 13, 2009 12:56:38 PM
Subject: Re: [asa] Climate Progress

On 12/12/09, John Walley <> wrote:
> I think the gratuitous and continued use of the label "denialist" for those
> that don't affirm your conclusions reveals an arrogance and immaturity in
> the AGW dogma.


The label "denialist" has been used by some of those opposed to the IPCC.

It is also an accurate descriptor. "Skeptic" once descibed such
people, and it may well still describe some, but although I read a lot
of anti-IPCC arguments, none of them (with one or two rare exceptions)
evince any more credibility than the rantings of ICR and AIG against
evolution theory.

I began a study of this issue about a year ago -- I describe myself
then as a "skeptic" then, for in my then uneducated view there still
seemed to be about a 5 or 10% probablilty the IPCC had gotten it
wrong. If pressed, I'd probably still hold to a 5% probability.

I have never seen any argument from any denialist that they might --
just might -- be wrong. I conclude that they richly deserve the label.
Among them are the Heritage Foundation, George Will, The Cato
Institute, Rush Limbaugh and -- perhaps the sorriest of them all --
the Heartland Institute. If they win, my great grandchildren,
struggling to survive in a ruined world, will curse their names.

I apologize for being blunt. But I reject the characterization
"gratuitous" in my use of the label, which I intend to continue using.
I do not intentionally use it to describe skeptics.

To unsubscribe, send a message to with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.


To unsubscribe, send a message to with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Sun Dec 13 19:53:20 2009

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Sun Dec 13 2009 - 19:53:20 EST