What'sUpWithThatWatts, et al.: The Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine Petition on climate change

I've been carrying on a conversation over at a weird little YouTube video named "Denier land: How deniers view global warming." The thing is a textbook example of what's called an "Argument from Incredulity." Meaning that the person is flailing at information that he obviously doesn't understand, like a petulant school boy angry at a teacher who's just flunked him.

Rather than trying to learn something from that information he hides behind ridicule while ignoring all he doesn't understand. I know many people behave like that, but it's definitely no way to learn anything.

In any event, I've been commenting over there and some folks keep challenging me with different, not new, twists on the climate science skeptics handbook of excuses for ignoring what a world wide community of tens of thousands of professionals and experts agree on.

For example, take the following claim:

""More than 2,000 scientists from 154 countries typically participate in the IPCC process"

That is not only dishonest but unimpressive too. Over 30,000 scientists in the USA alone signed a petition disagreeing. Prominent scientists around the world with far more credibility than the anonymous 2000 so-called scientists agree with those 30,000.

You could dispute these figures, as many are not in relevant fields and many do not have higher degree or research backgrounds. However if you did so you admit to your dishonesty, as most of the 2000+ you claim are not researchers, most are not experts in their fields and many do not have PhDs, unlike over 9000 of those in those 30,000."

That, along with other pitches for the "OISM Petition," has inspired me to compose this compilation of information regarding the Oregon Petition, finishing with a REPOST of a DeSmogBlog story examining Arthur Robinson and his one-man operation, the so-called "Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine"

To begin with, from
http://greenfyre.wordpress.com/2009/07/12/what-if-the-oregon-petition-names-were-real/

Some articles which discuss the Oregon Petition

UPDATE: Aug 2nd, 2012

There is a comprehensive breakdown of the signatories at

2. The Scientific Consensus « The Global Warming Debate (begin about 1/3rd down the page).

Now add to that the equally comprehensive, but somewhat different analysis from

Scholars and Rogues » 31,478… 13,245… 152 OISM “scientists” can’t be wrong

where Brian does a much more detailed look at how representative the signatories are of their various disciplines.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c9mgT-xJNFA

Uploaded on Aug 13, 2009

This is a mirror from Greenman3610's channel, you can see all his videos at http://www.youtube.com/user/greenman3610

We've all heard about the "Petitions" of "Scientists" who disagree with Climate Science. This sordid little episode in the history of climate denial points up once again the fundamental dishonesty of the climate denial industry.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Flawed Oregon Petition Rises Again (via Desmogblog)

Climate "Science" by the Pound A climate change petition started in 1988 by the tobacco industry's favourite scientist (Federick Seitz), has just been re-released with a reported 31,072 signatures of "scientists" - some of whom are reported to actually…

RECOMMENDED WEBSITES

{edited 12/11/2014}

I know there are too many typos, what can I say, eyes aren't what they were, I get rushed, and always did have a thing with transposing…{well, I also hated high school "english" classes... bad call that one.}. Doing the best I can with what I got. Embarrassing though it is, it's better than doing nothing. Besides, it's the issues and reasoning that we should be worrying about.

Though I'm in my own little world here, I'm also constantly learning and evolving and do get occasional feedback and when I reread stuff and find errors or omissions or garbage, I fix it. If it's major I'll acknowledge it with an 'edited' note, minor stuff I don't bother.

~ ~ ~

I hardly keep track of Anthony's latest antics (besides, with Sou on the job why bother - can't beat her insights). It's just me over here and I have more important things to do with my precious hours - still now that Anthony's luster has been wearing thin he's put his energy into discovering and honing new fresh faces to carry on the public show of the Republican/Libertarian strategic attack on science.

He seems to have transitioned into a ring-leader, perhaps mentor/coach would be better, producer? At least that's how Mr. Steele and his antics of the past year has gotten me to think about it. So in that regard this blog remains about WUWT's brand of thinking and logic and my struggle to understand the anatomy of the fraud they've perpetrated against mankind. {December 2014}

_____________________________

ok, now some recommended websites:

This blog was started in April 2013 and is written by an actual scientist so it has a refreshingly serious objective air to it, plus he does a good clear job of explaining complex issues.

And Then There's Physics.
~ ~ ~

Sou has some of the best {readability and detailed} examinations of Watt's antics I've seen - and she does have fun with certain characters.

She continues be the best at keeping up with Mr. Watts' and pals and their many deceptions.

The recent dirty tricks and attacks she is enduring are acknowledgment of how good she is at it.

http://blog.hotwhopper.com

~ ~ ~

Ben has been documenting Anthony's misdeeds longer than the rest of us.

http://wottsupwiththat.com

~ ~ ~

Tamino, an acknowledged statistical/mathematical expert of the highest order, at Open Mind also does an excellent job of holding Anthony’s feet to the fire with clearly explained facts and math. Check it out:
http://tamino.wordpress.com
~ ~ ~

And of course, there is the excellent, most up to date internet depository of climate studies and information for the non-expert public.

http://SkepticalScience.com

~ ~ ~

Then there's RealClimate.org the scientist's commentary site. Run by working climate scientists intended to help the interested public and journalists sort through the complexities of the climatology. They provide "quick response to developing stories and provide the context" that is too often missing from public media's depiction. {But, you better be serious and have some real science education/understanding under your belt if you want to keep up.}

http://realclimate.org

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

I remember back in da day, good websites/blogs were few and far between. But over the past years that's been changing to the point that it's impossible to keep up with them all. Here's an incomplete, and long overdue addition to my above list: