Would you believe Climategate II is here? More emails have been disclosed, but this time they are from a National Academies of Science listserv. Apparently, climate scientists affiliated with the U.S. National Academies of Science are none too happy about how Climategate has tarnished the reputation of climate scientists, and have turned public opinion against belief in Anthropogenic Global Warming. So upset are they, that they have been planning a public campaign to restore their damaged reputation.
Their plan was to get officials at the National Academies and other professional associations to produce studies that endorse existing climategate research, and otherwise cause people to disbelieve the skeptics’ argument.
Stephen Dinan broke this story in the Washington Times today, and the Competitive Enterprise Institute has independently obtained copies of the e-mails.
Read the copies of the emails for yourself in this PDF.
We’re still reading them, but they make you think, shouldn’t scientists be focusing on research, not on playing politics? Shouldn’t they just publish their sicentific findings and let the chips fall where they may?
Paul Falkowski (bio) kicks it off with the first email of the bunch:
Date: Fri, 26 Feb 2010 22:14:13 -0500
Reply-To: NAS Section 63 Discussion
Sender: NAS Section 63 Discussion
From: Paul Falkowski
We are facing an increasingly ill informed, hostile public
regarding two areas in which we have expertise:
Obviously one is climate change.
The second is energy.
They obviously are connected and the NAS has not done a good
job of selling the former to the latter.
Anyone looking at blogs on climate change thinks that the
"climategate' debacle and at the hacking of UEA has undermined the
scientific basis of climate change.
Combined with the snows in the Northeast, many people may
think the arguments about climate change are dead.
I would like to invite all members of the NAS (Ralph -
please send this to all sections) - to sign a declaration that
there is clear scientific evidence that burning of fossil fuels by
humans will will alter the climate. I want that to be on the back
page of the NYT and other newspapers in the US, sponsored by the
NAS- without any outside contributions - unless they sign a
contract making it clear that the NAS will not endorse any private companies.
For this - I offer $1000.00 of my personal funds- but I will
only donate these funds if 50 members of the NAS come with matching funds.
I will accept corporate sponsorship at a 5 to 1 ratio; but
only to be sure that the corporate funds sponsor the NAS. .
Second, we are facing an incredible misunderstanding of key
issues in science across the the spectrum of science.
We have no PBS program on science.
I want the NAS to begin discussions with PBS on developing a
national science program for prime time.
I want science to be on Thursdays at 8 PM - and repeated for
all schools across the nation - streaming.
I want us to find government and corporate sponsorship.
I think, from private conversations with producers in
Hollywood, there is an opportunity.
But, even if not, we need to develop a face on TV and Radio
that is real science -
My big conversation
I want the NAS to be a transformational agent in America -
Possibly related posts: