It is essential that a wide-ranging study of the issues, and open debate of the conclusions drawn, take place when the future of the quality (including the possible extinction!) of life on earth is brought into question.
The introduction of any deliberate distortion of facts is unethical and immoral. But this is what is happening in the debate over Climate Change/Global Warming.
4. Deliberate Campaigns of Disinformation
The introduction of any deliberate distortion of facts is unethical and immoral. But this is what is happening in the debate over Climate Change/Global Warming.
4. Deliberate Campaigns of Disinformation
Much of the material that follows is from Smoke, Mirrors & Hot Air: How ExxonMobil Uses Big Tobacco’s Tactics to Manufacture Uncertainty on Climate Science published by the Union of Concerned Scientists, an organization founded in 1969
by faculty and students of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
Scientists formed the organization to "initiate a critical and continuing examination of governmental policy in areas where science and technology are of actual or potential significance" and "devise means for turning research applications away from the present emphasis on military technology toward the solution of pressing environmental and social problems."
Scientists formed the organization to "initiate a critical and continuing examination of governmental policy in areas where science and technology are of actual or potential significance" and "devise means for turning research applications away from the present emphasis on military technology toward the solution of pressing environmental and social problems."
The most vocal
critics of the Union of Concerned Scientists assert that the organization
harbors a liberal
"pro-regulation, anti-business" agenda. The
UCS has also been criticized by skeptics of climate change.
In 2007, the conservative non-profit group Capital Research Center accused the UCS of waging a "jihad against climate skeptics", and televangelist Jerry Falwell even cautioned Evangelical Christians against "falling for...global warming hocus-pocus" propagated in the mass media, with the UCS "leading the charge".
In the following, the Union of Concerned Scientists documents an example of the use and abuse of the reputation of a famous scientist in order to put forth the case against Global Warming.
In 2007, the conservative non-profit group Capital Research Center accused the UCS of waging a "jihad against climate skeptics", and televangelist Jerry Falwell even cautioned Evangelical Christians against "falling for...global warming hocus-pocus" propagated in the mass media, with the UCS "leading the charge".
In the following, the Union of Concerned Scientists documents an example of the use and abuse of the reputation of a famous scientist in order to put forth the case against Global Warming.
In order to promote a
disinformation campaign against Global Warming evidence, ExxonMobil and its public relations partners recognized that they would need to cultivate new scientific spokespeople to create a sense among the public that there was a serious debate among scientists.
Toward that end a memo suggested that the team
"identify, recruit and train a team of five independent scientists to participate in media outreach.
These will be individuals who do not have a long history of visibility and/or participation in the climate change debate.
Rather, this team will consist of new faces who will add their voices to those recognized scientists who already are vocal."
Toward that end a memo suggested that the team
"identify, recruit and train a team of five independent scientists to participate in media outreach.
These will be individuals who do not have a long history of visibility and/or participation in the climate change debate.
Rather, this team will consist of new faces who will add their voices to those recognized scientists who already are vocal."
By the late 1990s, the scientific evidence on global warming was so
strong that it became difficult to find scientists who disputed the reality of
human-caused climate change.
But ExxonMobil and its public relations partners persevered.
In 1998, ExxonMobil helped create a small task force calling itself the “Global Climate Science Team” (GCST).
One member of the GCST task force, Steven Milloy, headed a nonprofit organization called the Advancement of Sound Science Coalition, which had been covertly created by the tobacco company Philip Morris in 1993 to manufacture uncertainty about the health hazards posed by secondhand smoke.
Ultimately this plan led to the involvement of (quoting now from the UCS report): Frederick Seitz, who has ties to both Big Tobacco and ExxonMobil.
Seitz is a prominent solid state physicist who was president of the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) from 1962 to 1969. Consider, for instance, one of Seitz’s most controversial efforts.
In 1998, he wrote and circulated a letter asking scientists to sign a petition from a virtually unheard-of group called the Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine calling upon the U.S. government to reject the Kyoto Protocol.
(The Kyoto Protocol is an international agreement that aims to reduce carbon dioxide emissions and the presence of greenhouse gases.
Countries that ratify the Kyoto Protocol are assigned maximum carbon emission levels and can participate in carbon credit trading.
Emitting more than the assigned limit will result in a penalty for the violating country in the form of a lower emission limit in the following period. The United States has not ratified the Protocol, though it has met the emissions goals embodied within it.)
So, returning to Seitz, he initiated a petition, fronted by the OISM, that solicited scientists to take a stand against the mounting evidence that Global Warming was occurring.
Now we need to examine three things:
1. What do we know about the OISM?
2. What do we know about Seitz?
3. What are the relevant scientific credentials of the signers of the petition?
But ExxonMobil and its public relations partners persevered.
In 1998, ExxonMobil helped create a small task force calling itself the “Global Climate Science Team” (GCST).
One member of the GCST task force, Steven Milloy, headed a nonprofit organization called the Advancement of Sound Science Coalition, which had been covertly created by the tobacco company Philip Morris in 1993 to manufacture uncertainty about the health hazards posed by secondhand smoke.
Ultimately this plan led to the involvement of (quoting now from the UCS report): Frederick Seitz, who has ties to both Big Tobacco and ExxonMobil.
Seitz is a prominent solid state physicist who was president of the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) from 1962 to 1969. Consider, for instance, one of Seitz’s most controversial efforts.
In 1998, he wrote and circulated a letter asking scientists to sign a petition from a virtually unheard-of group called the Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine calling upon the U.S. government to reject the Kyoto Protocol.
(The Kyoto Protocol is an international agreement that aims to reduce carbon dioxide emissions and the presence of greenhouse gases.
Countries that ratify the Kyoto Protocol are assigned maximum carbon emission levels and can participate in carbon credit trading.
Emitting more than the assigned limit will result in a penalty for the violating country in the form of a lower emission limit in the following period. The United States has not ratified the Protocol, though it has met the emissions goals embodied within it.)
So, returning to Seitz, he initiated a petition, fronted by the OISM, that solicited scientists to take a stand against the mounting evidence that Global Warming was occurring.
Now we need to examine three things:
1. What do we know about the OISM?
2. What do we know about Seitz?
3. What are the relevant scientific credentials of the signers of the petition?
The Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine (OISM) describes itself as "a small research institute" that studies "biochemistry, diagnostic medicine, nutrition, preventive medicine and the molecular biology of aging."
It is headed by Arthur B. Robinson, who has a long history of controversial entanglements with figures on the fringe of accepted research.
OISM also markets a home-schooling kit for "parents concerned about socialism in the public schools" and publishes books on how to survive nuclear war.
It is headed by Arthur B. Robinson, who has a long history of controversial entanglements with figures on the fringe of accepted research.
OISM also markets a home-schooling kit for "parents concerned about socialism in the public schools" and publishes books on how to survive nuclear war.
The OISM would be obscure, except for the role it played in 1998 in circulating a deceptive "scientists' petition" on global warming in collaboration with Frederick Seitz.
Seitz signed the
petition identifying himself as a former NAS president. He also enclosed with it a report asserting that carbon dioxide emissions pose no warming threat.
The report was not peer reviewed. But it was deceptively formatted to look like an article that had been published in The Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS), a leading peer reviewed scientific journal.
The petition’s organizers publicly claimed that the effort had attracted the signatures of some 17,000 scientists. But it was soon discovered that the list contained few credentialed climate scientists. For example, the list was riddled with the names of numerous fictional characters, including the crew of the Starship Enterprise.
The report was not peer reviewed. But it was deceptively formatted to look like an article that had been published in The Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS), a leading peer reviewed scientific journal.
The petition’s organizers publicly claimed that the effort had attracted the signatures of some 17,000 scientists. But it was soon discovered that the list contained few credentialed climate scientists. For example, the list was riddled with the names of numerous fictional characters, including the crew of the Starship Enterprise.
See, for instance, a review of the Seitz petition saga on the SourceWatch website, http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Oregon_Institute_of_Science_and_Medicine
It should be noted that the current website for the Oregon petition no longer includes fictional characters (such as doctors from the television show M*A*S*H).
A video report (produced by University of California Television) on this misadventure by global warming detractors can be seen at
A video report (produced by University of California Television) on this misadventure by global warming detractors can be seen at
Likewise, after investigating a random sample of the small number of signers of the Seitz petition who claimed to have a Ph.D. in a climate-related field, an article in a 2001 issue of Scientific American estimated
that approximately one percent of the petition signatories might actually have
a Ph.D. in a field related to climate science.
In a highly unusual response, the National Academy of Sciences issued a statement disavowing Seitz’s petition and disassociating the academy from the fake PNAS-formatted paper.
None of these facts, however, has stopped organizations, including those funded by ExxonMobil, from touting the petition as evidence of widespread disagreement over the issue of global warming.
For instance, in the spring of 2006, years after it had been discredited, the petition surfaced again when it was cited in a letter to California legislators by a group calling itself “Doctors for Disaster Preparedness,” a project of the Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine.
The Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine is only one example of an organized campaign of disinformation on the issue of Climate Change and Global Warming in particular.
I have presented its history at this length because its failure to adhere to the most basic criteria of honest promotion of a position is so well documented.
The word "Science" does not belong in its title. The institute has not submitted its claims to the review and criticism of scientists qualified to judge these issues.
In a highly unusual response, the National Academy of Sciences issued a statement disavowing Seitz’s petition and disassociating the academy from the fake PNAS-formatted paper.
None of these facts, however, has stopped organizations, including those funded by ExxonMobil, from touting the petition as evidence of widespread disagreement over the issue of global warming.
For instance, in the spring of 2006, years after it had been discredited, the petition surfaced again when it was cited in a letter to California legislators by a group calling itself “Doctors for Disaster Preparedness,” a project of the Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine.
The Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine is only one example of an organized campaign of disinformation on the issue of Climate Change and Global Warming in particular.
I have presented its history at this length because its failure to adhere to the most basic criteria of honest promotion of a position is so well documented.
The word "Science" does not belong in its title. The institute has not submitted its claims to the review and criticism of scientists qualified to judge these issues.
No comments:
Post a Comment