Maybe the title is a bit dramatic? Well, I figure when a Oregon AMS (American Meteorological Society) meeting makes good fodder (it did today) for local conservative radio talk shows, it should be something I mention here on our weather blog. Sure they’ll move on to something more spicy tomorrow but let’s chat about it.
Here’s the story:
For the past 5 weeks or so, our local AMS chapter has had a meeting scheduled at OMSI (we just use their space, they don’t participate) for tomorrow, Tuesday, the 29th. The subject matter is global warming; we’ve had a few of those talks in the past, along with a climate debate with the previous State Climatologist George Taylor and current State Climatologist Phil Mote. In the past year or so the AMS Executive Committee (I’m the Secretary) has been approached by some of the critics of the human-caused global warming theory. They’d like to present their thoughts. So we decided to give them a podium for the night. No big deal, at least to us. One is a meteorologist (Chuck Wiese) and the other is a physicist (Gordon Fulks). The meeting is all scheduled, and just 5 days before, OMSI abruptly cancels it.
Here is the Oregon AMS press release sent to our members, cancelling the meeting:
We have apologized to the AMS for the inconvenience that this has caused. OMSI is unwavering in our commitment to provide life-long science opportunities for children and adults. We have extended a formal invitation to the AMS to jointly develop and co-host a public forum on the science behind the human impact on climate change. We look forward to setting a date for this event and communicating it out soon.”
This is our Executive Council’s reaction to their press release (released this evening)
For what it’s worth, I believe OMSI has the right to do whatever they want since it’s their auditorium. I’m not sure whether or not they are subsidized…if they are that’s a whole different story. But if they’re not, this would be akin to expecting Rush Limbaugh to allow pro- global warming scientists take up half of one his shows to explain their theory. Rush Limbaugh would never do that, nor would I ever expect him to.
Secondly, I think it was just foolish of the AMS to plan this. Filling up half of their winter wx workshop with climate change skeptics, then having another full meeting of skeptics really comes across like AMS is taking a side. It would have been MUCH smarter to have a debate.
Out of everything I’ve read today this post makes the most sense out of all of them. Thanks for posting this WhiteEagle.
Thanks Mike!
Well, I agree that its OMSI’s auditorium. However comparing a scientific discussion at OMSI to Rush Limbaugh is nothing but a straw man argument.
To quote Mark below: “By the way, the AMS Board made it very clear that there was to be no political talk at today’s meeting; that was for OMSI and the speakers. And the speakers agreed. It was to be focused on the science and data only.”
I’m not sure where to start with your second paragraph…
Calling the AMS’s plans foolish doesn’t help anything. And I doubt they would call it climate change skepticism; it would be more like “man-made global warming skepticism on a significant scale” skepticism.
AMS has taken a side. Here is an excerpt from their public statement “Despite the uncertainties noted above, there is adequate evidence from observations and interpretations of climate simulations to conclude that the atmosphere, ocean, and land surface are warming; that humans have significantly contributed to this change; and that further climate change will continue to have important impacts on human societies, on economies, on ecosystems, and on wildlife through the 21st century and beyond” http://www.ametsoc.org/policy/2007climatechange.html
Mark rates himself a 6 or 7 on the human global warming theory, with a 10 being the world ending.
The issue in my mind is scientific debate being stifled. Plus its just rude to cancel the meeting a few days before the event.
I think we’ll just have to agree to disagree about the “straw man argument” you’re suggesting I’m making. I think my comparison is pretty accurate.
As for suggesting the Oregon AMS was foolish for planning this, hopefully they can realize how foolish they were so they don’t damage valuable partnerships like Oregon AMS/OMSI in the future. I am aware of the AMS position of climate change; I’m talking about the Oregon AMS here.
I was frankly surprised that OMSI would allow themselves to be used as a platform for a one-sided argument that runs counter to mainstream science, not once, but twice. In the end it appears they allowed it because they weren’t aware of what was happening. Once they were informed of the topic, they came to their senses…in my mind.
As for the timing, we really don’t know who knew what and when, so I can’t really have an opinion on that. I do know in the end, it’s pretty obvious Oregon AMS damaged OMSI’s trust in them by not letting them know the purpose of the program when asking to use OMSI’s space…regardless of if it’s justified or not.
It just wasn’t a good move.
Curse thIs rain for messing up the beginning of our inversion!
Okay Okay…. If the weather is getting on ya nerves…. Here’s something you can start wishcasting for a little while! ^_^
I recognize that loop! That was a fun day!
Everyone here has good points about the canceled OMSI meeting but ultimately they reserve the right to do what they want regardless if me or anyone else likes it or not 😦
BTW.. if anyone is interested there is a group on Facebook which includes most of the people already posing here on Mark’s blog 🙂
*posting