One of our bete noirs here at FemCon3 is the climate change game, because it’s been so intensely politicizied. Real science has been thrown by the wayside in favor of consensus, which has nothing to do with the scientific method. If we relied on consensus for our scientific method, we’d still believe the earth was the center of the universe.
So while numbers of people who agree or disagree on a theory don’t matter when you’re using the scientific method, it’s heartening that numbers of scientists are beginning to speak out against the shoddy methodology around anthropogenic global warming theories. Fifty former NASA scientists, engineers, and astronauts recently sent a letter to NASA, asking that it not use its name to back poor science, claiming the agency’s politicized take on the matter is ruining the NASA name:
March 28, 2012
The Honorable Charles Bolden, Jr.
Washington, D.C. 20546-0001
We, the undersigned, respectfully request that NASA and the Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) refrain from including unproven remarks in public releases and websites. We believe the claims by NASA and GISS, that man-made carbon dioxide is having a catastrophic impact on global climate change are not substantiated, especially when considering thousands of years of empirical data. With hundreds of well-known climate scientists and tens of thousands of other scientists publicly declaring their disbelief in the catastrophic forecasts, coming particularly from the GISS leadership, it is clear that the science is NOT settled.
The unbridled advocacy of CO2 being the major cause of climate change is unbecoming of NASA’s history of making an objective assessment of all available scientific data prior to making decisions or public statements.As former NASA employees, we feel that NASA’s advocacy of an extreme position, prior to a thorough study of the possible overwhelming impact of natural climate drivers is inappropriate. We request that NASA refrain from including unproven and unsupported remarks in its future releases and websites on this subject. At risk is damage to the exemplary reputation of NASA, NASA’s current or former scientists and employees, and even the reputation of science itself.
For additional information regarding the science behind our concern, we recommend that you contact Harrison Schmitt or Walter Cunningham, or others they can recommend to you.
Thank you for considering this request.