See the Interview with Dr. Fred Singer about Global Warming and other issues.
Experts on Global Warming
Global Warming? Some common sense thoughts
Global Energy Rationing
Global Warming Swindle vs. Al Gore
Global warming labeled a 'scam'
Global Warming: The Cold, Hard Facts?
Science, Politics, and Death
The Global Warming Folly
Author Michael Crichton's Speeches
HOAX: Implementation of Kyoto Accord/Protocol
Interest in Kyoto Cools
Dang...I missed Earth Day
Eco whackos strike out on Consensus bid one more time.
The Environmentalists Are Wrong
US and Australia reject Kyoto Treaty
The Enviros: Some Notes for the Record
The truth about the environment- The Economist
Its not PC to blame Mother Nature
Badgering Bush on global warming
Here Comes the Sun to Further Cloud Global Warming Theory
Facts disprove warnings about global warming
Where rising hot air hits cold hard facts
Global warming claims 'based on false data'
Book: Hot Talk, Cold Science
Drown or drought? Enviros can't make up their minds.
Earth Worshipping Evangelicals?
The American Spectator - April 2000 - Some Like It Hot
WSJ: Global Warming 300-year-old news
Boston Globe: Scientists don't agree on global warming
American Association of State Climatologists
Global Warming Treaty and Business
Climate Change Fervour Cools
Letters to the Editor
Kyoto Accord Protest Quickening
Ozone Action Dirty Tricks 
Treaty Rejection Urged
  Your Input
Send a News Item
Diagnosing Al Gore: Truth in the Balance
Art Robinson Reponds to Petition Slander
Glenn Shaw - Atmospheric Scientist

Oregon Petition Project

Man Made Global Warming Debunking News and Views
Ozone Action Dirty Tricks
Washington Times, April 29, 1998

The Washington Times
3600 New York Ave, NE
Washington, DC 20002
FAX (202)832-2982

To the Editors:

Brandon MacGillis and his buddies at Ozone Action apparently don't know very many scientists, or they would recognize a lot of signers of the Petition they ridicule. But now that their lie about a "scientific consensus" on global warming has been exposed, what can they do? One possibility is to lie again, by planting one or more names on the petition. They could then "discover" the fake names and thereby try to impugn the more than 15,000 real scientists who did sign, using a crude and tawdry guilt-by-association ploy.

In attempting to counter the Petition with a previous Scientists' Statement, they do not tell the number of signatories (fewer than one-tenth as many), a place to find the list, or the wording of the statement they signed. One Nobel Laureate only recalls signing a petition to continue research.

The National Academy of Science has disavowed any association with the project. Fine: no one tried to give them credit for the project in the first place. Nothing in the package sent to signatories suggested NAS involvement, and few scientists would make the error of attributing sufficient courage to that organization. However, no member of the Academy has even attempted to refute any of the scientific points in the heavily referenced review article sent to signatories so that they could check the facts for themselves. The best that Bruce Alberts can come up with is a 1992 statement about "the great uncertainties."

Many scientists have probably been deterred from signing the Petition because their research funding depends on government agencies that have a heavy investment in finding "evidence" for impending doom. There being few alternatives to government funding these days, scientists are under intense peer pressure to be "politically correct."

The case against the global warming hypothesis has received very little media attention. I hope The Washington Times will help to correct the imbalance in coverage on this critical issue.

Sincerely yours,

Jane M. Orient, M.D.

Man Made Global Warming Debunking News and Views