Washington Times, April 29, 1998
The Washington Times
3600 New York Ave, NE
Washington, DC 20002
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.
Jane M. Orient, M.D.