http://www.heatisonline.org/contentserver/objecthandlers/index.cfm?id=4361&method=full
Three Journal
Editors Resign Over Paper by Skeptics
JOURNAL EDITORS RESIGN IN PROTEST OVER FLAWS IN
PAPER BY SKEPTICS
By Jeff Nesmith
Cox News Service, July
29, 2003
WASHINGTON -- A science
journal editor who recently published
an article questioning whether industrial emissions are driving
up the earth's temperature has resigned, saying he was not allowed
to publish an editorial repudiating the article.
The article was written
by two Harvard University scientists with
support from the petroleum industry.
``They submitted a
flawed paper,'' said Hans von Storch,
editor-in-chief of the journal, Climate Research. He said
that the journal's peer review procedure failed to identify
methodological flaws in the study.
However, owners of
the magazine, which is published in Germany,
refused to allow him to write an editorial saying the paper
was flawed, Von Storch said in an e-mail to Sen. James Jeffords,
I-Vt.
Cox Newspapers reported
in May that the paper was underwritten
by the American Petroleum Institute and promoted by nonprofit
organizations that receive support from energy interests,
primarily ExxonMobil Corp.
Jeffords announced
Von Storch's resignation, as well as that
of another Climate Research editor, Clare Goodess, in the
middle of a Senate Environment and Public Works Committee
hearing called in part to air the views of one of the Harvard
authors, astrophysicist Willie Soon.
The paper by Soon and
fellow astrophysicist Sallie Baliunas
argues that the current global warming trend is not unique
and that an even more dramatic episode occurred centuries ago,
before widespread combustion of oil and coal.
The paper, as well
as an earlier, almost identical article
by Soon, Baliunas and three other scientists, stated that
``across the world, many records reveal that the 20th century
is probably not the warmest nor a uniquely extreme climatic
period of the last millennium.''
That statement may
be true, Von Storch said, but it is not
supported by evidence cited in the paper. Most scientists
believe global warming is mainly caused by carbon dioxide
released into the atmosphere through the combustion of fossil
fuels.
Opponents of climate
change legislation have used the
Soon-Baliunas paper to challenge the need for legislation
restricting emissions of the greenhouse gases.
A bill introduced by
Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., and
Joseph Lieberman, D-Conn., to impose the first limits
on greenhouse gas emissions in the United States is
scheduled to come before the Senate this week.
Story Filed By Cox
Newspapers
-- -- ON THE SAME WEB
PAGE AS THE ARTICLE ABOVE -- --
Global Warming Skeptics
Are Facing Storm Clouds
By Antonio Regalado,
The Wall Street Journal, July 31, 2003
A big flap at a little
scientific journal is raising questions
about a study that has been embraced by conservative politicians
for its rejection of widely held global-warming theories.
The study, by two astronomers
at the Harvard-Smithsonian Center
for Astrophysics, says the 20th century wasn't unusually warm
compared with earlier periods and contradicts evidence indicating
man-made "greenhouse" gases are causing temperatures
to rise.
Since being published
last January in Climate Research,
the paper has been widely promoted by Washington think tanks
and cited by the White House in revisions made to a recent
Environmental Protection Agency report. At the same time,
it has drawn stinging rebukes from other climate scientists.
This week, three editors
of Climate Research resigned
in protest over the journal's handling of the review
process that approved the study; among them is Hans von
Storch, the journal's recently appointed editor in chief.
"It was flawed and it shouldn't have been published,"
he said.
Dr. von Storch's resignation
was publicly disclosed
Tuesday by Sen. James Jeffords (I., Vt.), a critic of
the administration's environmental policies, during a
hearing of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee
called by its chairman, Sen. James Inhofe (R., Okla.).
The debate over global
warming centers on the extent
to which gases released from the burning of fossil fuels --
mainly carbon dioxide -- are trapping the sun's heat in
the Earth's atmosphere, creating a greenhouse effect.
The political fight has intensified as the Senate votes
on a major energy bill. Sens. John McCain (R., Ariz.)
and Joseph Lieberman (D., Conn.) planned to introduce
an amendment this week that would cap carbon-dioxide
emissions at 2000 levels starting in 2010 for select
industries. The Bush administration is opposed to imposing
caps, and the measure isn't expected to become law.
The Harvard study has
become part of skeptics' arguments.
Mr. Inhofe, who is leading the opposition to the emissions
measures, cited the research in a speech on the Senate floor
Monday in which he said, "the claim that global warming
is caused by man-made emissions is simply untrue and not
based on sound science."
The paper was authored
by astronomers Willie Soon and Sallie
Baliunas, and looked at studies of tree rings and other
indicators of past climate. Their basic conclusion:
The 20th century wasn't the warmest century of the past
1,000 years. They concluded temperatures may have been
higher during the "Medieval Warm Period," the time during
which the Norse settled Greenland.
Dr. Soon couldn't be
reached and Dr. Baliunas declined
comment. In his testimony before Mr. Inhofe's committee,
Dr. Soon reiterated the findings of his study, which was
partly funded by the American Petroleum Institute.
Dr. Soon's findings
contradict widely cited research
by another scientist, Michael E. Mann of the University
of Virginia. Dr. Mann's reconstruction of global temperatures
shows a distinct pattern shaped like a hockey stick:
Temperatures stayed level for centuries, with a sudden
upturn during recent decades.
A reference to Dr.
Soon's paper previously found its way
into revisions suggested by the White House to an EPA
report on environmental quality. According to an internal
EPA memorandum disclosed in June, agency scientists were
concerned the version containing the White House edits"
no longer accurately represents scientific consensus on
climate change."
Dr. Mann's data showing
the hockey-stick temperature curve
was deleted. In its place, administration officials added
a reference to Dr. Soon's paper, which the EP A memo called
"a limited analysis that supports the administration's
favored message."
The EPA says the memo
appears to be an internal e-mail
between staffers but isn't an "official" document.
A spokesman at the White House's Council on Environmental
Quality says the addition of the citation to Dr. Soon's
paper to the draft report was suggested during an interagency
review process overseen by the White House.
Dr. Mann and 13 colleagues
published a critique of
Dr. Soon's paper in Eos, a publication of the American
Geophysical Union, this month. They said the Harvard
team's methods were flawed and their results "inconsistent
with the preponderance of scientific evidence."
Then, last week Dr.
von Storch was contacted by
Sen. Jeffords's staff, which was looking into the
paper in preparation for Tuesday's hearing, where
Dr. Soon and Dr. Mann were scheduled to appear. After
hearing from Sen. Jeffords, Dr. von Storch says
he decided to speed an editorial into print criticizing
publication of the paper.
But publisher Otto
Kinne blocked the move, saying
that while he favored publication of the editorial,
Dr. von Storch's proposals were still opposed by some
of the other editors. "I asked Hans not to rush the
editorial," Mr. Kinne said in an e-mail.
That is when Dr. von
Storch resigned, followed by
two other editors.
