Why did 17,100 independently verified scientist sign a petition against the Kyoto, Global Warming agreement?

Question

The text of the petition read as follows:

We urge the United States government to reject the global warming agreement that was written in Kyoto, Japan in December, 1997, and any other similar proposals. The proposed limits on greenhouse gases would harm the environment, hinder the advance of science and technology, and damage the health and welfare of mankind.
There is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane, or other greenhouse gasses is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth's atmosphere and disruption of the Earth's climate. Moreover, there is substantial scientific evidence that increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide produce many beneficial effects upon the natural plant and animal environments of the Earth.

http://www.oism.org/pproject/s33p37.htm

If these people are all in the oil and gas business, do they just not care about the planet that they live on?

Crabby, if it's a fake, why is the Oregon Institue of Science & Medicine hosting iton there website?

Crabby, if it's a fake, why is the Oregon Institute of Science & Medicine hosting it on there website?

The petition was conducted from 1999-2007 and according to the Oregon Institute of Science & Medicine, the signatories have been verified by an independent organization and the prankster names are addresed on the following webpage:

http://www.oism.org/pproject/s33p357.htm

Correction, the petition was conducted from 1999-2001.

Answer 1

So, Paul, what's your point? Are you saying that nobody's claim of a consensus is valid? Because if you take away AGW advocates' "consensus", it leaves them with computer models and very little else. Their concerns might warrant further investigation, but not any specific action on the scale suggested by the IPCC.

Answer 2

Scientist Petition Against Global Warming

Answer 3

This is very old and bogus news.

1) People with any sort of degree could sign the petition.

"2,660 scientists [15%] were trained in physical or environmental sciences... while 25% were trained in chemistry, biochemistry, biology, or other life sciences."

In other words, most had no background in climate science. In 2005, Scientific American reported:

“Scientific American took a sample of 30 of the 1,400 signatories claiming to hold a Ph.D. in a climate-related science. Of the 26 we were able to identify in various databases, 11 said they still agreed with the petition —- one was an active climate researcher, two others had relevant expertise, and eight signed based on an informal evaluation. Six said they would not sign the petition today, three did not remember any such petition, one had died, and five did not answer repeated messages. Crudely extrapolating, the petition supporters include a core of about 200 climate researchers – a respectable number, though rather a small fraction of the climatological community."

In a 2005 op-ed in the Hawaii Reporter, Todd Shelly wrote:

“In less than 10 minutes of casual scanning, I found duplicate names (Did two Joe R. Eaglemans and two David Tompkins sign the petition, or were some individuals counted twice?), single names without even an initial (Biolchini), corporate names (Graybeal & Sayre, Inc. How does a business sign a petition?), and an apparently phony single name (Redwine, Ph.D.). These examples underscore a major weakness of the list: there is no way to check the authenticity of the names. Names are given, but no identifying information (e.g., institutional affiliation) is provided. Why the lack of transparency?"

In May 1998 the Seattle Times wrote:

“Several environmental groups questioned dozens of the names: "Perry S. Mason" (the fictitious lawyer?), "Michael J. Fox" (the actor?), "Robert C. Byrd" (the senator?), "John C. Grisham" (the lawyer-author?). And then there's the Spice Girl, a k a. Geraldine Halliwell: The petition listed "Dr. Geri Halliwell" and "Dr. Halliwell."

Asked about the pop singer, Robinson said he was duped. The returned petition, one of thousands of mailings he sent out, identified her as having a degree in microbiology and living in Boston. "It's fake," he said."

Additionally, along with the petition they sent a "summary" of global warming science which was written by Arthur B. Robinson, a biochemist with zero background in climate science. Needless to say, the "summary" basically said global warming was a giant hoax. This is the information upon which people based their signatures.

The petition had a covering letter from Frederick Seitz, who as pointed out by Trevor is an oil executive previously employed by R J Reynolds Tobacco to counter claims that smoking was harmful.

Basically the petition is completely bogus.

Answer 4

Imagine for a minute that it is suddenly 1942 again and say these words: "Fifty million Germans can't be wrong". Just because some scientists may have signed a petition does NOT mean that there is no problem with global warming. The amount of people who used to believe that RNA viruses existed = zero, until somebody proved that they existed... and won the Nobel Prize for doing so. When it comes to science, numerical consensus does not add up to being correct.

Answer 5

Paul and blindguy would rather exchange insults than to stop and think that just maybe their side is invalid.
Valid or not,I will never believe in gw.I think the earth's weather moves in cycles.But even if my position were completely wrong,why do believers on this issue spend so much time trying to convince people of it. Wouldn't we all be better served if more time and energy be spent on improving the quality of life.Show people how to save money on home fuel for example and you'll have their attention.
The hybrid car they love so much has only been on the market for 2 years or so.Not because the tech.wasn't there,but because there wasn't any demand for it.
It's getting closer to being affordable now ($30,000 is out of my price range) and any car that gets 70 mpg (imp) is worth a look!
A geothermal unit can heat/cool a house for under $500 per year,but it cost $20,000 to install.Just a bit much.
My point to all this is if the link pasting scientist would spend more time helping the low income folks achieve affordable solutions rather than tax the hell out of ever thing that runs on gas BOTH would be satisfied.
Instead they want to impose carbon tax on companies.For what,to punish them?
That tax just gets passed on to the rest of us in the form of profit,so we are the punished.
Help make the solution that saves money and reduces emissions and I'm right behind you.

Answer 6

1) 17,100 scientists didn't sign the declaration. The number of signatories is continually dropping as more and more names are removed from it and supposed signatories threaten legal action.

2) It is 10 years out of date

3) Signatures were collected by e-mail with no verification of who was submitting them

4) 'Enviro-pranksters' submitted names including those of various actors and singers including the Spice Girls. Gerri Halliwell has signed it 3 times.

5) The petition has been investigated on a number of occasions by scientific organisations, lawyers and the media and on every occasion has been widely discredited.

----------------------

There are two well-known such petitions, one is the Leipzig Declaration and the other is ‘Oregon Petition’, both have been widely discredited. Øjvind Hesselager, a Danish broadcaster examined the credentials of the signatories to the Leipzig Declaration and concluded “only 20 of the names on the list had any scientific connection with the study of climate change, and some of those names were known to have obtained grants from the oil and fuel industry”
http://naturalscience.com/ns/letters/ns_let08.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leipzig_Declaration
http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/sptimes/access/22741240.html?dids=22741240:22741240&FMT=FT&FMTS=ABS:FT&date=Jul+29%2C+1996&author=DAVID+OLINGER&pub=St.+Petersburg+Times&edition=&startpage=1.A&desc=Cool+to+the+warnings+of+global+warming%27s+dangers+Series%3A+COLUMN+ONE

The Oregon Petition has some 19,700 signatories of which 17,800 are ‘verified’. There are serious concerns about the way in which the signatures were acquired. One examination of the petition by Scientific American found that many of the names were not of scientists, of those that were scientists some had never heard of the petition, of those who originally signed a significant number stated they wouldn’t sign again.

The man behind the petition is Professor Frederick Seitz, an oil executive previously employed by R J Reynolds Tobacco to counter claims that smoking was harmful.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oregon_Petition
http://www.ecosyn.us/adti/Seitz_Tobacco_Crimes.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frederick_Seitz

Answer 7

They are not in the oil and gas business.
Just think about it all of that locked up carbon used to be in the atmosphere (it is made up of dead dinosausers and plants) and when the carbon was in the atmosphere the planet was lush and green and full of life

Answer 8

"man made international warming" is what supposedly justifies the "cap and commerce" scam. If there wasn't any money in it i think of even Gore could profess severe doubts. inspite of each thing, decrease than a year in the past he replaced into marching interior the snow throughout an distinctly chilly iciness "demonstrating" on behalf of "cap and commerce".

Answer 9

What is the matter with the people who refuse to see what is really happening? We can discuss this to death, or we can start taking action! You won't get anything done debating here. Start emailing your legislators! It takes less time than doing this!

Answer 10

That fake "petition" has been floating around the Internet for years. No one takes it seriously.