l****z
发帖数: 29846 | 1 加州大学物理学家Hal Lewis退出美国物理学会，“人造全球暖化骗局，用以十亿计的
美元，俘虏了那么多科学家”
http://thegwpf.org/ipcc-news/1670-hal-lewis-my-resignation-from-the-american-physical-society.html
Hal Lewis: My Resignation From The American Physical Society
Friday, 08 October 2010 17:19 Hal Lewis
E-mail Print PDF
From: Hal Lewis, University of California, Santa Barbara
To: Curtis G. Callan, Jr., Princeton University, President of the American
Physical Society
6 October 2010
Dear Curt:
When I first joined the American Physical Society sixty-seven years ago it
was much smaller, much gentler, and as yet uncorrupted by the money flood (a
threat against which Dwight Eisenhower warned a half-century ago). Indeed,
the choice of physics as a profession was then a guarantor of a life of
poverty and abstinence---it was World War II that changed all that. The
prospect of worldly gain drove few physicists. As recently as thirty-five
years ago, when I chaired the first APS study of a contentious social/
scientific issue, The Reactor Safety Study, though there were zealots
aplenty on the outside there was no hint of inordinate pressure on us as
physicists. We were therefore able to produce what I believe was and is an
honest appraisal of the situation at that time. We were further enabled by
the presence of an oversight committee consisting of Pief Panofsky, Vicki
Weisskopf, and Hans Bethe, all towering physicists beyond reproach. I was
proud of what we did in a charged atmosphere. In the end the oversight
committee, in its report to the APS President, noted the complete
independence in which we did the job, and predicted that the report would be
attacked from both sides. What greater tribute could there be?
How different it is now. The giants no longer walk the earth, and the money
flood has become the raison d'être of much physics research, the vital
sustenance of much more, and it provides the support for untold numbers of
professional jobs. For reasons that will soon become clear my former pride
at being an APS Fellow all these years has been turned into shame, and I am
forced, with no pleasure at all, to offer you my resignation from the
Society.
It is of course, the global warming scam, with the (literally) trillions of
dollars driving it, that has corrupted so many scientists, and has carried
APS before it like a rogue wave. It is the greatest and most successful
pseudoscientific fraud I have seen in my long life as a physicist. Anyone
who has the faintest doubt that this is so should force himself to read the
ClimateGate documents, which lay it bare. (Montford's book organizes the
facts very well.) I don't believe that any real physicist, nay scientist,
can read that stuff without revulsion. I would almost make that revulsion a
definition of the word scientist.
So what has the APS, as an organization, done in the face of this challenge?
It has accepted the corruption as the norm, and gone along with it. For
example:
1. About a year ago a few of us sent an e-mail on the subject to a fraction
of the membership. APS ignored the issues, but the then President
immediately launched a hostile investigation of where we got the e-mail
addresses. In its better days, APS used to encourage discussion of important
issues, and indeed the Constitution cites that as its principal purpose. No
more. Everything that has been done in the last year has been designed to
silence debate
2. The appallingly tendentious APS statement on Climate Change was
apparently written in a hurry by a few people over lunch, and is certainly
not representative of the talents of APS members as I have long known them.
So a few of us petitioned the Council to reconsider it. One of the
outstanding marks of (in)distinction in the Statement was the poison word
incontrovertible, which describes few items in physics, certainly not this
one. In response APS appointed a secret committee that never met, never
troubled to speak to any skeptics, yet endorsed the Statement in its
entirety. (They did admit that the tone was a bit strong, but amazingly kept
the poison word incontrovertible to describe the evidence, a position
supported by no one.) In the end, the Council kept the original statement,
word for word, but approved a far longer "explanatory" screed, admitting
that there were uncertainties, but brushing them aside to give blanket
approval to the original. The original Statement, which still stands as the
APS position, also contains what I consider pompous and asinine advice to
all world governments, as if the APS were master of the universe. It is not,
and I am embarrassed that our leaders seem to think it is. This is not fun
and games, these are serious matters involving vast fractions of our
national substance, and the reputation of the Society as a scientific
society is at stake.
3. In the interim the ClimateGate scandal broke into the news, and the
machinations of the principal alarmists were revealed to the world. It was a
fraud on a scale I have never seen, and I lack the words to describe its
enormity. Effect on the APS position: none. None at all. This is not science
; other forces are at work.
4. So a few of us tried to bring science into the act (that is, after all,
the alleged and historic purpose of APS), and collected the necessary 200+
signatures to bring to the Council a proposal for a Topical Group on Climate
Science, thinking that open discussion of the scientific issues, in the
best tradition of physics, would be beneficial to all, and also a
contribution to the nation. I might note that it was not easy to collect the
signatures, since you denied us the use of the APS membership list. We
conformed in every way with the requirements of the APS Constitution, and
described in great detail what we had in mind---simply to bring the subject
into the open.
5. To our amazement, Constitution be damned, you declined to accept our
petition, but instead used your own control of the mailing list to run a
poll on the members' interest in a TG on Climate and the Environment. You
did ask the members if they would sign a petition to form a TG on your yet-
to-be-defined subject, but provided no petition, and got lots of affirmative
responses. (If you had asked about sex you would have gotten more
expressions of interest.) There was of course no such petition or proposal,
and you have now dropped the Environment part, so the whole matter is moot.
(Any lawyer will tell you that you cannot collect signatures on a vague
petition, and then fill in whatever you like.) The entire purpose of this
exercise was to avoid your constitutional responsibility to take our
petition to the Council.
6. As of now you have formed still another secret and stacked committee to
organize your own TG, simply ignoring our lawful petition.
APS management has gamed the problem from the beginning, to suppress serious
conversation about the merits of the climate change claims. Do you wonder
that I have lost confidence in the organization?
I do feel the need to add one note, and this is conjecture, since it is
always risky to discuss other people's motives. This scheming at APS HQ is
so bizarre that there cannot be a simple explanation for it. Some have held
that the physicists of today are not as smart as they used to be, but I don'
t think that is an issue. I think it is the money, exactly what Eisenhower
warned about a half-century ago. There are indeed trillions of dollars
involved, to say nothing of the fame and glory (and frequent trips to exotic
islands) that go with being a member of the club. Your own Physics
Department (of which you are chairman) would lose millions a year if the
global warming bubble burst. When Penn State absolved Mike Mann of
wrongdoing, and the University of East Anglia did the same for Phil Jones,
they cannot have been unaware of the financial penalty for doing otherwise.
As the old saying goes, you don't have to be a weatherman to know which way
the wind is blowing. Since I am no philosopher, I'm not going to explore at
just which point enlightened self-interest crosses the line into corruption,
but a careful reading of the ClimateGate releases makes it clear that this
is not an academic question.
I want no part of it, so please accept my resignation. APS no longer
represents me, but I hope we are still friends.
Hal
Harold Lewis is Emeritus Professor of Physics, University of California,
Santa Barbara, former Chairman; Former member Defense Science Board, chmn of
Technology panel; Chairman DSB study on Nuclear Winter; Former member
Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards; Former member, President's Nuclear
Safety Oversight Committee; Chairman APS study on Nuclear Reactor Safety
Chairman Risk Assessment Review Group; Co-founder and former Chairman of
JASON; Former member USAF Scientific Advisory Board; Served in US Navy in WW
II; books: Technological Risk (about, surprise, technological risk) and Why
Flip a Coin (about decision making) |
|
