A Nobel deed

Nobel laureate Ivar Giaever has resigned from the American Physical Society citing its stance on global warming:

Sent: Tuesday, September 13, 2011 3:42 PM
To: xxxx@aps.org
Cc: Robert H. Austin; 'William Happer'; 'Larry Gould'; 'S. Fred Singer'; Roger Cohen
Subject: I resign from APS

Dear Ms. Kirby

Thank you for your letter inquiring about my membership. I did not renew it because I can not live with the statement below:

Emissions of greenhouse gases from human activities are changing the atmosphere in ways that affect the Earth's climate. Greenhouse gases include carbon dioxide as well as methane, nitrous oxide and other gases. They are emitted from fossil fuel combustion and a range of industrial and agricultural processes.

The evidence is incontrovertible: Global warming is occurring.
If no mitigating actions are taken, significant disruptions in the Earth's physical and ecological systems, social systems, security and human health are likely to occur. We must reduce emissions of greenhouse gases beginning now.

In the APS it is ok to discuss whether the mass of the proton changes over time and how a multi-universe behaves, but the evidence of global warming is incontrovertible? The claim (how can you measure the average temperature of the whole earth for a whole year?) is that the temperature has changed from ~288.0 to ~288.8 degree Kelvin in about 150 years, which (if true) means to me is that the temperature has been amazingly stable, and both human health and happiness have definitely improved in this 'warming' period.

Best regards,

Ivar Giaever

It's funny, but I thought that scepticism on the global warming question was tantamount to being "anti-science". Isn't that what all the unthinking science gurus say - the Simon Singhs, the Paul Nurses, the New Scientist clique and the Scientific American gang and the Chris Mooneys and the George Monbiots?

How are they going to explain this?

Comments

[BBD]

John Hewitt

Thank you. I appreciate your saying it.

[Coldish]

An earlier comment refers to the Wikipedia stub on Giaever, where some interesting opinions are attributed to him:
"To me the greatest moment in an experiment is always just before I learn whether the particular idea is a good or a bad one. Thus even a failure is exciting, and most of my ideas have of course been wrong. But this time it worked! "
"If I have learned anything as a scientist it is that one should not make things complicated when a simple explanation will do."
"My own beliefs are that the road to a scientific discovery is seldom direct, and that it does not necessarily require great expertise. In fact, I am convinced that often a newcomer to a field has a great advantage because he is ignorant and does not know all the complicated reasons why a particular experiment should not be attempted."
Electron Tunneling and Superconductivity, Nobel Lecture [1] (December 12, 1973)
"If you want to do good research, it's important not to know too much. This almost sounds contradictory but really if you know too much and you get an idea, you will sort of talk yourself out of trying it because you figure it won't work. But if you know just the right amount and you get enthusiastic about your project, you go ahead, you do it and if you're lucky things'll work out."

[klem]

"He's old.......and male........and white!"

Oh Yes that's right, I forgot about the conservative white male explanation for CAGW denial. How foolish of me.