Author of AMS Paper Trashes AMS Climate Expertise
Neil Stenhouse, lead author of a paper accepted for publication by the Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, trashed the expertise of American Meteorological Society meteorologists in an article published yesterday in the UK Guardian.
Stenhouse, a psychologist who is a doctoral student in communications at George Mason University, emailed all American Meteorological Society (AMS) members for whom the AMS had a mailing address (excluding associate members and student members) and asked them to fill out an online survey on global warming. More than 1,800 AMS meteorologists filled out the survey, providing a highly representative view of scientists with meteorological, climatological, and atmospheric science expertise.
Only 52 percent of AMS meteorologists said global warming is occurring and is caused mostly by humans. The results are a huge blow to the mythical notion that all or nearly all scientists agree humans are causing a global warming crisis. This is especially the case considering the AMS survey reflected the views of scientists with atmospheric science expertise. This wasn’t a survey of engineers or chemists who have little if any atmospheric science expertise.
When I reported the results in an article for Forbes.com, global warming activists went into damage control overdrive, doing everything possible to downplay the results.
“Most AMS members are not climate researchers, nor is scientific research of any kind their primary occupation,” the Guardian claimed in its efforts to dismiss the survey results.
According to the Guardian, only 13 percent of AMS meteorologists have the expertise to speak knowledgeably about global warming.
Count Stenhouse among those quick to trash the credentials of AMS meteorologists after the survey results did not support his alarmist views.
“You only see low levels of consensus in the sample if you also look at the views of people who are not climate experts," Stenhouse told the Guardian.
So now you have the American Meteorological Society bureaucracy so eager to advance global warming alarmism that it will publish papers by authors who survey AMS meteorologists on global warming and then trash the expertise of those same AMS meteorologists.
At least AMS member dues are supporting a good cause.