Facts Clear Astrophysicist Soon of Wrongdoing, Indict Journalists Covering Climate Debate

Willie SoonWillie Soon, Ph.D., is an astrophysicist in the Solar, Stellar and Planetary Sciences Division of the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics in Cambridge, Massachusetts.

Soon’s career has proven to be a textbook example of speaking truth to power and bravely facing the consequences.

Beginning in 1994, Soon produced an important series of astrophysics papers on the Sun’s impact on Earth’s climate, which received positive discussion in the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s (IPCC) second and third assessment reports, released in 1996 and 2001, respectively. Throughout the 1990s, IPCC still acknowledged there were uncertainties about humankind’s potential influence on climate, despite pressure from nongovernmental organizations to find a “smoking gun” in the weak data.

In his 2007 book History of the Science and Politics of Climate Change, Bert Bolin, co-creator and first chairman of IPCC, deplored the denial of uncertainty, writing, “It was non-governmental groups of environmentalists, supported by the mass media who were the ones exaggerating the conclusions that had been carefully formulated by the IPCC.”

In 1997, Bolin told the Associated Press, “Global warming is not something you can ‘prove.’ You try to collect evidence and thereby a picture emerges.”

Soon’s study about the influence of the Sun on climate made him a target for alarmists, but Soon had defenders. In a 2013, Boston Globe article, iconic physicist Freeman Dyson praised Soon.

“The whole point of science is to question accepted dogmas,” said Dyson. “For that reason, I respect Willie Soon as a good scientist and a courageous citizen.”

Unjustified ‘Conflict of Interest’ Claims

In February 2015, Greenpeace agent Kert Davies, a vocal critic of Soon since 1997, falsely accused him of wrongfully failing to disclose “conflicts of interest” to an academic journal he submitted research to. Despite the fact the journal’s editors and the Smithsonian Institution found no violation of their disclosure or conflict of interest rules, Davies’ accusation created a clamor amongst alarmist reporters, who repeated the claim without further investigation.

The Greenpeace ruckus brought pressure from the Obama administration on the Harvard-Smithsonian Center to silence climate skeptics. Smithsonian responded with an elaborate new “Directive on Standards of Conduct,” which forced its employees to wade through bureaucratic rules replete with an ethics counselor and a “Loyalty to the Smithsonian” clause.

Despite the pressure applied to Smithsonian, its inspector general found Soon had not broken any rules, prompting additional attacks from alarmists.

In March and April 2016, two outlets published stories scurrilously demonizing Soon, relying heavily on bogus claims. The two activist-writers, David Hasemyer, who worked for the controversial InsideClimateNews, and Paul Basken, who worked for The Chronicle of Higher Education, seem to have forgotten journalistic ethics and the facts.

Read rest…

Trackback from your site.

Leave a comment (newest first):

Comments (8)

  • Avatar

    amirlach

    |

    “Loyalty to the Smithsonian” clause eh? How classic leftist is that? Of course they mean loyalty to the groups thoughts.

    When instead they should observe a “Loyalty to the Scientific Method”, clause.

    The latter is almost always at odds with the groups way of thinking and grant funding.

    Reply

  • Avatar

    High Treason

    |

    Dr Soon should be able to sue and win. Although it is a long and tedious process, someone has to bite the bullet and send the message that blatant smear with unsubstantiated claims will not go unpunished. The Left will sue or threaten to sue at the drop of a hat , especially if the painful truth is revealed.
    Time to give them a dose of their own medicine. Each of the journalists who publishes false claims could well be liable to pay out quite a bit in compensation. There will be a limit to how much blind alarmist supporters will shell out to support the penalties, especially if it is several million. The donors will not be impressed that they are being asked to pay compensation to rectify blatant lies.
    I reckon what should be done in lieu of some of the financial penalties is LARGE retractions in many publications with a full statement of the skeptic positions that have been proved in court.
    Time to fight lawfare with lawfare and truth.If we can get rid of one of their biggest weapons-the propaganda of constant baseless smear and ridicule, the climate lies could be allowed to fade away in to obscurity.

    Reply

  • Avatar

    4TimesAYear

    |

    I had no doubts whatsoever. No one would blame him for suing, but I’m hoping that the so-called journalists have to face criminal charges for slander.

    Reply

  • Avatar

    Amber

    |

    Dr Soon is a hero. He stands for principles of science and has suffered abuse by people more suit to the policies of the German government of the 1940’s . Millions gave up everything to not be bullied by nut jobs trying to silence people .
    You would think of any one group the media would have a little longer memory . They are bought and gift wrapped to sell
    scary global warming .
    When people like the first chairman of the IPCC , Bert Bolin , say “Global warming is not something you can prove “, how do none scientists like AL Gore get off saying “the science is settled “. How is it the media sit on their hands eyes, closed tight ,
    and a big piece of masking tape over their mouths when bullying of highly qualified scientist like Dr Soon and many others is going on from yard apes who barely passed
    high school ?

    People like Dr Soon will not give into bully’s
    pushing a massive fraud that the earth has a fever . Let’s hope it’s warming because the world will be a lot better off than the alternative.As everyone who got through Grade 3 knows the climate changes with or without humans miniscule effect .

    Reply

  • Avatar

    amirlach

    |

    I highly doubt he would sue. This man has way too much integrity and class. He is a true scientist who deals in provable facts. This is why he will likely avoid the politics and showmanship of a suit.

    Reply

  • Avatar

    william

    |

    The sun doesn’t have that much to do with climate change. The colpert is “Bow Shock” from “Dark Matter”, Dark Energy”!!

    Reply

  • Avatar

    JayPee

    |

    [quote name=”william”]The sun doesn’t have that much to do with climate change. The colpert is “Bow Shock” from “Dark Matter”, Dark Energy”!![/quote]
    Just because the Sun has been a marvel of consistency for a long time does not make its effect on global temperatures any less profound.

    A 1 % variation in solar energy output is approx. a 5° F. temperature change ( approx. 3° C. ).

    Reply

  • Avatar

    Amber

    |

    The little clique of AG’s is an example of what is wrong with the USA . Government bureaucrats by passing voters to lobby for
    an industry receiving $$Billions in tax payer funding then trying to silence others . Is Dr Soon the type they hope to shut up?
    Can AG’s legally act as registered lobbyists ? Were the AG’s registered lobbyists before their press announcement
    with AL Gore ?
    What are the employment restrictions on AG’s acting as a lobbyist while in the full time employment of their respective States ? Did they take time off to pursue their lobby pastime ?
    How could they fulfill their duties and not disclose a massive conflict of interest when dealing with the industry they lobby for ?

    Dr Soon is a saint compared to the rent seekers in the earth has a fever industry .

    Reply

Leave a comment

Loading Disqus Comments ...

No Trackbacks.