James Diamond, a chemistry professor at Linfield College (a great liberal arts college just south of Portland) had an op-ed in yesterday's Oregonian: "What you can do to cut your carbon footprint: Guest opinion," inspired by his recent trip to the American Chemical Society's national meeting.
Some people apparently think that such articles are not allowed. So they report you to to your boss and cc all their denier friends in their denier mailing group, who pile on and harass further with their personal emails (Those replies, there or here, are why comment sections exist).
Gordon Fulks is their ringleader, just as he was for the harassment I went through a week ago.
Fulks isn't content to merely comment on the article on the Oregonian's site (it's the second comment here) -- he sent it as an email to the president of Linfield College, as if he expected it would get Diamond reprimanded or fired.
By now Fulks schtick is clear: pretend he's sciencer-than-thou, accuse another scientist of "ignorance," and whine that no one pays him any attention -- as if a president of a college would give more than aHello everyone,
Linfield College Chemist Jim Diamond is promoting solutions to a 'problem' that he will not discuss and does not understand:
I wrote this response on Oregonlive:
Dear Dr. Diamond,
You and I have tried to discuss the science of climate on a number of occasions, but you refuse all substantive discussions. I have challenged you to debate the issue in front of your students at Linfield College, but you refuse.
After Linfield College allowed the notorious meteorologist Dr. Michael Mann to speak, I asked Linfield President Thomas Hellie to allow someone to provide the skeptical perspective, but he would not even return my telephone calls.
I suggested to you that you invite Professor of Physics Will Happer from Princeton University. Will is a member of the National Academy of Sciences and a Fellow of the American Physical Society. When he gave a lecture to Nobel Laureates at UC Berkeley, they listened attentively and asked good questions. When he gave the same lecture at a nearby junior college, the audience was disruptive. Is the intellectual tradition at Linfield College still lower than a junior college?
Neither you nor apparently any of your faculty have ANY background in climate science, yet you profess complete devotion to "the cause." Isn't that a bit outrageous for someone who considers himself a scientist? You are supposed to be able to discuss the logic and evidence on whatever topic you profess competence. Can you?
Gordon J. Fulks, PhD (Physics)
Corbett, Oregon USA
cc: Dr. Thomas Hellie, President of Linfield College
Fulks always cc's his buddies -- firstname.lastname@example.org -- who in this case quickly piled on with their usual piffle:
andWhat You Can Do To Cut Your Carbon Footprint: Guest OpinionWhat You Can Do To Cut Your Carbon Footprint: Guest Opinion, by Dr. James J. Diamond, professor of chemistry at Linfield College, and in the August 1 The Oregonian link at http://www.oregonlive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2014/08/what_you_can_do_to_cut_your_ca.html, is copied at the bottom of the page and concludes with the following statements,"Worldwide emissions now are 165 percent of those in 1988. If 1988 was the time to act to reduce CO2 emissions, what should we be doing now? It is up to us to act together to reduce our reliance on burning carbon."Dr. Diamond states above that worldwide CO2 emissions are now 165 percent of those in 1988 and that it is up to us to act together to reduce our reliance on burning carbon, but he will be relieved to learn that the NOAA National Climatic Data Center Climate at a Glance site at www.ncdc.noaa.gov/cag/ reports the official Oregon climate data indicating that:· Annual temperatures in Oregon's Climate Division 2 (The Willamette Valley) have trended downward at a rate of 0.3 degrees F per decade since 1988.· Annual temperatures in Oregon's Climate Division 2 (The Willamette Valley) have trended downward at a rate of 0.5 degrees F per decade over the last 20 years.· Annual temperatures in Oregon's Climate Division 2 (The Willamette Valley) have trended downward at a rate of 1.4 degrees F per decade over the last 10 years.Annual temperatures in Oregon's Climate Division 2 (The Willamette Valley) have trended downward at increasing downward rates since 1988, as indicated by the official NCDC data above, even while our worldwide CO2 emissions have continued to increase to 165 percent of those in 1988.
Karlock -- who on the Oregonian's boards seems to go by both his real name and "Logical Thinker" -- has trailed me on comment boards for years, always asking if "man's CO2 is causing dangerous global warming." Of course, a thoughtful reply never works -- he just asks over and over, because apparently he thinks it's a killer question -- or, at least, the only trick he has. So anymore I ask him to please define the word "dangerous," because it's not a scientific term but one of human values, but never replies to that, not even once, I think.Jim,
I saw you article in the Oregonian and have two questions:
1. Why do you believe that man?s CO2 is causing dangerous global warming?
2. What is the actual proof that man's CO2 is causing dangerous global warming?
Keep in mind that:
* Past warming periods such as the Minoen, Roman and Medieval were as warm or warmer than the present time.
* The ice core data used by Al Gore actually show CO2 following, not leading temperature.
* The historical temperature chart used by AL Gore showing a sudden recent increase in temperature is simply wrong and has been dropped from the latest IPCC report.
* Man emits around 5% of the annual CO2 emission, while natural sources emit about 95%.
* Water vapor causes more greenhouse effect than CO2.
* The rate of recent warming is within historical norms. (The late 1800s and early 1900s warming rates are statistically indistinguishable form the current according to CRU head Phil Jones in his BBC interview).
* Glaciers retreated faster in the 1930s (before most of man's CO2 emission) than recently.
* Climate warming slowed (or quit) 15 years ago (depending on data source and criteria) and the IPCC climate models did not predict this pause.
* Coincidence does not prove causation.
* Many, if not all, claimed extreme weather is actually not extreme when looking back a few hundred years, let alone compared to earlier times where no good records exist.
So it seems now you can't even write a simple op-ed in the Oregonian about climate change without them coming after you. You can't suggest how to lower your carbon footprint. Apparently you can't even claim that climate change is anthropogenic. With the science getting ever stronger, the harassment gets ever nastier.
Added 4:43 pm PDT: And it continues:
> From: email@example.com
> Date: August 2, 2014 at 6:47:52 PM EDT
> To: Gordon Fulks <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> Cc: email@example.com, Jim Diamond, Thomas Hellie
> Subject: Re: [GWR] Linfield College again displays ignorance
> Frankly most chemists know very little about the processes that lead to climate and climate change, and Diamond is a perfect example of one ignorant of the science. Why chemists and the ACS should feel the need to chime in on something they know so little about might be considered a mystery, unless they merely seek to cash in on the torrent of funding supporting continued alarmism. In any event this piece is simply a silly embarrassment to chemists, and to Linfield College, whatever that is.