[ExI] Hal Lewis' resignation from The American Physical Society

Richard Loosemore rpwl at lightlink.com
Sat Oct 9 18:07:38 UTC 2010

spike wrote:
>> ...On Behalf Of Max More
>> Subject: [ExI] Hal Lewis' resignation from The American 
>> Physical Society
>> As a result of the APS part in creating the fake "consensus".
> http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/10/08/hal-lewis-my-resignation-from-the-amer
> ican-physical-society/#more-26117
> Funny story for a Saturday morning.
> I was walking by my computer, saw Max's post with the title Hal Lewis'
> resignation... etc.  I wasn't wearing my reading glasses, and thought it
> said Ha! Lewis' resignation... etc, as one might say Ha! Yanks defeat
> commies in chess olympiad (assuming one is a yank who finds commies
> distasteful in general.)
> So I read the entire article, still thinking it was Max exulting over Lewis
> resigning from APS.  Then I noticed he wasn't actually exulting, but rather
> citing only, in a neutral manner.  So regardless of Max's unstated intent, I
> exult over this article, so Ha!  Hal Lewis resigned from APS.
> Reasoning: regardless of whether global warming is true or false, regardless
> of whether it is manmade or otherwise (and I see good evidence on all sides
> of these question) I have personally witnessed what looks to me like
> scientific malpractice on all sides of this issue, corruption by money and
> politics of a damn complicated question, claims of solid consensus on a
> topic in which reasonable doubt is perfectly legitimate.  
> It is perfectly OK to have a strong scientific opinion on a matter which is
> not yet completely settled.  But it is not OK to claim scientific consensus
> before it actually exists.  The jury may be about 8-4 on this, but it is
> still out of the room.  Lewis isn't actually claiming global warming is
> wrong or natural, only that the jury is still out on this one.

The LACK of a scientific consensus is only perceived by a scientifically 
illiterate, politically motivated group that will use whatever dirty 
tricks it can to pervert the course of normal scientific inquiry.

Or:  The jury is "only about 8-4 on this"?  Bullshit.

Richard Loosemore

More information about the extropy-chat mailing list