From Bishop Hill, news via Pierre Gosselin that the decision by SEII to disinvite speakers to a conference (including Dr. Fred Singer) has backfired, badly.
Gosselin is reporting that a prominent engineer has resigned from one of France’s [sic*] learned societies over its bad behaviour on climate change – SEII, which appears to be an interdisciplinary body, disinvited two prominent sceptics from its conference after pressure from the IPCC.
Thanks to Messenger for this rough translation of the resignation letter:
[excerpts]
It has come to my knowledge that the official document put out by the Secretary General n which he informed the Administrators that with regard to the Climategate affair.
…
For myself, to put it plainly, this action was nothing other than the trafficking of influence, based on defamatory declarations that you had not taken the trouble to verify yourself and you would have been better to admit that you had come under external pressure from SEII [for?] appearing to censure those who defended a point of view which was opposite to that of M. VAN YPERSELE and those authorities that he represents. These facts are incontestable, whatever casuistical arguments you are tempted to develop to suggest that I had committed a serious fault in procedure.
…
I can no longer accept that neither you nor the Executive Bureau share [the same] values which are dear to me and on which I have never compromised nor will ever compromise in the future. In consequence of which, I present you with my resignation from all the duties which I have performed on behalf of SEII. Also I no longer wish to appear on the list of members, nor to receive any more of your emails.
*Update: J-Cl Michel points out in comments it is actually one of Belgium’s learned societies
Wow!!! A climate scientist with ethics AND a pair.
Bravo!
I speak French. This is a much more strongly worded letter than we have seen in the Anglosphere. It borders on vitriolic. Good for him.
Unfortunately this resignation is representative of a rare indivual who works at the highest levels of science and who also has normal ethical standard.
We have seen a trickle of these resignations for over 15 years now and have yet to see any significant impacts. We need to see a lot more if the cancer eating away at science is to be cured.
Seems that those pesky “skeptics” are on a bit of a roll lately.
Since I (just a simple engineer that manages to reconcile my models with my complex system (most of the time)) do not belong to any of these scientific societies I am prohibited from resigning in protest. But if I could I sure as H—L WOULD.
Cheers, Kevin.
It’s appearing that some organizations can no longer put out press releases saying that their ENTIRE membership agrees with their CAGW stance.
Hopefully, we’ll see more of these scientists put out PUBLIC statements, not only commenting on the refusal to debate the science, but questioning the scientific process itself (releasing the data to see if results can be repeated, etc).
Of course, these “renegade” scientists will be denigrated, their pasts reviewed, their papers refused – the usual tactics from the “consensus”.
Heh, Paul, he knew he needed to bring the big one to flatten the fort.
============
Every day another bails. The smarter each is, the faster the departure.
…
They were fooled by imbeciles with a political or monetary agenda.
http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&js=n&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&layout=2&eotf=1&u=http%3A%2F%2Fnotrickszone.com%2F2011%2F09%2F24%2Fanother-professor-resigns-this-one-from-the-belgian-european-society-of-engineers-and-industrialists-seii%2F
he’s really angry and not mincing words
More evidence that no one should believe in ‘manmade global warming’.
Other scientists have resigned from organizations, Richard Feynman being a very famous example:
I was at the private alternative meeting where Singer and Johnson did speak, after the decision of SEII and the Free University of Brussels (ULB) to forbid the meeting at the ULB in their name. Interesting debate and a shame that this kind of debate is impossible in Belgium, while Singer a day before was invited at the KNMI (the Dutch meteorological institute), without problems…
gnomish @ur momisugly September 25, 2011 at 12:14 am
This is the best bit:-
Google translate:-
http://notrickszone.com/2011/09/24/another-professor-resigns-this-one-from-the-belgian-european-society-of-engineers-and-industrialists-seii/
More here
http://notrickszone.com/2011/08/30/ipcc-vice-chai-van-ypersele-suppresses-open-scientific-inquiry-disallows-critical-debate/
Amino Acids in Meteorites says:
September 25, 2011 at 12:50 am
great post to remind people of what ‘attitude’ in science is all about. I’d just graduated in 81, and I recall watching his interviews on the BBC – Feynman was a truly genuine inspirational type of scientist, with an enthusiasm that makes most ordinary science folks blush.
I’d meant to add that the scientific ‘attitude’ should always be to welcome views, critical or not, blase or serious ideas, even the seemingly plain ‘stupid’ ones (which often later turn out to be reasonable!). In my humble opinion, a true scientist is one who is always observing (and that includes looking and listening to others!).
Who resign ?
Henri Masson, engineer yes, but too Dr and honorary (retired) Professor of geology at University of Lausanne (UNIL), former director of ELSTE (University of Geneva and University of Lausanne, both in Switzerland) http://www.unil.ch/geoleman
Henri Masson always sign : Prof. Dr. eng.
Gosselin is reporting that a prominent engineer has resigned from one of France’s learned societies over its bad behaviour on climate change…
Please correct to : … from one of Belgian learned societies
[Thank you – footnote correction added as it is a direct quote ~jove, mod]
Well done that man, he speaks for science.
The translation is a bit ‘automatic’.
I only have schoolboy French, but I have provided a more fluent English translation. It is somewhat freer with the idioms, and in some cases I have had to make guesses about the underlying meaning since my vocab is so poor – it should not therefore be considered highly accurate. But it may prompt some better translator to improve it, and give it a wider circulation in the Anglophone world. At present no English-speaking journalist can really use the document…
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
Mr. President,
I have just read the official document drawn up by the General Secretary of SEII concerning the Climategate affair, which informs the Governors that the Board, by very large majority, retains its confidence in you, in spite of the clear evidence I have provided earlier of the lies that you have told them.
After having denied that you were involved, you appear to have continued to intervene (as the Secretary General makes clear in his letter to the Governors), orchestrating third-party protests through Professor Van Ypersele. It is clear to me that this was nothing more than a blatant attempt to apply pressure to our working group, based on defamatory statements which you have not taken the trouble to confirm. You have surrendered to forces outside SEII whose aim is to prevent any presentation of any views which oppose those of Professor Van Ypersele and their own position
These facts are undeniable, whatever justification you may try to produce to defend the serious transgression that you have committed.
Though there is no precise mandate for the activities of formation of the SEII, and in particular those covering the general discussion of the climatic controversy, I really cannot see why the normal procedures for this regular working group cannot be followed.
When an agenda or speaker for a SEII working group is being proposed, it is usual for this to be undertaken without an intervention from the Board. If this approach had been followed, there would have been no need for this unpleasant incident.
But, obviously, the Board are not interested in coherent and objective judgement.
Free discussion of subjects such as these are central to the remit of SEII. Trying to suppress this while citing specious procedural excuses does not become you. It would have been better for you to claim that you were persuaded to do this by Professor Van Ypersele, on the basis of the reputation he still enjoys in Belgium, in spite of his connections to the most radical branch of Greenpeace. I have given you a week to reconsider your position, and you have failed to do so.
I can only conclude that both yourself and the Board do not share a certain number of values which I hold to be central, and which I have never compromised nor ever will.
Therefore I formally resign all the positions which I hold within SEII. I do not wish to be included on your list of members, nor receive any mail from you in future.
In this matter that divides us I can now maintain my freedom to discuss my beliefs and put my case to whoever I may wish.
Sincerely yours,
Prof Dr. Ir. Henri A. Masson
CC: SEII Board
Disinvitation is dishonorable, and can be a really dirty trick, depending on the timing. Last-minute disinvitation is a form of censorship. If the speaker knew in advance that he would not be welcome at a particular venue, he could make plans to speak before a more open-minded group. This happened to a friend of mine, Glenn Burress, who has since died.
Although he had a Ph.D. in economics, Glenn considered himself to be a systems scientist. In contrast with the leading team-players in the macroeconomics field, Glenn successfully predicted all of the major economic ups and downs of the 1970s–including the Oil Shock of 1979.
Many years later, I proposed to the program committee of the annual Regional Gathering for Sacramento-area Mensa that we invite Glenn to give a presentation at the RG. They thought that it was a good idea, and we invited Glenn. When the Locsec at the time caught wind of the decision, she weighed in with ad hom attacks against Glenn–behind his back, of course. And Glenn was subsequently disinvited.
Glen was understandably POd, and he threatened to sue. The Locsec caved, and Glenn gave his presentation, as originally planned. Sometimes disinviters do get their comeuppances.
The IPCC’s objective is to show indications that CO2 is dangerous, and then to make influencal reports for the executive bodies. They want to put a stop to the usage of fossile fuels.
So they want a concensus view from an international body (themselves) so that the governments will start doing what is neccessary (in the IPCC’s view). Without troublesome inputs from sceptics.
The science is settled, start executing! That is the message. The more sceptics that resign, the better, they think. Keep the scepitcs out in the dark, forever forgotten. That is the goal.
Hurry,hurry, otherwise we are all doomed! They believe in the tipping point, you see. The idea that we have a stable regulator in there with negative feedbacks is preposterous to them. Therefore the fuzz around Spencer-Baswell’s paper. It should never have seen the light of day.
Call me Mr Cynical but could this have anything to do with the 3 recent papers regarding cloud feedback being neg rather than pos? There’s an old story about rats leaving the ship at it’s last port of call before it goes down. The good ship AGW has been holed below the waterline for years, perhaps some on board are now seriously worried about the efficacy of all that emergency caulking they stuffed in trying to keep it afloat?
ANSWER to MAROT: Please note Henri Masson form UNIL is my homonym.
“Dr. Ir.” is the Belgian oficial title for PhD in Engineering, that I got from the University of Brussels, Faculty of Applied Science & Engineering.
“Ir” is to be distinguished in Belgium from “Eng”. The first one (which is my title) refers to a M.Sc. cum laude (2 years bachelor + 3 years masters). Eng corresponds to four study years.
I have been affiiliated with the University of Brussels, University of Durban (SA), University Collerge London (UK), Cambridge University (UK), Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne (CH). I presently work on a part time basis at the University of Antwerp (Be) and at the Maastrichtt School of Management (Nl) beside my consulting work for international donors (USAId, EUAid, UNDP, etc.) on sustainable and local development in emerging economies.
My research focus is since several years on the analysis of complex “dynamical” (chaotic) systems (understand systems so coimplex and non linear that they become almost unpredictable on the medium and long term). Climate change and all the players moves around are my real favourite investigation playground, as it is a marvellous case for using my toolbox.
This information is only provided to avoid pending questionmarks on my identity and legitimacy. it is not who you are that is important but how you behave (especially when you have to deal with incomplete or biased information). I do not intend to develop a polemic on this specific issue with you, Margot
A prominent engineer? Wow. The renowned climate scientist Fred Singer? What a
loss for any learned society and for us all.
Pihlström <— a worm criticizing a lion.
I call for the resignation of IPCC vice president Jean-Pascal van Ypersele.
John