A new professional society for meteorology and climatology is announced

The Open Atmospheric Society takes a new approach to atmospheric science, becoming the first international society of its kind to be a cloud-based online organization



September 16, 2014 – The Open Atmospheric Society, known as “The OAS” for short, announces its formation, and readiness to accept charter members. The purpose of The OAS is to provide a paperless and entirely online professional organization that will represent individuals who have been unrepresented by existing professional organizations that have become more activist than science based in their outlook. It also aims to provide a professional peer reviewed publication platform to produce an online journal with a unique and important requirement placed up-front for any paper submitted; it must be replicable, with all data, software, formulas, and methods submitted with the paper. Without those elements, the paper will be rejected. This focus on replicability up front is not found in other similar organizations that publish scientific results.

John Coleman, Founder of The Weather Channel had this to say

It is very gratifying to hear of the formation of The Open Atmospheric Society. A new Meteorological organization and scientific publication have been greatly needed for more than a decade. It is unfortunate that the American Meteorological Society has become totally politicized and conducts itself in total violation of the basic scientific principle of open debate; encouraging competing points of view to be presented and published.

I allowed my Professional Membership in the AMS expire many years ago after being an active member, attending National Conferences and reading The Bulletin of the AMS for many years. Several events occurred that made it clear to me that the society was in the control of people who were using it to complete their personal agendas and the Society would was becoming closed and dogmatic. I look forward to membership in the OAS.

Joseph D’Aleo AMS Fellow, and Certified Consulting Meteorologist adds:

The AMS, AGU and other professional society editors have slow-walked and thrown up obstacles to papers that challenge the “consensus” position, usually forcing authors to go elsewhere to publish their work. They have fast tracked other papers when issues arose that threatened that position. The AMS had policy advocacy as one of the top organizational goals. A professional scientific society should only advocate for good science and leave the policymaking to those elected to determine the policies based on the very best science.


The OAS, whose motto: verum in luce means “truth in the light”, offers not only a place for a free exchange of ideas, but a unique Internet cloud-based journal publishing platform providing emphasis on open review and reproducibility requirements up-front. Here are a few points of interest:

  • Open membership— Associate members, anyone who has an interest in atmospheric science, can join at a basic rate, providing interdisciplinary membership. Professional full voting members, will require a degree in atmospheric sciences or related earth or physical science disciplines, or three published papers in these subjects. Student members get a reduced rate, similar to associate members with option to full member elevation. More details at The OAS Charter.
  • Open journal— The Journal of the OAS will be free to read by the public. Open science— a transparent online peer review process
  • No other journal asks this upfront: strict OAS Journal submission requirements—technical submissions to the Journal by members must include all source data, software/code, procedures, and documentation to ensure reproducibility of the paper’s experiment or analysis by external reviewers.
  • Author account—each author and co-author will have accounts for collaboration, submitting papers, making edits, and responding to reviewers.
  • Emphasis on reasonable publication turnaround, 3 months or less.
  • DOI’s will be assigned and provided with each publication.
  • The OAS will offer press releases and web video assistance for authors to explain papers clearly and effectively to the general public. It will also occasionally offer statements and positions regarding atmospheric science as it relates to current news.
  • Organizational activity will be conducted entirely online – This means no costly brick and mortar infrastructure, no costly postal mailings journals, and no need for warehousing paper files and publications.

The formation of The OAS represents a new way of conducting the scientific method, and welcomes those who feel their professional interests are not being served with the current collection of professional societies who focus on meteorology and climatology. The upcoming Journal of the Open Atmospheric Society has been assigned an official ISSN publication number by the Library of Congress (ISSN 2373-5953) and is registered with CrossRef, the world’s leading scientific publication identifier providing Digital Object Identifiers (DOI) for publications.

If you would like more information about this new society, please e-mail us at contact (at) theoas dot org or visit online at http://theoas.org to learn more or to become a member.

# # #

Follow The OAS on Twitter, here: https://twitter.com/The_OAS

Personal Note:

This is a project that has been two years in the making and was borne out of feedback in this WUWT poll in May 2012:

Many, many, people have provided input that helped shape the concept, and a full launch had been planned for June of this year, but as Murphy’s Law would have it, the Annotum publishing platform used for the Journal became non-functional due to a major software upgrade introduced by WordPress in May. We had to wait for the issue to sort itself out, and now that it has, we have the final green light for the official launch. Here is what the workflow looks like:

OAS_workflow_mapDr. Roy Spencer once said to me that trying to organize climate skeptics would be like “trying to herd cats”. While this Society is not trying to “herd” anyone, nor is it specifically focused on climate skepticism, it will serve to represent a group of people and ideas that up until now has been essentially ostracized because the ideas and viewpoints are counter to “consensus”. Until now, there has not been an organization that represented those people who feel that the other organizations have lost their way. Now, there is.

Feedback from members is going to be our most important asset. Participation will be the engine that drives change. Asking for replication up front will also drive change. While a replication requirement by itself does not guarantee that a scientific paper will be unfalsifiable (all the math and data could be valid, but the premise and/or conclusion can still be wrong), it is a step in the right direction that other atmospheric science journals have yet to demand. Imagine if Cook’s 97% paper or Mann’s Hockey sticks had replicability requirements before publishing.

Further announcements, calls for papers, and organizational notices will be posted in the coming days and weeks. In the meantime, you can get familiar with the charter, the goals, and the publishing platform.

Right now, membership is the most important goal. I encourage everyone who reads WUWT to become a member, or an associate member . Like any organization, it starts out small with an idea, and grows as momentum builds. As the momentum builds, so will the organization. My role is to put all the pieces in place, and help it grow.

For the inevitable naysayers, here is one of my favorite quotes from Winston Churchill:

“You will never reach your destination if you stop and throw stones at every dog that barks.” ― Winston Churchill

Thank you for your consideration. – Anthony Watts


newest oldest most voted
Notify of

The Open Atmospheric Society is going to be cloud based. I’m sure there’s a joke in the somewhere.
BTW, congratulations to everyone involved in setting this up.

Greg Goodman

Joke, I’m not sure but it is ironic.


How about “prophetic!!!”

Sorry Greg, but it isn’t ‘ironic’.


Sorry ghost, you are wrong.

Will they accept cloud-based feedback?
It’s quite negative. 😉


It’s a breath of fresh air in the polluted fog of climate research publication?


It’s sure to rain on a lot of people’s parades.
Personally, I prefer the stance that sunlight is the best disinfectant.


I was thinking the same thing…
Since the mainstream GCM’s are ignoring clouds it’s nice to see someone pay attention to them.

I got misty just thinking about it.

Great idea and good for everyone involved in making this come about.

Greg Goodman

Congratulations !
This will be a milestone in the recovery of science.
Existing structures that have been to shy to take action or been part of the corruption of science will be left behind.
Great news.


Can I hope for a success that will help bring other organizations in line with science?

Steve Keohane

Congratulations to all involved.

Welcome OAS!

Travis Casey

Best of luck with this endeavor. I fear that the establishment science community will treat this like they do open debate. There will be an aversion to publishing in the journal so as not to legitimize it. Then they can compare it to Fox News and laugh. The model-based “science” will still have their pet publications for alarm. At least it is a step in the right direction.

Ian W

I fear that the establishment science community will treat this like they do open debate. There will be an aversion to publishing in the journal so as not to legitimize it.
To which the response will be that they are only posting in those paper journals because they cannot meet the higher scientific standards of the Open Atmospheric Society, and are afraid of the public exposure of their data and methods.


Great initiative, congratulations.

Can I join as a drinking member? (Brit term for a non-participatory supporter)

It appears that being either an Associate Member or simply making a donation would qualify you to buy yourself a drink.


A good bottle of strong Spanish Vino Tinto helps any discussion.


grumpyoldmanuk – only if there is an empty stool in the pub for me to join you!! Cheers!

Bob Shapiro

Is Kenji Watts allowed as an Associate Member?

Frank K.

Congratulations, and I wish everyone involved great success in this venture.
However, expect a vigorous pushback from the Climate Industry(tm)…


“would was” typo in John Coleman’s quote.
(Is there a different way to inform WUWT of typos so that the discussion threads are not interrupted?)

Steve R

You could just go with the flow and ignore them.


“Go with the flow” crowd is currently infecting too much of climate science.

Robert Wykoff

Although, everybody “hates” the spelling and grammar nazis, many people find misspellings at the very least annoying and completely “distracting” from the flow of the text, but also it gives a feeling that the website is unprofessional, and thus makes it easier to dismiss and not take seriously. Yes, the science and the discussion are way more important than the spelling and grammar, but spelling and grammar is not that hard to fix, and there is no point giving detractors any low hanging fruit. But I do agree, there should be a way to alert the moderators outside of the comment threads.
[Life happens. Tell us. .mod]


Well OK, here is a minor one:
Under “Goals”
“To be paperless, easing the burden on the environment,and without need for a central office all business and publications done online.”
needs a space after the second comma for easier reading

I generally don’t point out typos unless I have some worthwhile comment to make, then I just tack it on at the beginning. And if no one else has pointed it out.

Ray Donahue

I have read, and it is my experience, that most readers simply “auto adjust” for typos and read the phrase/sentence as though the typo wasn’t present. In other words, most minds glide over the minor typos.


Having taught at the university level since 1970, I tell my students that the term papers they turn in are practice assignments for grant writing and resumes.


I went to the WordPress site years ago and suggested that WP include, in its “Report” button, and option to report a typo. I was told I could do it myself with a macro or some similar programming technique as long as I wasn’t being hosted by WP.
A jerkish response (it should be built-in, and in both versions. It’s similar to the jerkishness underlying their recent repulsive editor-feature.


Is the OAS a 501(c)3?

Duke C.

Section 7. The OAS shall operate initially as an incorporated organization, with the goal to gain recognition as a non-profit organization, heeding all State and Federal Requirements for such a designation.

Steve R

What will there policy be regarding IRS demands for their membership lists?


Personally I’m not worried about the membership list going to the IRS or being made public, at least for myself. Other skeptics who wish to remain in the closet likely may have a different opinion on the matter I realize.
Any confidential membership lists the IRS gets of political rivals to the current Democratic Party administration is likely to get funneled to that organization’s political rivals. For background on how corrupt our IRS has become, read what happened to another 501(c)4’s membership list and confidential tax filings.
BTW: the IRS simply paid a $50K “fine” (US taxpayer’s money of course) to NOM. And the Justice Dept has refused so far to follow up on the matter and prosecute the individuals involved.
I just worry about shenanigan’s going on at the IRS these days against Democrat’s political rivals and those they see as opposing the Liberal agenda. The IRS could contrive an excuse to revoke 501(c)3 status some year or more down the road. A 501(c)3 that get its Non-profit status revoked either faces very costly litigation against the IRS in an appeal, or if they capitulate, then they cannot file for (c)4 status. They become For-profit corporations and must pay taxes on all income (dues, publication fees, etc), and any donations are not tax-deductible. Just suppose (future hypothetical) the editor wrote an Opinion piece criticizing say presidential-candidate Hillary Clinton’s stand on claiming “settled science” in Climate Change, IPCC propaganda etc. Politically-motivated operatives in the IRS could stretch the rules and try to revoke a (c)3 status. Just a cautionary thought.


Happy Birthday OAS!
What a welcome change in the climate community!
Great thanks to those who founded this.
Hopefully “closet climatology” will finally become a thing of the past.
Regards Ed


More details at The OAS Charter…. link not working???


I’m signed up as an associate. I don’t drink.
They may laugh at this in public, but behind closed doors… they will be sweating. This is an important initiative.Get something published from Judith Curry right away.

Mark this day, Anthony.
Today you have taken a giant leap to help keep those in science, and science itself, honest.
Congratulations to all involved.


Congrats! Lifetime Founding Associate Member application and payment submitted.

Me too.
As to the thought above that people are going to diss this org? Oh yeah? Who you gonna’ believe? A sneering Guardian article written by one person mocking science findings he doesn’t provide the full evidence for, or a replicable peer-reviewed paper with accompanied data and software methods available online for free for everyone to read?
Who do you think politicians are going to reference once they realize that the public is reading these papers? And that this org is global?

Reblogged this on Sierra Foothill Commentary and commented:
I have joined as a charter member.

Dr. Roy Spencer once said to me that trying to organize climate skeptics would be like “trying to herd cats”.
A herd of cats? No such thing.
Think of it more as Pride of Lions.

Robbin Harrell

I joined the Pride!


Lions? Does Bastardi know about this?

Alberta Slim

Herd is being used as a verb.
That is why there is no such thing as a herd of cats. They cannot be herded.
No? ;^D

johann wundersamer

Deeply impressed.
Sounds like hard work has been done; more waiting.
Best wishes on the way ahead.


it must be replicable, with all data, software, formulas, and methods submitted with the paper. …..
I hope that works out…….it’s going to be difficult with most of the facts being conjecture, and most of the history fabricated

Brad Rich

What? Conjecture and fabrication? You’ve slipped between your alarmist site and this without noticing.


If anyone can join, it’s hardly “professional”


Only professions can vote

Allowing layman (laywomen?) to be able to view and feel that they are part of the proper scientific process is somewhat of an honor, and one, I might add, that I will be proud to embrace.


In fact, many professional, scientific societies accept the membership of avocationalists and even interested laymen. The problem seen in publishing research, as exemplified by the collusion in the Climategate emails, is an endemic problem in all of science and far beyond. Cliques tend to seize control of the power to define “professional” and “qualified.” Once that happens, the society ceases to produce new, productive research lines in favor of “consensus.” The upshot is the emergence of “professional” societies that are more social than scientific. New ideas, different ways to looking at phenomena, “stupid” questions that on second thought are not so stupid rarely emanate from in-groups. They tend to emanate from mavericks, and from simple souls who simply want to understand and encountered an explanation that failed Feynman’s requirement of being understandable to most. Members of in-groups that do become original thinkers or consider “non-consensus” views of phenomena seriously are at hazard of being effectively ostracized, cut off from access to funding and to instruments and data collection possibilities.
There are “problems” of course. Letting “anyone” in means that you encounter ideas that range from startling, feasible alternative views through science fiction to outright nonsense.

“So-called “Professionals” in climate science are the problem. I am not a professional climate scientist. When someone tells me that a 380 PPM natural trace gas DRIVES the temperature of our atmosphere, not the Sun, I know it’s baloney. No credentials required.

Professionals authored all the climate models that are doing so splendidly.

Lots and lots of serious professional orgs have associate memberships for people interested in their topic. But they are not considered professional members.

Bloke down the pub

Will Michael Mann be offered an Honorary Life Membership, seeing as he played such an important part in creating the need for the OAS?

Michael Wassil

I think Mark Steyn is working on Mann’s just desserts as we speak.

Ian L. McQueen

Having made the same mistake myself and having had it pointed out politely, I will continue the practice by saying that it is actually “deserts” (related to “deserve”) while being pronounced like “dessert”.
Ian M

Michael Wassil

Thank you! I looked it up (only after your correction, unfortunately). ‘Just deserts’ is an idiom and I should have known that. The ‘just dessert’ for Michael Mann would be humble pie, with a topping of minced crow.


“Use every man after his deserts and who shall ‘scape a whipping?”

Great move.
Sincere best wishes.
Well done Anthony et al.


I am a Fellow of the AMS but dropped my membership several years ago due to its political bias. This organizations sounds like a great idea. I will join and I wish it great success.


Curious to know why the Full Membership category excludes persons with degrees in the biological sciences since the biosphere affects climate. Knowledge of biological organisms and systems has been neglected by much of the climate science community to the detriment of progress in the research. I hope this is just an oversight.


The membership requirements appear to be a degree in certain fields or the publication of three papers related to these fields. So, it seems that a person with a degree in biological sciences who has since specialized in climate matters would be eligible.


It says “or physical science disciplines”, that does not mean physics.. Biology is a physical science.
It excludes social scientists, political scientists, psychologists, journalists and cartoonists, for example.


Best of luck and success, I’m sure there are thousands of your supporters like me would like to join but do not have the funds but wish you well, the truth deserves it.

James Strom

Congratulations to the creators.


Who can join?

Anyone for associate membership. Science/engineering degree for full membership. Follow the links to get the whole story.

Anthony, from the website: “Our motto: verum in luce means “truth in the light”.”
Maybe it should be included on the banner?


Reminds me of the good old days at the University of Chicago when two inhouse journals: The Journal of Political Economy and the Journal of Law & Economics played leading roles in reversing some widely held economic paradigms related monetary theory and antitrust economics. I hope OAS can play the same role in overturning beliefs about climate change.
As an aside, I hope you did check into the fact that an OAS (Organization of American States) already exists. People doing searches on Google or other search engines will be easily confused.


I am happy to see such an initiative emerging – time to get atmospheric sciences some fresh air. However, I have also a problem with the acronym, but a more serious one : us French associate OAS with Organisation de l’Armée Secrète, which was a terrorist group in the army aiming at overthrowing the government in 1961. In fact, googling OAS in France will return as first hit the wikipedia page about that organisation.
If you aim to reach french-speaking people, this may cause some concerns. No obvious solution (OrAS ? OAtS ? OASo ?), but maybe I’m creating a mountain out of a molehill.


Of course there will be a requirement for full disclosure of funding sources, right? And will there be open (public) discussion, or a closed peer review process?

John V. Wright

Get IN! Well done Anthony and to all those who are supporting you. How the media react to this will be important. I realise that funding will be tight to begin with but it will help you enormously if you can locate a professional PR outfit to faithfully represent the ideals and ethics of the OAS to the lazy/sceptical media. Either that or maybe Joe Bast would act as media adviser during the start-up period.
Over here in the UK we are standing up and applauding this initiative.


Without a means to hide the decline of scientific integrity this org has no chance of success. Why would scientists submit papers if others only want to pick them apart looking for errors?


Pick them apart and look for errors…… Isn’t that the Scientific Method?


Indeed it is….but it was an actual complaint, I believe by Phil Jones, in the climategate emails. It was part of his reason for not cooperating. And the green nutters stupid enough to support them consider it harassment of the researchers to issue multiple FOI requests …which is an utterly stupid position to take because all the researcher has to do is put the data online and there would never be another FOI request for it.


It’s satire, Phil Jones’ refusal to give McIntyre the surface record data: ” why should I give it you, all you want to do is find something wrong with it.”
This has been a pervasive attitude amongst alarmist climatologists.
A good scientist with confidence in his work would welcome external, even hostile examination which would only validate his work.
Replication and validation are the cornerstones of science. This seems to be a key objective of this venture.
More power to them.


That was an antithetic parallel that obviates any criticism why this new open organization should, must exist. I would say fully 97% of all scientists believe such an organization has always existed when in fact that is not the case – see my original comment for an explanation.
Hopefully it was as witty as it is now circular.

Yeah, it is a travesty, isn’t it?

I thought clouds didn’t have anything to do with global warming.

Whack! (you are a funny person)


They are everything to do with it and the absence of any real understanding of the mechanisms of cloud formation and precipitation are the main reason why climate models are not “based on physical laws”.
Lots of nice detail is but the bits that matter aren’t , they’re guesses at “parameters”.

This has been direly needed and congratulations to all involved.

Climatology has been plagued by applications of the equivocation fallacy resulting from ambiguity of reference by terms in the language of climatology This has resulted in widespread misperception of a pseudo-science as a science .Thus, it would be well if the authors of articles submitted for publication to the new journal were to be required to write them in a disambiguated language developed for this purpose by the OAS.

Gary Pearse

” verum in luce ” It’s very telling that one has to say this for a scientific organization, but I get it. Let me predict there will similarly be new associations along these lines for physicists and others. Real geologists may not need a new one, they’ve only rotted along the edges and probably can recover. Biologists? Has activism killed this an objective science? Ecology has scientific tools, but I fear these have been overwhelmed by political activism – probably taught in their courses. There will be at least a small core of uncorrupted practitioners to form a new association – Jim Steele would be a good guy to do this.


I would also suggest another area of study that needs to clean up its act or start a new association, and that is Software Engineering – particularly in the areas of ethics and scientific modeling.

I hope they keep it open. Existing organizations started out that way.

The Other Phil

I have a question about scope.
The title of the organization suggests it is interested in atmospheric issues, as does the first bullet point. While people with degrees in other earth sciences can be admitted, it appears that the subject matter is atmospheric science.
The title of this posts refers to climatology, but that is a much broader scope, including studies of the sea, and ice, both sea based an land based. Not to mention solar issues.
So is the scope of the organization the broad topic of climatology, or only the narrower aspects which emphasize the atmosphere?

Anthony, you need to correct the links to the OAS site. They are defaulting to oas.com INSTEAD or oas.org.
[the link to the charter page has been fixed, thanks -mod]

Anthony: Just joined up for a full membership to show my support. I used my ChE degree to qualify, although my JD has been my livelihood most of my life. Good onyer, we needed an independent scientific organization to get away from the politics. I expect that the papers will be limited to the science, without the hysteria.


This is big.
Understand the state of academic research, I received an email with this in it this morning:
If the question is, are they [principal investigators] are reading their contracts, I know they are reading parts of them since half of them seem to have a problem with one of the basic clauses that has been in every one of these agreements since 2010: They seem suddenly surprised that they should be required to permit public access to research products.
This follows a review meeting in Aug where a PI told me he didn’t think it was reasonable to put all of their relevant data in an archive. They should only put the data from their publications there, because it is the “best” data.


State-sponsored consensus just got a lot smaller.


Thinking along the same line.
As state sponsored “scientific concensus” on global warming is proven wrong by actual scientists.
And not just your run of the mill skeptic like myself.
The grants will start to dry up as the politicians that sign off on them.
Come to the shocking reality that they are going to be far more accountable to the owners of those monies they are handing over.
This little provision is going to be the cause for extreme angst among the Manns and co. of the fraud that is global warming.
“Open journal— The Journal of the OAS will be free to read by the public. Open science— a transparent online peer review process”.
Behold, the emperor has new clothes!

Reg Nelson

Science returning to actual science, what a novel idea.
Best of luck, Anthony!

TImo Soren

It would be fun to have embership ranking # for all living members so that the length of membership is always viewable. Just like Massachusett’s Low Number Lottery for license plates: http://blog.mass.gov/transportation/rmv/rmv-low-number-license-plate-lottery-begins/


Great news…


Good job. But I’m sure it will soon be designated a “hate site” by alarmists.


OAS is a crime against humanity. All those involved should be subject to some kind of Nuremberg tribunal and locked up. 😉

Kevin Hearle

Congratulations Anthony and all the team that was involved with you in creating this important new organisation to further open access science. The public across the world will thank you all. The formation of this organisation will shake the foundations of the established societies and not before time.

Can I recommend that one of the first actions of OAS is to join with PubPeer, so that the peer review system cannot be gamed or seen to be gamed by Mann-style cliques?


Who knows, maybe science can make a comeback from the dark ages of Gore.
Meanwhile I wonder if Mann will sue OAS for, I don’t know, something or other.