date: Wed, 23 Jul 2003 21:22:26 -0400
from: Michael Oppenheimer <omichaelatXYZxyznceton.EDU>
subject: Re: letter to Senate
to: Tom Wigley <wigleyatXYZxyzr.edu>
Since several of you are uncomfortable, it makes good sense to step back and
think about a more considered approach. My view is that scientists are fully
justified in taking the initiative to explain their own work and its relevance in
the policy arena. If they don't, others with less scruples will be heard
instead. But each of us needs to decide his or her own comfort zone.
In this case, the AGU press release provides suitable context, so it may be that
neither a separate letter nor another AGU statement would add much at this time.
But this episode is unlikely to be the last case where clarity from individuals
or groups of scientists will be important.
Tom Wigley wrote:
> I am inclined to agree with Peck. Perhaps a little more thought and time
> could lead to something with much more impact?
> Jonathan Overpeck wrote:
> > Hi all - I'm not too comfortable with this, and would rather not sign -
> > at least not without some real time to think it through and debate the
> > issue. It is unprecedented and political, and that worries me.
> > My vote would be that we don't do this without a careful discussion first.
> > I think it would be more appropriate for the AGU or some other
> > scientific org to do this - e.g., in reaffirmation of the AGU statement
> > (or whatever it's called) on global climate change.
> > Think about the next step - someone sends another letter to the
> > Senators, then we respond, then...
> > I'm not sure we want to go down this path. It would be much better for
> > the AGU etc to do it.
> > What are the precedents and outcomes of similar actions? I can imagine a
> > special-interest org or group doing this like all sorts of other
> > political actions, but is it something for scientists to do as individuals?
> > Just seems strange, and for that reason I'd advise against doing
> > anything with out real thought, and certainly a strong majority of
> > co-authors in support.
> > Cheers, Peck
> >> Dear fellow Eos co-authors,
> >> Given the continued assault on the science of climate change by some
> >> on Capitol Hill, Michael and I thought it would be worthwhile to send
> >> this letter to various members of the U.S. Senate, accompanied by a
> >> copy of our Eos article.
> >> Can we ask you to consider signing on with Michael and me (providing
> >> your preferred title and affiliation). We would like to get this out ASAP.
> >> Thanks in advance,
> >> Michael M and Michael O
> >> ______________________________________________________________
> >> Professor Michael E. Mann
> >> Department of Environmental Sciences, Clark Hall
> >> University of Virginia
> >> Charlottesville, VA 22903
> >> _______________________________________________________________________
> >> e-mail: mannatXYZxyzginia.edu Phone: (434) 924-7770 FAX: (434) 982-2137
> >> http://www.evsc.virginia.edu/faculty/people/mann.shtml
> >> Attachment converted: Macintosh HD:EOS.senate letter-final.doc
> >> (WDBN/MSWD) (00055FCF)
> > --
> > Jonathan T. Overpeck
> > Director, Institute for the Study of Planet Earth
> > Professor, Department of Geosciences
> > Mail and Fedex Address:
> > Institute for the Study of Planet Earth
> > 715 N. Park Ave. 2nd Floor
> > University of Arizona
> > Tucson, AZ 85721
> > direct tel: +1 520 622-9065
> > fax: +1 520 792-8795
> > http://www.geo.arizona.edu/Faculty_Pages/Overpeck.J.html
> > http://www.ispe.arizona.edu/
Attachment Converted: "c:\eudora\attach\omichael3.vcf"