- American Physical Society Sites
- Meetings & Events
- Policy & Advocacy
- Careers In Physics
- About APS
- Become a Member
In our October edition we reported that APS President Cherry Murray had appointed an ad-hoc committee to review the Society’s 2007 statement on climate change in response to a petition put forth by a member of APS Council. The committee was charged with reviewing the statement and making a recommendation as to whether or not the it should be changed and with suggesting new wording if necessary. As reported on the APS website on November 10, the committee recommended that the Council reject the petition and that the current statement be allowed to stand, but also requested that the Society’s Panel on Public Affairs (POPA) examine the statement for possible improvements in clarity and tone. The text of the web release is reproduced below; the report of the Kleppner committee is accessible to APS members at http://www.aps.org/policy/reports/climate.
The Council of the American Physical Society has overwhelmingly rejected a proposal to replace the Society’s 2007 Statement on Climate Change with a version that raised doubts about global warming. The Council’s vote came after it received a report from a committee of eminent scientists who reviewed the existing statement in response to a petition submitted by a group of APS members. The petition had requested that APS remove and replace the Society’s current statement. The committee recommended that the Council reject the petition. The committee also recommended that the current APS statement be allowed to stand, but it requested that the Society’s Panel on Public Affairs (POPA) examine the statement for possible improvements in clarity and tone. POPA regularly reviews all APS statements to ensure that they are relevant and up-to-date regarding new scientific findings. Appointed by APS President Cherry Murray and chaired by MIT Physicist Daniel Kleppner, the committee examined the statement during the past four months. Dr. Kleppner’s committee reached its conclusion based upon a serious review of existing compilations of scientific research. APS members were also given an opportunity to advise the Council on the matter. On Nov. 8, the Council voted, accepting the committee’s recommendation to reject the proposed statement and refer the original statement to POPA for review.
This contribution has not been peer refereed. It represents solely the view(s) of the author(s) and not necessarily the views of APS.