Update: Scientist Accuses American Chemical Society Editor of ‘censoring of articles and letters’ that reject man-made global warming claims!


By: - Climate DepotJuly 31, 2009 9:46 AM

Climate Depot Exclusive

[Climate Depot Editor’s Note: Longtime American Chemical Society (ACS) member and Environmental Chemist Steven J. Welcenbach, the President of the Wisconsin based Alchemical Ventures, Inc., has released a portion of his private email exchange with American Chemical Society’s editor in chief Rudy Baum. Baum, now under pressure to be removed from his post, created a scientific firestorm with his June 22, 2009 editorial in Chemical and Engineering News (C&E News) claiming that the global warming debate was settled. (See Climate Depot’s Exclusive Report: Climate Revolt: World’s Largest Science Group ‘Startled’ By Outpouring of Scientists Rejecting Man-Made Climate Fears! Clamor for Editor to Be Removed! – July 29, 2009 )]

Text of longtime ACS member and Environmental Chemist Steven J. Welcenbach’s note to Climate Depot and an Email exchange with ACS editor Rudy Baum. Welcenbach has been an ACS member since 1986.

Hello Marc [Morano], (Executive Editor of Climate Depot)

Thank you for getting the word out with what is going on in American Chemical Society (ACS). A vast number of members are very upset with the lack of complete and balanced coverage of the AGW issue and the continued censoring of articles and letters by Rudy Baum that do not support the theory of catastrophic global warming caused by CO2 emissions from man’s use of petroleum and coal. Many of the members I have spoken with have not only expressed their disgust but either have left ACS or are contemplating leaving the group. Lots of us, however, have decided that we should take action to return the group back to the scientific method and the initial purpose for which this group was formed and why we joined.

Therefore, I think it is imperative for you and all readers to understand the entire context of my exchange with [editor-in-chief] Rudy Baum. I treated him with respect and tried to interface with him in a reasonable way. As you will see, he resorted to personal insult and attack, thus my final e-mail which he decided was enough to publish. It was not. [Climate Depot Editor’s Note: Baum quoted Welcenbach’s email in a follow up article reacting to blowback from ACS member scientists. Welcenbach wrote to Baum: “When all is said and done, and you and your kind are proven wrong (again), you will have moved on to be an unthinking urn for another rat pleading catastrophe. You will be removed. I promise.” ]

As the largest scientific organization in the world we need to be on the front lines of this debate. True debate. Unfortunately Rudy Baum used his position as a political stump speech platform while cherry picking info supporting AGW and suppressing all info and articles to the contrary. For this reason he needs to go. An information censor is the LAST thing ACS needs.

I have been involved as a TRUE environmentalist since 1986. I have worked in the waste disposal and recycling industry this entire time. I will send you a copy of my resume in a separate e-mail for you to get a more complete picture of what I have done in this area.

Yours Truly,

Steven J. Welcenbach

President – Alchemical Ventures, Inc.

Menomonee Falls, WI

414-XXX-XXXX

[ Climate Depot Editor’s Note: Welcenbach has given Climate Depot permission to reprint his portion of the email exchange with editor Rudy Baum below. But since they were a private email exchange, Climate Depot is not publishing Baum’s responses to Welcenbach.]

Begin forwarded message:

From: Steven Welcenbach < >

Date: June 26, 2009 11:56:10 AM CDT

To: Rudy Baum <>

Subject: Re: AGW letters published which are contrary to your own viewpoint

Well Rudy,

I hoped that you may have had a new information input valve into your mind but I see it has been closed off or eliminated. I guess you’re happy in your little prison of thought so I certainly don’t want to disturb you. It becomes obvious when the “Flat Earth” comments come out one is not dealing with an individual interested in fact finding or relevant discussion. When all is said and done, and you and your kind are proven wrong (again), you will have moved on to be an unthinking urn for another rat pleading catastrophe.

You will be removed. I promise.

We have no need for further interaction.

Steven J. Welcenbach

ACS Member that has now been designated the job of removing Rudy Baum from Editor-in Chief of C&E News

Also card carrying “Flat Earther”

And Neanderthal (since I’m sure that one was next to come)

—–Original Message—–

From: Steven Welcenbach [mailto:]

Sent: Thursday, June 25, 2009 4:34 PM

To: Rudy Baum

Subject: Re: AGW letters published which are contrary to your own

viewpoint

Hi Rudy,

Thank you for your quick response. But you have to admit this is a pretty pathetic record.

As far as AGW theory goes, I’m sure you’ve heard of the works of the following PhD research scientists: Richard Lindzen, Willie Soon, Fred Singer, Craig Idso, Dennis Avery, Ferenc Miskolczi, Miklos Zagoni, William Gray, Roy Spencer, Timothy Ball, Henrik Svensmark, Patrick Michaels and hundreds of others referenced in their footnotes and publications. I have many articles from these gentlemen in my possession and could provide you with copies if you’re truly interested in understanding the supporting information of my claim. In addition, many others have written excellent works outlining the tremendous economic and social implications of implementing such a policy, such as current Czech Republic and EU president Vaclav Klaus and Roy Innis, to name just two of many that I have read.

Truly, as editor of our ACS publication, you owe it to all of us to provide all sides of all issues. You have done this to some degree with the Biofuels situation and Wind power. See, I am watching and

can be fair. But this publication is woefully short on providing accurate and new information on the real story of AGW. One example that comes to mind is that you published in July of 2007 that “the

arctic Ice is melting” in concentrates implicating AGW. But you never published the fact that the Ice has more than returned since to a 50 year high. You also have not published anything about the fact that global temperatures have been decreasing since 1998 and plummeting in the last two years. So there is an excellent example supporting my grief. You did publish something about the cooling sea temps but the article was highly skewed with excuses dismissing the data by AGW advocates. But that’s OK. You published it and we could draw our own conclusions.

I only ask you to allow publication of articles which refute AGW. They are the majority of articles published in the world on this subject.

Go online and get the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change report and you will have all the information you need, fully footnoted and supported with actual data. Also, go to CO2science.org for tons of articles and fully footnoted, data supported information.

I apologize for the tone of our initial conversation but I obviously feel very strongly that your position requires a better diversity of information on this subject. I hope we can gain clarity here. I am

confident that if you truly dig in to the material I am referencing here you will see very compelling information and data that could very well change your mind.

Thank you for your time.

Steve Welcenbach

414-XXX-XXXX

—–Original Message—–

From: Steven Welcenbach [mailto:]

Sent: Thursday, June 25, 2009 3:43 PM

To: Rudy Baum

Subject: AGW letters published which are contrary to your own

viewpoint

Hi Rudy,

Please kindly send me some examples of this claim. Also, would you be so kind as to reference at least ONE article published in the C&E news magazine that does not support the now FULLY DISCREDITED theory of man-made CO2 induced global warming/climate change. I will be more than happy to supply you with say, several hundred articles which provides factual data and employs the real scientific method to be published in C&E News (Chemical and Engineering News).

Frankly, a lot of members like myself are very, very tired of your censorship and proclaiming your misguided and unsupported AGW agenda. If this is a publication for scientists, the least we can expect of our editors is respect for the scientific method.

Thank you for your attention to my claim.

Steve Welcenbach

ACS member since 1986

[ End email excerpts. ]

Related Link:

Climate Depot’s Exclusive Report: Climate Revolt: World’s Largest Science Group ‘Startled’ By Outpouring of Scientists Rejecting Man-Made Climate Fears! Clamor for Editor to Be Removed! – July 29, 2009

‘Once the emperor is seen to have no clothes, pretending otherwise in public becomes difficult’

‘It’s the beginning of the end of the alarmists’ stranglehold…the carefully stacked cards are starting to fall’

Orlando Sentinel: ‘To shut the door on debate runs against the very mission of science’

Climate Fear Promoter Tobis defends ACS Editor: ‘He has got it exactly right’

UK Spectator: ‘More and more scientists have just about had it with the rubbish being put out as the ‘consensus’

Australian Herald Sun: ‘Scientists have finally had it up to here with their cause-pushing colleagues’

Portland Examiner: ‘Thankfully real scientists are now fighting back. Successfully!’

Climate Revolt: World’s Largest Science Group ‘Startled’ By Outpouring of Scientists Rejecting Man-Made Climate Fears! Clamor for Editor to Be Removed!

New Haven Examiner: ‘The tide is turning folks and this is just the beginning’

UK Professor: ‘At last real scientists are beginning to show some guts and are standing up to the bullies’