American Physical Society NOT saying humans aren't causing global warming

Apparently, there's a new "meme" going around the interwebs: "The American Physical Society, an organization representing nearly 50,000 physicists, has reversed its stance on climate change..." Check out this excerpt from hotair.com:

The American Physical Society had been a proponent of the “consensus” on anthropogenic global warming/climate change — until now.  While the main organization has not addressed its position — yet — a major unit within APS has declared global warming unproven and that the IPCC’s conclusions unsupportable.  The APS will re-open the debate on global warming with a new paper accusing the IPCC of deliberate obfuscation (via Memeorandum):

Another excerpt from DailyTech:

The American Physical Society, an organization representing nearly 50,000 physicists, has reversed its stance on climate change and is now proclaiming that many of its members disbelieve in human-induced global warming.  The APS is also sponsoring public debate on the validity of global warming science.  The leadership of the society had previously called the evidence for global warming "incontrovertible."

Well, let's see what's going on with the APS, then, shall we? Taken from the Editor's Comments section of the July 2008 online "Physics and Society" quarterly edition of its Forum of Physics and Society (emphasis mine): 

With this issue of Physics & Society, we kick off a debate concerning one of the main conclusions of the International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the UN body which, together with Al Gore, recently won the Nobel Prize for its work concerning climate change research. There is a considerable presence within the scientific community of people who do not agree with the IPCC conclusion that anthropogenic CO₂ emissions are very probably likely to be primarily responsible for the global warming that has occurred since the Industrial Revolution. Since the correctness or fallacy of that conclusion has immense implications for public policy and for the future of the biosphere, we thought it appropriate to present a debate within the pages of P&S concerning that conclusion. This editor (JJM) invited several people to contribute articles that were either pro or con. Christopher  Monckton responded with this issue's article that argues against the correctness of the IPCC conclusion, and a pair from Cal Poly San Luis Obispo, David Hafemeister and Peter Schwartz, responded with this issue's article in favor of the IPCC conclusion. We, the editors of P&S, invite reasoned rebuttals from the authors as well as further contributions from the physics community. Please contact me (jjmarque@sbcglobal.net) if you wish to jump into this fray with comments or articles that are scientific in nature. However, we will not publish articles that are political or polemical in nature. Stick to the science! (JJM)

Ummm... So somehow HotAir and DailyTech went from an invited scientific debate to the APS reversing its stance on anthropogenic global warming (AGW) can only really be answered with the accusation of "spinning" the news (or a major lack of understaing about the nature of scientific debate). Since I consider that people at DailyTech (from which HotAir got its news) are likely somewhat versed in the concept of scientific debates, I am going to conclude that their position is merely a major spin campaign about the APS to match their viewpoint on AGW. And, indeed, if you go to the APS homepage, you will find the following (click the image on the left to bring up a screen-capture of the July 18, 2008 web page):

APS Climate Change Statement

APS Position Remains Unchanged

The American Physical Society reaffirms the following position on climate change, adopted by its governing body, the APS Council, on November 18, 2007:

"Emissions of greenhouse gases from human activities are changing the atmosphere in ways that affect the Earth's climate."

An article at odds with this statement recently appeared in an online newsletter of the APS Forum on Physics and Society, one of 39 units of APS. The header of this newsletter carries the statement that "Opinions expressed are those of the authors alone and do not necessarily reflect the views of the APS or of the Forum." This newsletter is not a journal of the APS and it is not peer reviewed.

So let's do a little sleuthing to see what's up with that Forum on Physics and Society online quarterly. Indeed, if you read the disclaimer at the bottom of the page, you will note that it states, just as the APS homepage announcement does (emphasis mine):

Physics and Society is the quarterly of the Forum on Physics and Society, a division of the American Physical Society. It presents letters, commentary, book reviews and reviewed articles on the relations of physics and the physics community to government and society. It also carries news of the Forum and provides a medium for Forum members to exchange ideas. Opinions expressed are those of the authors alone and do not necessarily reflect the views of the APS or of the Forum. Contributed articles (up to 2500 words, technicalities are encouraged), letters (500 words), commentary (1000 words), reviews (1000 words) and brief news articles are welcome. Send them to the relevant editor by e-mail (preferred) or regular mail.

So taking this additional piece of evidence into account, TechNews and HotAir are both really spinning the news by stating that APS - a group with a membership of 500,000 - has changed its position on whether humans are causing global warming by basing their entire claim on a single un-reviewed article submitted as part of a pro vs. con scientific debate in a quarterly forum-derived newsletter. They also seem to ignore the big, glaring letters on the APS's own home page: "APS Position Remains Unchanged ... Read APS Climate Change Statement":

National Policy

07.1 CLIMATE CHANGE

(Adopted by Council on November 18, 2007)

Emissions of greenhouse gases from human activities are changing the atmosphere in ways that affect the Earth's climate. Greenhouse gases include carbon dioxide as well as methane, nitrous oxide and other gases. They are emitted from fossil fuel combustion and a range of industrial and agricultural processes.

The evidence is incontrovertible: Global warming is occurring. If no mitigating actions are taken, significant disruptions in the Earth’s physical and ecological systems, social systems, security and human health are likely to occur. We must reduce emissions of greenhouse gases beginning now.

Because the complexity of the climate makes accurate prediction difficult, the APS urges an enhanced effort to understand the effects of human activity on the Earth’s climate, and to provide the technological options for meeting the climate challenge in the near and longer terms. The APS also urges governments, universities, national laboratories and its membership to support policies and actions that will reduce the emission of greenhouse gases.

So, in the end, this turns out to be another (very poor) attempt by global warming skeptics at trying to "prove" their position is right, by "showing" the scientific consensus point as wrong, incomplete, inconclusive, or otherwise without scientific merit. I really hope that the editor of the quaterly (JJM) does not get more than a polite e-mail reminding him of the polemics that take place around this subject outside the ivory towers of science (and academia in general).

Hat tip to Climate Progress