Deming, D

<div></div><div>ggl alertjuly 27, 2023<h1 trebuchet="trebuchet" ms="MS" arial="arial" helvetica="helvetica" sans-serif="sans-serif" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); margin: 0px;">The Suppression of Discussion Continues to Degrade Science</h1><div class="author" trebuchet="trebuchet" ms="MS" arial="arial" helvetica="helvetica" sans-serif="sans-serif" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); margin: 5px 0px; font-weight: bold;">By <a data-author="Victor Fernandez" href="https://www.americanthinker.com/author/victorfernandez/" style="text-decoration-line: none; outline: none; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial;">Victor Fernandez</a></div><div class="article_body" times="times" new="new" roman="roman" serif="serif" font-size="font-size" em="em" style="">One of the primary aims of science, as it is ideally understood in high schools and universities, is to lift us from ignorance. It generally advances by utilizing the tools of reason and the critical evaluation of evidence to make explicit a more comprehensible understanding of the physical world. Such a process also includes sharing data for peer analysis in an effort to arrive at the truth concerning some matter of fact or make successive approximations to it.However, our present quest for such lofty goals has run into serious obstacles that thwart science’s revelations and processes.  And, although these obstructions have been ongoing for a number of years, some modern scientific publications have ironically proven themselves to be one of its greatest impediments.On July 5, 2023, Dr. Peter McCullough among other clinical specialists published a <a data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id%3D4496137&source=gmail&ust=1690420585283000&usg=AOvVaw3ZcTidfXrTkcEJQhQABLn5" href="https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4496137" mcafee_aps="true" rel="nofollow" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial;">systematic review</a> of autopsy findings involving victims who died post-COVID vaccine on The Lancet journal’s preprint server.They identified…“<a data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://petermcculloughmd.substack.com/p/kim-iversen-we-now-have-definitive?utm_source%3Dsubstack%26utm_campaign%3Dpost_embed%26utm_medium%3Dweb&source=gmail&ust=1690420585283000&usg=AOvVaw0LOozwpcJgIkANwIJD1JDm" href="https://petermcculloughmd.substack.com/p/kim-iversen-we-now-have-definitive?utm_source=substack&utm_campaign=post_embed&utm_medium=web" mcafee_aps="true" rel="nofollow" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial;">678 studies </a>and, after screening for our inclusion criteria, included 44 papers that contained 325 autopsy cases and one necropsy case…Most deaths occurred within a week from last vaccine administration.  A total of 240 deaths (73.9%) were adjudicated as directly due to or significantly contributed by COVID-19 vaccination…” <div id="v-americanthinker" style=""><img src="https://s3.amazonaws.com/ssl-intgr-net/tags/7_238_9.gif" height="0" width="0" border="0" class="im_t" style="border: 0px; max-width: 100%;" />Dr. McCullough explains that the systematic review went through two sets of checks on the preprint server and that it was getting surges of downloads.  But the very next morning, The Lancet shut it down.  The study got censored.Why?
The Lancet’s response is that the “study’s conclusions are not supported by the study methodology.” Curiously, they don’t say how.  <a data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://rumble.com/v301wue-vaccine-agenda-dr.-peter-mccullough-and-dr.-naomi-wolf-tpc-1299.html&source=gmail&ust=1690420585283000&usg=AOvVaw1W3Juw-NSBzBmOSTHlG3aS" href="https://rumble.com/v301wue-vaccine-agenda-dr.-peter-mccullough-and-dr.-naomi-wolf-tpc-1299.html" mcafee_aps="true" rel="nofollow" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial;">Dr. McCullough</a> says: <blockquote style="background: rgb(245, 245, 245); margin: 10px 40px; padding: 10px 10px 10px 20px;">“This act of medical censorship occurred after the paper met all the criteria for listing on the Lancet Preprint Server… This speaks to the importance of our findings as the largest summary of autopsies after COVID-19 vaccination. Elsevier and Lancet are trying to suppress critical scientific observations on COVID-19 vaccine safety. Their actions are reprehensible.”  </blockquote><img src="https://s3.amazonaws.com/ssl-intgr-net/tags/7_232_19.gif" height="0" width="0" border="0" class="im_t" style="border: 0px; max-width: 100%;" />The Lancet was not alone in its rejection of the study.   The New England Journal of Medicine, and The Journal of the American Medical Association <a data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://twitter.com/mercola/status/1681380959898173441&source=gmail&ust=1690420585283000&usg=AOvVaw1KsNE9RRIqlXYTt4cVB21u" href="https://twitter.com/mercola/status/1681380959898173441" mcafee_aps="true" rel="nofollow" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial;">rejected the work</a> within a few days and within an hour of submission, respectively, before finding its way to The Lancet.    This is but a small example of how the process of science is being suffocated. We need information, data, discussion and debate on things that have been discovered as well as of things of deep relevance to our lives.  And the massive COVID/vax - related injuries and deaths as revealed by VAERS certainly count among them.  There is no telling where the debate will lead, but at least there remains the possibility that productive courses of action can be taken to stay the hand of illness, motivate motions to address accountability, and redirect medical and scientific practices. Apart from some scientific journals, lack of important data and discussion continue to take their toll among members of the media and its viewers.  Recently, Fox host Stuart Varney -- believing that 19 straight days above 110 degrees in Phoenix, Arizona is the result of climate change -- is surprised that climate skeptic and journalist <a data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.climatedepot.com/2023/07/20/marc-youre-losing-me-here-watch-fox-host-stuart-varney-debates-morano-over-heatwave-climate-link/&source=gmail&ust=1690420585283000&usg=AOvVaw366KVIvwZFPhpR2siBiCyV" href="https://www.climatedepot.com/2023/07/20/marc-youre-losing-me-here-watch-fox-host-stuart-varney-debates-morano-over-heatwave-climate-link/" mcafee_aps="true" rel="nofollow" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; outline: none; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial;">Marc Morano</a> disagrees.  <blockquote style="background: rgb(255, 255, 255); margin: 10px 40px; padding: 10px 10px 10px 20px;">“This is not outside the normal bounds of hot summer weather. Yes, it’s a record year. It could be one of the hottest, but here’s the thing… Joe Biden's EPA has a chart of the heatwave index going back to the 1930s.  The 1930s are probably 8 to 10 or 12 times hotter in the United States than anything we’re currently seeing.” </blockquote>Not only did Biden’s EPA show that the 1930s heat waves were worse than such waves today, many studies have shown that the Roman Warming Period (250 BC to AD 400) and the Medieval Warm Period (10th to 13th centuries) were as warm or warmer than today.  The United Nations acknowledged this in 1990.  But, evidently the Medieval warming period proved too much an inconvenient fact as the data was altered and, ultimately, erased. Geologist Dr. <a data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v%3Du1rj00BoItw&source=gmail&ust=1690420585283000&usg=AOvVaw26ZQMxY8m5E51R5sm0Wvci" href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u1rj00BoItw" mcafee_aps="true" rel="nofollow" target="blank" style="background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">David Deming</a> of the Mewbourne College of Earth and Energy at the University of Oklahoma in a statement to a US Senate Committee of Environment and Public Works in 2006 recounts that in 1995 he received an email from a major researcher in climate change who said, “We have to get rid of the Medieval Warming Period.” Sadly, Michael Mann, and his fraudulent hockey stick graph, <a data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://realclimatescience.com/2018/12/erasing-the-medieval-warm-period/&source=gmail&ust=1690420585283000&usg=AOvVaw3Rm97YEbPmDgR2tsfaH83m" href="https://realclimatescience.com/2018/12/erasing-the-medieval-warm-period/" mcafee_aps="true" rel="nofollow" target="blank" style="background: rgb(255, 255, 102); text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">erased it</a> by his omission of this well-documented period as well as the Little Ice Age (early 14th to mid 19 century), both of which contradicted the scope of his narrow, deceitful graph.  Such is the state of modern science. It gets worse.  Andrew Dessler of Texas A&M University has difficulty with anything contradicting the notion that today’s weather must be warmer than anything in the past.  So, what does he want?  He aims to remove the 1930s EPA heatwave records entirely (<a data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://wattsupwiththat.com/2022/06/28/heat-waves-dessler-continues-to-step-in-it/&source=gmail&ust=1690420585283000&usg=AOvVaw0pgpOLPVaVkoaG2F5slvs5" href="https://wattsupwiththat.com/2022/06/28/heat-waves-dessler-continues-to-step-in-it/" mcafee_aps="true" rel="nofollow" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial;">here</a> and <a data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.climatedepot.com/2022/06/27/we-have-to-get-rid-of-the-1930s-epa-heatwave-records-warmist-prof-andrew-dessler-tries-to-erase-1930s-heatwaves/&source=gmail&ust=1690420585283000&usg=AOvVaw24K32pGEkRc_izCa_6v8fQ" href="https://www.climatedepot.com/2022/06/27/we-have-to-get-rid-of-the-1930s-epa-heatwave-records-warmist-prof-andrew-dessler-tries-to-erase-1930s-heatwaves/" mcafee_aps="true" rel="nofollow" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial;">here</a>).  The root of this corruption is as long as it is depressing. Suffice it to say for now, that the depraved hand of Marxist cultural constructivists, their wicked march through the institutions, a compliant media, the Leftist drive for centralized, absolute power, along with decades of UN plots for a top-down bureaucratic State have played a role.  Scientists relying on funding from powerful doners also continue to present a host of conflicting problems. Fortunately, there are many who have fought and continue to fight this treachery on a number of fronts.  Besides the work of truly informed and battle-ready warriors like Mark Morano and Tom Heller, who take on the backward forces of climate alarmism, by 2009 there were 31,478 American scientists who had taken a stand against unfounded climate alarmism and signed the <a data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=http://www.petitionproject.org/index.php&source=gmail&ust=1690420585283000&usg=AOvVaw0_VC9GzHM2Rmmr4dzBrMql" href="http://www.petitionproject.org/index.php" mcafee_aps="true" rel="nofollow" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial;">Global Warming Petition Project</a>.  NOTE RENAME “There is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth’s atmosphere and disruption of the Earth’s climate.  Moreover, there is substantial scientific evidence that the increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide produce many beneficial effects upon the natural plant and animal environments of the Earth.”  So much for the widely buzzed noise that 97% of climate scientists agree with views surrounding Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW).  There is no such consensus, and honest scientists made sure to make the point. And in the world of medicine there are also combatants like Dr. Peter McCullough and Dr. Simone Gold, founder and president of American Frontline Doctors, who on July 27, 2020 gathered a team of doctors and held a White Coat Summit press conference before the US Supreme Court.  AFD delivered accurate scientific data, notes on the law and defended human rights during a time when Covid fearmongering was festering the nation.  AFD has recently arranged for a new White Coat Summit this week on July 27th entitled, <a data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.whitecoatsummit.com/&source=gmail&ust=1690420585283000&usg=AOvVaw2Qepkn_OeyaE1RgweSCJRh" href="https://www.whitecoatsummit.com/" mcafee_aps="true" rel="nofollow" target="_blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial;">The Reckoning</a> .  So, the fight is on.  And the fight is necessary, as an informed citizenry is a requisite for this democratic republic to succeed.  We are living in a time when degenerate and destructive forces have rooted themselves in dangerous positions of power and influence.  But, because the march of a dispassionate search for truth cannot and will not be contained, we will not forever remain in ignorance.  May those of us who love truth and freedom remain vigilant, as the dissecting blade of reason and courage slowly, but steadily, slay the dragons of irrationality and deceit.</div>=</div></div><div>
</div><div>===</div><div>
</div><div>David Deming, a geophysicist from the University of Oklahoma, testified that “Every natural disaster that occurs is now linked [by the media] with global warming, no matter how tenuous or impossible the connection. As a result, the public has become vastly misinformed on this and other environmental issues.” (To read Dr. Deming's full testimony go to: (http://www.epw.senate.gov/hearing_statements.cfm?id=266543))</div>

<div>

<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Oklahoma_Council_of_Public_Affairs">http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Oklahoma_Council_of_Public_Affairs</a></div>

<div>Dan Gainor of the Business & Media Institute noted that reporters are violating their own code of ethics with their one-sided climate coverage. “It also violates the ethical code of the Society of Professional Journalists which urges the media to ‘Support the open exchange of views, even views they find repugnant.’ That code calls for reporters to “distinguish between advocacy and news reporting.’” Gainor added. (To read Gainor's full testimony go to: (http://www.epw.senate.gov/hearing_statements.cfm?id=266543))</div>

<div>

</div>

<div>

<table width="100%" height="211" border="0" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="2" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><tbody><tr><td height="22" align="left" valign="top" class="txtheader" style=" font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; font-weight: bold; color: rgb(0, 51, 51);">U.S. Senate Committee on Environment & Public Works

Hearing Statements</td></tr><tr><td height="169" valign="top">

<center>Statement of Dr. David Deming

University of Oklahoma

College of Earth and Energy

Climate Change and the Media</center>

</td></tr></tbody></table>

<hr />

Mr. Chairman, members of the Committee, and distinguished guests, thank you for inviting me to testify today. I am a geologist and geophysicist. I have a bachelor's degree in geology from Indiana University, and a Ph.D in geophysics from the University of Utah. My field of specialization in geophysics is temperature and heat flow. In recent years, I have turned my studies to the history and philosophy of science. In 1995, I published a short paper in the academic journal Science. In that study, I reviewed how borehole temperature data recorded a warming of about one degree Celsius in North America over the last 100 to 150 years. The week the article appeared, I was contacted by a reporter for National Public Radio. He offered to interview me, but only if I would state that the warming was due to human activity. When I refused to do so, he hung up on me.

I had another interesting experience around the time my paper in Science was published. I received an astonishing email from a major researcher in the area of climate change. He said, "We have to get rid of the Medieval Warm Period."

The Medieval Warm Period (MWP) was a time of unusually warm weather that began around 1000 AD and persisted until a cold period known as the "Little Ice Age" took hold in the 14th century. Warmer climate brought a remarkable flowering of prosperity, knowledge, and art to Europe during the High Middle Ages.

The existence of the MWP had been recognized in the scientific literature for decades. But now it was a major embarrassment to those maintaining that the 20th century warming was truly anomalous. It had to be "gotten rid of."

In 1769, Joseph Priestley warned that scientists overly attached to a favorite hypothesis would not hesitate to "warp the whole course of nature." In 1999, Michael Mann and his colleagues published a reconstruction of past temperature in which the MWP simply vanished. This unique estimate became known as the "hockey stick," because of the shape of the temperature graph.

Normally in science, when you have a novel result that appears to overturn previous work, you have to demonstrate why the earlier work was wrong. But the work of Mann and his colleagues was initially accepted uncritically, even though it contradicted the results of more than 100 previous studies. Other researchers have since reaffirmed that the Medieval Warm Period was both warm and global in its extent.

There is an overwhelming bias today in the media regarding the issue of global warming. In the past two years, this bias has bloomed into an irrational hysteria. Every natural disaster that occurs is now linked with global warming, no matter how tenuous or impossible the connection. As a result, the public has become vastly misinformed on this and other environmental issues.

Earth's climate system is complex and poorly understood. But we do know that throughout human history, warmer temperatures have been associated with more stable climates and increased human health and prosperity. Colder temperatures have been correlated with climatic instability, famine, and increased human mortality.

The amount of climatic warming that has taken place in the past 150 years is poorly constrained, and its cause--human or natural--is unknown. There is no sound scientific basis for predicting future climate change with any degree of certainty. If the climate does warm, it is likely to be beneficial to humanity rather than harmful. In my opinion, it would be foolish to establish national energy policy on the basis of misinformation and irrational hysteria.

</td></tr><tr><td height="18" align="center" valign="top" class="menu">

The Wall Street Journal recently <a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323478304578330050167945348.html" target="_blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">opened up their editorial pages</a> for noted climate change denier <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/david-deming" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">David Deming</a>, allowing him to publish a “call to action” for the dirty energy industry.

In his op-ed, Deming says that the fossil fuel industry could learn a thing or two from the NRA about how to become an effective, powerful lobbying force.  Deming believes that the effectiveness of the NRA is due to their ability to stand in solidarity with one another, whereas the fossil fuel industry is operating under a “every man for himself” mentality.

It is worth noting that the Wall Street Journal did not disclose the fact that <a href="http://www.ncpa.org/environment/david-deming" target="blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">Deming is a member of conservative think tanks</a> that receive <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Center_for_Policy_Analysis" target="blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">significant funding from the dirty energy industry</a>, including Koch Industries and Exxon Mobil.

From <a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323478304578330050167945348.html" target="_blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">Deming’s op-ed</a>:

Fossil-energy companies could learn a thing or two from the gun lobby. The gun industry is tiny compared with theirs, yet it is among the most respected and powerful groups that lobby Congress.

After the horrific school shooting in Newtown, Conn., Wayne LaPierre, CEO of the National Rifle Association, didn't budge an inch. He never agreed to the premise that firearms were inherently evil. Instead, he went on television and suggested that putting armed guards in schools might be an effective way of stopping evil. In other words, he refused to cede the moral high ground.

Deming, who in the past has claimed that the science behind climate change is “<a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/david-deming" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">pseudo-scientific mumbo-jumbo</a>,” has presented an argument that is a clear fallacy.  Not only is he misrepresenting the facts, but he has made conclusions that cannot be proven.  desmog

</div>

</div>

<h2 style=" margin: 0px 0px 0.75em; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.3em; font-size: 1.8em; font-weight: 300;">Credentials </h2>

<li style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">Ph.D, geophysics, University of Utah (1988). </li>

<li style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">B.S., geology, Indiana University (1983). </li>

<li style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">National Research Council postdoctoral fellowship at the US Geological Survey in California.</li>

</ul>

Source: <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/david-deming#s1" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">[1]</a>

<h2 style=" margin: 0px 0px 0.75em; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.3em; font-size: 1.8em; font-weight: 300;">Background</h2>

David Deming is associate professor of Arts and Sciences at the University of Oklahoma in Norman. He graduated from Indiana University in 1983 with a B.S. degree in geology, and received a Ph.D. in geophysics from the University of Utah in 1988.

Prior to his arrival at the University of Oklahoma in 1992, Deming held a National Research Council postdoctoral fellowship at the US Geological Survey in California.

Deming believes that we should not move away from a petroleum-based economy, as there is no danger of peak oil. As a geophysicist, he has written numerous newspaper articles skeptical of global warming, and has worked with the National Center for Policy Analysis (<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=National_Center_for_Policy_Analysis" target="_blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">NCPA</a>) on environment issues.

<h2 style=" margin: 0px 0px 0.75em; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.3em; font-size: 1.8em; font-weight: 300;">Stance on Climate Change</h2>

"Weather and climate change are natural processes beyond human control. To argue otherwise is to deny the factual evidence." <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/david-deming#s2" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">[2]</a>

<h2 style=" margin: 0px 0px 0.75em; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.3em; font-size: 1.8em; font-weight: 300;">Key Quotes</h2>

"The largest mistake would be to start to move away from petroleum, a proven and economic energy source, to more speculative and expensive sources...The world will eventually leave the age of oil, but there is no geologic reason for this to happen until near the end of the 21st century." <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/david-deming#s3" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">[3]</a>

</blockquote>

"Global warming has long since passed from scientific hypothesis to the realm of pseudo-scientific mumbo-jumbo." <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/david-deming#s4" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">[4]</a>

</blockquote>

"I'm a geophysicist who has conducted and published climate studies in top-rank scientific journals. My perspective on Mr. Inhofe and the issue of global warming is informed not only by my knowledge of climate science but also by my studies of the history and philosophy of science." <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/david-deming#s5" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">[5]</a>

</blockquote>

<h2 style=" margin: 0px 0px 0.75em; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.3em; font-size: 1.8em; font-weight: 300;">Key Deeds</h2>

March 1, 2007

Deming <a href="http://www.kgou.org/index.php?news-management&action=view_news&news_id=1211&a=1" target="_blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">debated </a>David Karoly (a climatology professor at the University of Oklahoma) on global warming, arguing that that "the projection that the temperatures are becoming warmer is nothing more than speculation." <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/david-deming#s6" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">[6]</a>

December, 6, 2006

<a href="http://www.ncpa.org/speech/climate-change-and-the-media" target="_blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">Testified</a> Before the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee (run by <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/james-inhofe" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">Senator James Inhofe</a>). In his testimony, Deming refers to a <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/david-deming#Science" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">1995 paper</a> he published in the journal Science. It is worth noting that his paper was published in the "Perspective" section of the journal. <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/david-deming#s7" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">[7]</a>

Deming concludes that "There is no sound scientific basis for predicting future climate change with any degree of certainty. If the climate does warm, it is likely to be beneficial to humanity rather than harmful. In my opinion, it would be foolish to establish national energy policy on the basis of misinformation and irrational hysteria."

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u1rj00BoItw" target="_blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">See a video of Deming's testimony here</a>.

<h2 style=" margin: 0px 0px 0.75em; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.3em; font-size: 1.8em; font-weight: 300;">Affiliations</h2>

<li style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=National_Center_for_Policy_Analysis" target="blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">National Center for Policy Analysis (NCPA) </a>— "<a href="http://www.ncpa.org/environment/environment-experts" target="blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">Environmental Expert</a>," <a href="http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2006/jun/13/20060613-085607-8647r/" target="_blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">Adjunct Scholar</a>. Also member of the NCPA's "Environmental Task Force." (?) <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/david-deming#s8" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">[8]</a>, <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/david-deming#s9" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">[9]</a></li>

</ul>

<li style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Oklahoma_Council_of_Public_Affairs" target="blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">Oklahoma Council of Public Affairs (OCPA)</a> — "<a href="http://www.ocpathink.org/adjunct-scholars" target="blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">Adjunct </a><a href="http://www.ocpathink.org/adjunct-scholars" target="_blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">Scholar</a>." <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/david-deming#s10" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">[10]</a></li>

</ul>

Although Deming appears on <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=National_Center_for_Policy_Analysis#Environmental_Task_Force" target="blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">SourceWatch's list of Environmental Task Force members</a>, a list of members in an official NCPA report (<a href="http://www.ncpa.org/pdfs/st162.pdf" target="blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">PDF</a>) fails to mention his name. Deming is also listed as a member of the NCPA's "<a href="http://environmentblog.ncpa.org/about-the-ncpas-environment-team-e-team-2/" target="_blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">Environment Team (E-team)</a>" at the NCPA's blog.

<h2 style=" margin: 0px 0px 0.75em; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.3em; font-size: 1.8em; font-weight: 300;">Publications</h2>

According to his profile at NCPA, Dr. Deming is the author of more than thirty research papers, and a textbook on hydrogeology. He is an associate editor for the journals Petroleum Geology and Ground Water.

Sample Publications:

<li style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">David Deming. "<a href="http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0031018298001448" target="blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">On the possible influence of extraterrestrial volatiles on Earth's climate and the origin of the </a><a href="http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0031018298001448" target="blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">oceans</a>." Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology, Volume 146, Issues 1-4 (February 15, 1999), Pages 33-51.</li>

</ul>

<li style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><a name="Science" id="Science" style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"> </a>Deming, D. "<a href="http://www.sciencemag.org/content/268/5217/1576.extract" target="blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">Climatic Warming in North America: Analysis of Borehole </a><a href="http://www.sciencemag.org/content/268/5217/1576.extract" target="blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">Temperatures</a>."Science, v. 268, p. 1576-1577, June 16, 1995 (Note that this is a “Perspective” article, rather than an official paper.)</li>

</ul>

<li style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">David Deming. "<a href="http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2006/jun/13/20060613-085607-8647r/" target="_blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">The oil price bubble</a>," Washington Times, June 14, 2006.</li>

</ul>

<li style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">David Deming. "How 'Consensus' On Global Warming Is Used To Justify Draconian Reform," Investor's Business Daily, March 18, 2005.</li>

</ul>

<li style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">David Deming. "<a href="http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2008/dec/10/global-warming-freeze/" target="_blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">Global warming freeze?</a>" Washington Times, December 10, 2008.</li>

</ul>

<li style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">David Deming. "<a href="http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2007/dec/19/year-of-global-cooling/" target="_blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">Year of global cooling</a>," Washington Times, December 19, 2007</li>

</ul>

<li style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">David Deming. "Are We Running Out of Oil?" (<a href="http://www.ncpa.org/pdfs/bg159.pdf" target="_blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">PDF</a>)  Policy Backgrounder No. 159, January 29, 2003.</li>

</ul>

<li style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">David Deming. "<a href="http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2006/oct/14/20061014-102319-3494r/" target="blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">Inhofe</a><a href="http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2006/oct/14/20061014-102319-3494r/" target="blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;"> correct on warming</a>," Washington Times, October 15, 2006.</li>

</ul>

<li style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">David Deming. "<a href="http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2008/apr/6/environmental-hysterics/" target="_blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">Environmental Hysterics</a>," Washington Times, April 6, 2008.</li>

</ul>

<li style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">David Deming. "Malthus Reconsidered" (<a href="http://www.ncpa.org/pdfs/ba469.pdf" target="_blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">PDF</a>), National Center for Policy Analysis, Brief Analysis No. 469 (March 22, 2004).</li>

</ul>

<li style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">"Testimony Before the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee," December 6, 2006. <a href="http://www.ncpa.org/speech/climate-change-and-the-media" target="_blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">Republished by NCPA</a>.</li>

</ul>

<li style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">"The Warmest Year on Whose Record?" (<a href="http://www.ncpa.org/pdfs/ba337.pdf" target="_blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">PDF)</a>, National Center for Policy Analysis, Brief Analysis No. 337 (August 31, 2000).</li>

</ul>

<li style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">David Deming. "Petroleum Age is Just Beginning," The Washington Times, August 15, 2003. <a href="http://www.ncpa.org/media/petroleum-age-is-just-beginning" target="_blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">Republished by NCPA</a>.</li>

</ul>

<li style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">David Deming, "Are We Running Out of Oil?" (<a href="http://www.ncpa.org/pdfs/bg159.pdf" target="_blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">PDF</a>) National Center for Policy Analysis, Policy Backgrounder No. 159, January 29, 2003.</li>

</ul>

<li style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">"The Media Shows Irrational Hysteria On Global Warming." U.S. Newswire, December 6, 2006. <a href="http://www.ncpa.org/media/media-shows-irrational-hysteria-on-global-warming" target="_blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">Republished by NCPA</a>.</li>

</ul>

<h2 style=" margin: 0px 0px 0.75em; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.3em; font-size: 1.8em; font-weight: 300;">Resources</h2>

<a name="s1" id="s1" style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"> </a>"<a href="http://www.ncpa.org/environment/david-deming" target="_blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">David Deming,</a>" NCPA profile.

</li>

<a name="s2" id="s2" style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"> </a>David Deming. "<a href="http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2008/dec/10/global-warming-freeze/" target="_blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">Global warming freeze?"</a> Washington Times, December 10, 2008.

</li>

<a name="s3" id="s3" style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"> </a>David Deming. "<a href="http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2006/jun/13/20060613-085607-8647r/" target="_blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">The oil price bubble</a>," Washington Times, June 14, 2006.

</li>

<a name="s4" id="s4" style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"> </a>David Deming. "<a href="http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2007/dec/19/year-of-global-cooling/" target="_blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">Year of global cooling</a>," Washington Times, December 19, 2007

</li>

<a name="s5" id="s5" style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"> </a>David Deming. <a href="http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2006/oct/14/20061014-102319-3494r/" target="blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">"Inhofe</a><a href="http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2006/oct/14/20061014-102319-3494r/" target="blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;"> correct on warming</a>," Washington Times, October 15, 2006.

</li>

<a name="s6" id="s6" style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"> </a>"<a href="http://www.kgou.org/index.php?news-management&action=view_news&news_id=1211&a=1" target="_blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">OU Debate on Human-Induced Climate Change (Mar 08, 2007)</a>," KGOU. Accessed December 6, 2011.

</li>

<a name="s7" id="s7" style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"> </a>"<a href="http://www.ncpa.org/speech/climate-change-and-the-media" target="_blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">Climate Change and the Media</a>," David Deming's testimony before the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, December 6, 2006. Republished by the National Center for Policy Analysis.

</li>

<a name="s8" id="s8" style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"> </a>"<a href="http://www.ncpa.org/environment/environment-experts" target="_blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">Environment Experts</a>," National Center for Policy Analysis. Accessed March, 2012.

</li>

<a name="s9" id="s9" style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"> </a>"<a href="http://environmentblog.ncpa.org/about-the-ncpas-environment-team-e-team-2/" target="_blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">About the NCPA’s Environment Team (E-Team)</a>," Energy and Environment: Clearing the Air (NCPA Blog). Accessed March, 2012.

</li>

<a name="s10" id="s10" style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"> </a>"<a href="http://www.ocpathink.org/adjunct-scholars" target="_blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">ADJUNCT SCHOLARS</a>," Oklahoma Council of Public Affairs. Accessed March, 2012.

</li>

"<a href="http://www.greenpeace.org/usa/en/news-and-blogs/campaign-blog/david-deming-exxonsecrets-denier-of-the-day/blog/25297/" target="_blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">David Deming -- ExxonSecrets' Denier of the Day,</a>" Greenpeace, December 19, 2007.

</li>

<a href="http://www.exxonsecrets.org/html/personfactsheet.php?id=660" target="_blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">ExxonSecrets Factsheet: David Deming</a>.

</li>

"<a href="http://www.exxonsecrets.org/wiki/index.php/Deniers:Scientists:David_Deming" target="_blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">Deniers:Scientists:David Deming</a>," ExxonSecrets Wiki.

</li>

</ol>

</div>

<div class="field-item even" style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/623" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">david deming</a></div>

<div class="field-item odd" style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/634" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">James Inhofe</a></div>

<div class="field-item even" style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/913" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">global warming</a></div>

<div class="field-item odd" style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/939" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">climate change</a></div>

<div class="field-item odd" style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/2540" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">desmogblog</a></div>

<div class="field-item even" style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/2560" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">global warming blog</a></div>

<div class="field-item odd" style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/2654" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">denial industry</a></div>

<div class="field-item even" style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/2668" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">national center for policy analysis</a></div>

<div class="field-item odd" style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/3068" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">climate change denier</a></div>

<div class="field-item odd" style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/4046" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">global warming research</a></div>

<div class="field-item even" style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/4047" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">climate misinformation</a></div>

<div class="field-item odd" style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/4135" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">climate skeptic</a></div>

<div class="field-item even" style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/5721" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">smogger</a></div>

<div class="field-item odd" style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/6886" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">climate change skeptic</a></div>

<div class="field-item even" style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/7204" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">US Senate Committee on the Environment & Public Works</a></div>

<div class="field-item odd" style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/7705" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">climate denialism</a></div>

<div class="field-item even" style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/7706" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">denial database</a></div>

</div>

</td></tr></tbody></table>

</div>