It is disingenuous to imply that the membership bodies (in some cases hundreds of thousands of members) of these scientific organizations which have never voted to approve such statements can be used in support of them.
Many members join scientific organizations for free access to organizational resources or discounts on journals and meetings.
They may have little to no interest in the organization's policy positions.
Without a comprehensive survey or poll of every member's position in relation to these organization's policy statements no meaningful conclusions can be drawn.
When this list was first created the DOI system was incredibly slow and unreliable but since that time performance and reliability has improved to a point that we feel comfortable using them. Knox Climate forcing by the volcanic eruption of Mount Pinatubo (PDF) (Geophysical Research Letters, Volume 32, Number 5, March 2005)- David H.
"A tour de force list of scientific papers..." - Robert M. Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming (CAGW) or Dangerous Anthropogenic Global Warming (DAGW)].
Environmental Scientist "Wow, the list is pretty impressive ... General Antarctica Arctic Climate Sensitivity Clouds Coral Reefs Deaths Disease Ecological Glaciers Greenland Gulf Stream Hockey Stick Medieval Warm Period Roman Warm Period Ocean Acidification Permafrost Polar Bears Sea Level Species Extinctions Preface: The following papers support skeptic arguments against Anthropogenic Climate Change (ACC), Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) or Alarmism [e.g.
The purpose of the list is to show that peer-reviewed papers exist that support skeptic arguments and to be used as a bibliographic resource to locate these papers.
: This is absolutely false, as the list does not discriminate between competing skeptical viewpoints and the purpose of the list is clearly stated, "To provide a bibliographic resource for peer-reviewed papers that support skeptic arguments against ACC/AGW or Alarmism and to prove that these papers exist contrary to claims otherwise." Using this logic the IPCC reports are "cherry picked" because they failed to included most of these papers.