Did the American Chemical Society President really say this?

A climate skeptic here alleges that in an editorial printed in Chemical %26amp; Engineering News, the president of the American Chemical Society told ACS members, in essence, that as far as ACS is concerned the debate on climate change is over, and everyone needs to shut up and accept it. That didn't sound like anything I had ever read in C%26amp;E News so I went as far back as 2000 and searched the C%26amp;E News archive for all articles written by ACS presidents in that time period:





http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Pr...





and couldn't find *any* articles on climate change written by any president over that time period. The EiC of C%26amp;E News is a fairly outspoken supporter of the IPCC conclusions, but his comments are fairly balanced.





Does anyone know the citation where the ACS president told everyone to shut up? Or is this yet another case of skeptics citing falsehoods as fact?

Did the American Chemical Society President really say this?
All I could find was the associate editor of the ACS publication "Environmental Science and Technology", Jerald L. Schnoor, saying the debate was over in the May 1, 2006 (vol 40) issue.





"Now that the debate is over, let’s get to work."





http://pubs.acs.org/subscribe/journals/e...





I find it unlikely the ACS president issued such a statement as ACS policy.





Edit (Tuba): It ("it" being the logic trap you describe) works very well...like stating "man causes global warming" well! (AGW being a wonderful illustration of the logic trap you describe as mountains of documents produced to date fail to demonstrate how CO2 levels account for the increase in global temperature, the crux of the AGW assertion)





The difficulty you're having understanding me may be a generation gap issue. Take this slogan: "Geico is so easy, even a caveman could do it." We'd say: Geico is so easy, it's caveman easy. Got it?





Edit:"...says a lot about skeptics, namely that there is a lack of fact-checking and lack of accuracy."





So...you're going to hang this skeptic with the very rope I brought you...nice. Reminds me of a quote I read recently...
Reply:Here are a few entries that are the closest I could find. Nothing from the president, and nothing telling people to shut up and accept it.





http://pubs.acs.org/cen/editor/85/8507ed...


http://pubs.acs.org/cen/editor/85/8537ed...





In those links you can search all entries in C%26amp;E News with global warming as a keyword. As you discovered, none are by ACS presidents. Methinks this claim is BS.
Reply:I recall reading something similiar. However, the direction was unclear when I skimmed as I was in a hurry that day. It could have been to accept there IS global warming and that advocates of the existence of global warming won the debate. I think this was with in the last six months and will check later.
Reply:I do not know if it was said or not and I doubt you would find it in print. The person who made the claim would be the one to ask, and you would have to determine if they were a trustworthy source. Which is extremely difficult, that is a problem on any of these forums.
Reply:i remember reading something like his, i've looked for it but haven't found it yet, i'll keep looking
Reply:Hmmm... Is this like Ted Turner saying that people are going to turn into cannibals?
Reply:You know how it works. They have made this statement. Unless you can sift through every document that organization has ever produced and "prove" it isn't there, they will consider that you have proven them correct.





It's a logic trap. Don't step in it. A true statement can be used to prove another statement true or false. A false statement cannot be used to prove any other statement true or false. If you believe the statement isn't true in the first place then you have no chance of proving it false.





If the statement actually were true, then there is some chance that if you started rooting through all that outfits archives you might run across that statement, proving it to be true.





If the statement is false there is no chance you can prove it. Even if you looked at every document, you can't say for certain that there isn't another document somewhere that for some reason didn't get included. It's a tactic designed to make you waste your own time and get you off the track.





Did you ever do Debate Club in school, or take Debate as a class? I did both and the first thing they did was take us through all these kinds of cheap tricks.





edit





I have no idea what that's supposed to mean. Hopefully you do.