Just to narrow this down, do you reject that the authors of the "Oregon Petition" attempted to pull a fast one by enclosing what looked like a peer reviewed NAS article? Again, from Sourcewatch:
The Oregon Petition, sponsored by the OISM, was circulated in April 1998 in a bulk mailing to tens of thousands of U.S. scientists. In addition to the petition, the mailing included what appeared to be a reprint of a scientific paper. Authored by OISM's Arthur B. Robinson, Sallie L. Baliunas, Willie Soon, and Zachary W. Robinson, the paper was titled "Environmental Effects of Increased Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide" and was printed in the same typeface and format as the official Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. Also included was a reprint of a December 1997, Wall Street Journal editorial, "Science Has Spoken: Global Warming Is a Myth, by Arthur and Zachary Robinson. A cover note signed "Frederick Seitz/Past President, National Academy of Sciences, U.S.A./President Emeritus, Rockefeller University", may have given some persons the impression that Robinson's paper was an official publication of the academy's peer-reviewed journal.
Do you have a link to a rebuttal from OISM?
Any allegation or question that might have to do with supposed sponsorship apparently had little to do with the bulk of participation in the petition, especially with NAS disclaiming any connection prior to the majority of folks apparently signing on after the NAS disclaimers, or in spite of such disclaimers as the case may be.
A valid point, if the signers had heard of the NAS disclaimer. Perhaps they didn't. Do you know of a discussion of this point?
Just to narrow this down, do you reject that the authors of the "Oregon Petition" attempted to pull a fast one by enclosing what looked like a peer reviewed NAS article?
I've seen no evidence of such myself, just alot allegations not really supported by looking at the material published. see #74.
The material there speaks speaks for itself. and does not appear to have been changed in any material way since its inception.
About the only thing changed on that site over the years are a few comments about hoaxed signers added under the Signers of Petition Explaination page and added names of signers as far as I can determine from my own files and from such confirmation as is available from the wayback webarchive entries for it.