Time: Sat Jul 12 05:46:31 1997
	by primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id FAA10726;
	Sat, 12 Jul 1997 05:25:21 -0700 (MST)
	by usr06.primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id FAA07671;
	Sat, 12 Jul 1997 05:25:14 -0700 (MST)
Date: Sat, 12 Jul 1997 05:24:59 -0700
To: "Philip V. Brennan Jr." <pvbr@gate.net>
From: Paul Andrew Mitchell [address in tool bar]
Subject: SLS: Global Warming or Globaloney? (fwd)

The differential warming caused by CO2 build-up
lofts ocean water from the equatorial regions
into the upper altitudes, where it convects
to the poles and precipitates as ice and snow.
The convection pattern is called a Hadley Cell.

This shifts the weight of the entire planet from
the equator to the poles, crushing them as if
in a bench vice.  The tectonic plates adjust,
causing earth quakes and volcanic activity.

The process continues until glaciers move
outwards from the poles, towards the equator.
In their path, they grind up rocks beneath them.

These ground rocks turn to dust, which infiltrates
and re-mineralizes the soil.  The lack of minerals
is the beginning of this chain reaction, because
the world's forests remove minerals from the soil,
very gradually, but very steadily, over time
(roughly 10,000 years).

Then, the forests die, because they no longer have
any nutrition; and as they die, they release carbon
dioxide into the atmosphere, and they are no longer 
capable of consuming it.  The carbon that is in tree
fiber comes from the air, not the ground. 

The solution to stopping this cycle is to re-mineralize 
the soil, with emphasis on the world's forests.  
Then the forests will revive and accelerate their 
consumption of carbon dioxide.  

So, yes, a new ice age is fast approaching.  
For more details, see the work of mechanical 
engineer John Hamaker.

/s/ Paul Mitchell

At 04:50 PM 7/10/97 -0400, you wrote:
>The Forgotten Case for Global Cooling, Part One
>Part Two online 7-9-97
>Cover Story from July 2nd issue of Wednesday on the Web
>By Phil Brennan
>Is the world heating up? Will the polar ice caps melt, raise the sea 
>levels and inundate the coastal areas of the world? Will Florida 
>disappear beneath the waves? Is humanity facing a fiery cataclysm from 
>global warming? Is mankind in the process of radically altering the 
>earth's climate by thoughtlessly emitting monstrous quantities of 
>so-called "greenhouse gasses."
>Or is it all a lot of hooey?
>The answer to these questions is of absolute importance to all Americans 
>who value their liberty, because as Kim Weissman explains in his column, 
>behind all the rhetoric about global warming and mankind's culpability 
>for this impending disaster is a shrewdly planned campaign to inflict a 
>lot of socialistic restrictions on our cherished freedoms.
>Environmentalism, in short, is the last refuge of socialism.
>It is no accident that one of those in the forefront of the global 
>warming alarmists is one Michael Gorbachev, an unrepentant socialist who 
>appears to believe if you can't lick 'em one way, find another.
>Under the guise of saving the planet from a kind of self-inflicted 
>incineration the Clinton administration is seeking to impose some of the 
>most draconian restrictions on our liberties ever contemplated.
>The debate over global warming is the most crucial Americans have faced 
>since the Cold War ended with the demise of what now appears to have 
>been the first phase in the ongoing attempt to build a world socialist 
>That attempt was brutal and overt -- the Communists made no secret about 
>their plans to bury us, by force if necessary.
>The latest power grab by the left is far more subtle -- and covert. And 
>it must be met with the same vigor that energized America in its battle 
>with world communism because if those promoting the global warming panic 
>prevail, the outcome will be much the same as it would have been had we 
>lost the Cold War. Only the commissars will differ. It will be the Gores 
>instead of the Gorbachevs.
>Cooling? Global refrigeration instead of Global barbecuing? You bet. And 
>there's a heck of a lot more solid scientific evidence that what the 
>world is facing is the onset of a new ice age than there is behind the 
>very fragile global warming theory.
>Up until the mid-Seventies there was general agreement among 
>researchers, who studied such arcane signs of the far distant past as 
>sedimentary deposits on the ocean floor, that sooner or later a new ice 
>age was in the cards for this planet. Even the CIA signed on to the idea 
>that the iceman cometh.
>The idea that an ice age was approaching was based on history, not 
>hysteria -- the motivating force behind global warming studies. And what 
>history taught paleoclimatological scientists engaged in what is known 
>as quaternary research, is the incontrovertible fact that the earth has 
>experienced a long series of ice ages occurring as regular as clockwork 
>-- 100,000 years of glaciation followed by 10-to-12,000 years of 
>There is, they maintained, no reason to believe that what appears to be 
>an immutable law of nature has somehow been miraculously repealed and 
>the cycle of glaciation and interglaciation ended.
>No reason, except for political expediency. But more about that later.
>Here's a sample of the kind of thing was being discussed back in the 
>mid-seventies by that part of the scientific community that dealt with 
>the geological history of climate changes:
>"The present interglacial interval -- which has now lasted for about 
>10,000 years -- represents a climatic regime that is relatively rare 
>during the past million years, most of which has been occupied by 
>colder, glacial regimes. Only during about 8 percent of the past 700,000 
>years has the earth experienced climates as warm or warmer than the 
>"The penultimate interglacial age began about 125,000 years ago, and 
>lasted for approximately 10,000 years. Similar interglacial ages -- each 
>lasting 10,000 plus or minus 2000 years and each followed by a glacial 
>maximum -- have occurred on the average every 100,000 years during at 
>least the past half-million years. During this period, fluctuations of 
>the northern hemisphere ice sheets caused sea level variations of the 
>order of 100 meters." (Understanding Climate Change, published by the 
>National Academy of Sciences in 1975 -- page 181).
>On page 189 the question was asked: "When will the present interglacial 
>[period] end?
>"Few paleoclimatoligists would dispute that the prominent warm periods 
>(or interglacials) that have followed each of the terminations of the 
>major glaciations have had durations of 10,000 plus or minus 2000 years.
>In each case, a period of considerably colder climate has followed 
>immediately after the interglacial interval. Since about 10,000 years 
>have passed since the onset of the present period of prominent warmth, 
>the question naturally arises as to whether we are indeed on the brink 
>of a period of colder climate."
>"The question remains unsolved. If the end of the interglacial is 
>episodic in character, we are moving toward a rather sudden climatic
>change of unknown timing ... if on the other hand, these changes are 
>more sinusoidal in character, then the climate should decline gradually 
>over a period of a thousand years."
>A study prepared for the 95th Congress in 1978 agreed with the National 
>Academy of Sciences position as explained in the above-quoted study. The 
>document Weather Modification: Programs, Problems, Policy and Potential 
>"In geological prospective, the case for cooling is strong ... If this 
>interglacial age lasts no longer than a dozen earlier ones in the past 
>million years, as recorded in deep sea sediments, we may reasonably 
>suppose the world is about due to slide into the next ice age."
>That was the prevailing opinion among paleoclimatologists; it was a case 
>of the past being prologue. If the earth underwent regular cycles of 
>glaciation and interglacial periods, and the geological record proved 
>that to be the case, then obviously we are at the end of the present 
>between-ice-ages period.
>The only question remaining is exactly when and how glaciation will 
>Remember, what we are dealing with here is historic evidence -- not a 
>widely disputed theory as is the case with global warming. Even a 
>cursory glance at the global warming debate reveals that even its most 
>ardent supporters disagree on the details. Moreover, the so-called 
>evidence is so contradictory that one group of scientists will claim 
>that the ocean temperatures in the Northern Hemisphere are heating while 
>others will insist they are cooling.
>Even the scientific record is spotty. One group will insist that the 
>Northern latitudes are warming while others will point to growth of the 
>polar ice pack and the forward progress of some glaciers.
>Amazingly, the preponderance of opinion that obtained among 
>paleoclimatoligists back in the Seventies and early Eighties, is never 
>addressed. It's as if the record of a regular glacial/interglacial cycle 
>never existed. It has been ignored because it is much too inconvenient 
>to those who have a vested interest in pushing the Globalwarming 
>Interestingly, both the ice age predictions and the Global Warming 
>theory agree that the climate is changing, and not for the better. And 
>both rightly ascribe the changes to the drastic increase of CO2 in the 
>But there the agreement ends. The Global Warming supporters blame the 
>rise of CO2 levels on the rabid environmentalist movement's principal 
>villain: mankind.
>Those who either believe in the onset of a new ice age, or simply do not 
>buy the global warming scenario, blame the rise in CO2 levels on natural 
>causes. And it at this point that we venture out beyond the provable 
>historical geological evidence and enter the realm of speculation based 
>on some pretty compelling (and commonsensical) arguments.
>In 1982, a retired engineer, John D. Hamaker, published a book, The 
>Survival of Civilization, in which he expounded on his research into 
>climate change.
>Ice ages, Hamaker explained, are Mother Nature's versions of spring 
>house cleaning.
>During ice ages, as glaciers move over the land they pick up rocks, 
>grind them into powder and, when they retreat at the end of an ice age, 
>they leave this ground rock spread out across the continental areas they 
>This powdered rock contains tiny microorganisms which mineralize the 
>soil, providing a superior form of fertilization. Over the next 10,000
>plus or minus 2000 years the soil loses more and more of its fertility 
>as the sedimentary rock dissipates.
>Without the life-giving microorganisms, plant life grows weaker and 
>weaker, and eventually dies. And since healthy plant life thrives on CO2 
>and absorbs much of that gas in the atmosphere, when it weakens and dies 
>it can no longer soak up the excess CO2, which remains in the 
>Hamaker also noted that the geological record shows that whenever the 
>CO2 in the atmosphere reached levels above 300 parts per million the 
>onset of glaciation occurred!
>CO2 levels have already risen above 300 PPM!
>Next Week: Part Two -- How CO2 Triggers Ice Ages, and what Havoc it can 
>To subscribe to c-news, send the message SUBSCRIBE C-NEWS, or the message
>UNSUBSCRIBE C-NEWS to unsubscribe, to majordomo@world.std.com. Contact
>owner-c-news@world.std.com if you have questions.

Paul Andrew Mitchell                 : Counselor at Law, federal witness
B.A., Political Science, UCLA;  M.S., Public Administration, U.C. Irvine

tel:     (520) 320-1514: machine; fax: (520) 320-1256: 24-hour/day-night
email:   [address in tool bar]       : using Eudora Pro 3.0.3 on 586 CPU
website: http://www.supremelaw.com   : visit the Supreme Law Library now
ship to: c/o 2509 N. Campbell, #1776 : this is free speech,  at its best
             Tucson, Arizona state   : state zone,  not the federal zone
             Postal Zone 85719/tdc   : USPS delays first class  w/o this

As agents of the Most High, we came here to establish justice.  We shall
not leave, until our mission is accomplished and justice reigns eternal.
[This text formatted on-screen in Courier 11, non-proportional spacing.]


Return to Table of Contents for

Supreme Law School:   E-mail