Time: Fri Dec 12 17:21:27 1997
To:
From: Paul Andrew Mitchell [address in tool bar]
Subject: SLS: Global Warming Myth (fwd)
Cc:
Bcc: sls
References:
<snip>
>
>Science has spoken: Global Warming is a Myth
>By Arthur B. Robinson
>and Zachary W. Robinson
>
> Political leaders are gathered in Kyoto, Japan, working away on an
>international treaty to stop "Global warming" by reducing carbon dioxide
>emissions. The debate over how much to cut emissions has at times been
>heated---but the entire enterprise is futile or worse. For there in not a
>shred of persuasive evidence that humans have been responsible for
>increasing global temperatures. What's more, carbon dioxide emissions
>have actually been a boon for the environment.
>
> The myth of "Global warming" starts with an accurate observation: The
>amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is rising. It is now about 360
>parts per million, vs. 290 at the beginning of the 20th century.
>Reasonable estimates indicate that it may eventually rise as high as 600
>parts per million. This rise probably results from human burning of coal,
>oil and natural gas, although this is not certain. Earth's oceans and
>land hold some 50 times as much carbon dioxide as is in the atmosphere,
>and movement between these reservoirs of carbon dioxide is poorly
>understood. The observed rise in atmospheric carbon dioxide does
>correspond with the time of human release and equals about half the
>amount released.
>
> Carbon dioxide, water, and a few other substances are "greenhouse
>gases" -- For reasons predictable from their physics and chemistry, they
>tend to admit more solar energy into the atmosphere then they allow to
>escape. Actually, things are not so simple as this, since these
>substances interact among themselves and with other aspects of the
>atmosphere in complex ways that are not well understood. Still, it was
>reasonable to hypothesize that rising atmospheric carbon dioxide levels
>might cause atmospheric temperatures to rise. Some people predicted
>"global warming", which has come to mean extreme greenhouse warming of
>the atmosphere leading to catastrophic environmental consequences.
>
>Careful Tests
>
> The global-warming hypothesis, however, is no longer tenable.
>Scientists have been able to test it carefully, and it does not hold up.
>During the past 50 years, as atmospheric carbon dioxide levels have
>risen, scientists have made precise measurements of atmospheric
>temperature. These measurements have definitively shown that major
>atmospheric greenhouse warming of the atmosphere is not occurring and is
>unlikely ever to occur.
>
> The temperature of the atmosphere fluctuates over a wide range, the
>result of solar activity and other influences. During the past 3,000
>years, there have been five extended periods when it was distinctly
>warmer than today. One of the two coldest periods, known as the Little
>Ice Age, occurred 300 years ago. Atmospheric temperatures have been
>rising from that low for the past 300 years, but remain below the 3,000
>year average.
>
> Why are temperatures rising? The first chart nearby shows temperatures
>during the past 250 years, relative to the mean temperature for
>1951-1970. The same chart shows the length of the solar magnetic cycle
>during the same period. Close correlation between these two parameters --
>the shorter the solar cycle (and hence the more active the sun), the
>higher the temperature -- demonstrates, as do other studies, that the
>gradual warming since the Little Ice Age and the large fluctuations
>during that warming have been caused by changes in solar activity.
>
> The highest temperatures during this period occurred in about 1940.
>During the past 20 years, atmospheric temperatures have actually tended
>to go down, as shown in the second chart, based on very reliable
>satellite data, which have been confirmed by measurements from weather
>balloons.
>
> Consider what this means for the global-warming hypothesis. This
>hypothesis predicts that global temperatures will rise significantly,
>indeed catastrophically, if atmospheric carbon dioxide rises. Most of the
>increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide has occurred during the past 50
>years, and the increase has continued during the past 20 years. Yet there
>has been no significant increase in atmospheric temperature during those
>50 years, and during the 20 years with the highest carbon dioxide levels,
>temperatures have decreased.
>
> In science, the ultimate test is the process of experiment. If a
>hypothesis fails the experimental test, it must be discarded. Therefore,
>the scientific method requires that the global warming hypothesis be
>rejected.
>
> Why, then, is there continuing scientific interest in "global
>warming"? There is a field of inquiry in which scientists are using
>computers to try to predict the weather -- even global weather over very
>long periods. But global weather is so complicated that current data and
>computer methods are insufficient to make such predictions. Although it
>is reasonable to hope that these methods will eventually become useful,
>for now computer climate models are very unreliable. The second chart
>shows predicted temperatures for the past 20 years, based on the computer
>models. It's not surprising that they should have turned out wrong --
>after all the weatherman still has difficulty predicting local weather
>even for a few days. Long-term global predictions are beyond current
>capabilities.
>
> So we needn't worry about human use of hydrocarbons warming the Earth.
>We also needn't worry about environmental calamities, even if the
>current, natural warming trend continues: After all the Earth has been
>much warmer during the past 3,000 years without ill effects.
>
> But we should worry about the effects of the hydrocarbon rationing
>being proposed at Kyoto. Hydrocarbon use has major environmental
>benefits. A great deal of research has shown that increases in
>atmospheric carbon dioxide accelerate the growth rates of plants and also
>permit plants to grow in drier regions. Animal life, which depends upon
>plants, also increases.
>
> Standing timber in the United States has already increased by 30%
>since 1950. There are now 60 tons of timber for every American. Tree-ring
>studies further confirm this spectacular increase in free growth rates.
>It has also been found that mature Amazonian rain forests are increasing
>in biomass at about two tons per acre per year. A composite of 279
>research studies predicts that overall plant growth rates will ultimately
>double as carbon dioxide increases.
>
>Lush Environment
>
> What mankind is doing is moving hydrocarbons form below ground and
>turning them into living things. We are living in an increasingly lush
>environment of plants and animals as a result of the carbon dioxide
>increase. Our children will enjoy an Earth with twice as much plant and
>animal life as that with which we now are blessed. This is a wonderful
>and unexpected gift from the industrial revolution.
>
> Hydrocarbons are needed to feed and lift from poverty vast numbers of
>people across the globe. This can eventually allow all human beings to
>live long, prosperous, healthy productive lives. No other single
>technological factor is more important to the increase in the quality,
>length and quantity of human life than the continued, expanded and
>unrationed use of the Earth's hydrocarbons, of which we now have proven
>reserves to last more than 1,000 years. Global warming is a myth. The
>reality is that global poverty and death would be the result of Kyoto's
>rationing of hydrocarbons.
>
>+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>+
>Arthur Robinson and Zachary Robinson are chemists at the Oregon Institute
>of Science and Medicine. Taken from the December 4th, 1997 issue of the
>Wall Street Journal.
>
<snip>
Return to Table of Contents for
Supreme Law School: E-mail