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