Parting the green clouds
By S. Fred Singer
Copyright 1999 Washington Times
January 10, 1998
As is our custom, here is the year-end Environmental Myth
Report of the Science 
& Environmental Policy Project, our modest contribution to the
edification of 
the public:
* El Nino and global warming: Any connection?  It's been a
hot year, thanks to 
El Nino.  (According to weather satellite data, the first half of
1998 ranked 
well above the average of the last two decades; 1999 though is
likely to be 
quite cold.) Much to the frustration of environmental activists,
however, 
responsible climate scientists have steadfastly refused to blame
the unusually 
strong El Nino on man-made greenhouse gases.  They have also denied
any 
relationship between global 
warming and hurricanes, putting the lie to politicians who were
quick to blame 
Hurricane Mitch and other weather disasters on the greenhouse
effect.
Lots of environmental scares exist without any scientific
foundation, but 
global warming must take the cake when it comes to hype.  The late
Aaron 
Wildavsky referred to it as the 
"mother of all environmental scares." It certainly is the
most expensive - potentially.  If the Kyoto Protocol for 
cutting CO2 emissions and energy use were ever ratified by the U.S.
Senate and 
enforced by the United Nations, there go jobs and prosperity - all
because of 
the feverish imagination of environmental 
activists and some computer printouts that don't relate to what's
really 
happening in the atmosphere.  
* The climate-aerosol debacle: The U.N.  science advisory
group, the 
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), has a big
credibility 
problem.  Its 1996 report, the basis for Kyoto, had to admit that
the rapid 
warming predicted by computer models was not occurring.  So they
hit on an 
explanation to account for the discrepancy: Sulfate aerosols,
particles created 
from the burning of coal and other sulfur-containing substances,
were supposed 
to reflect incident sunlight and create an offsetting cooling -
forcing an 
agreement with the observations that show no warming trend.
Unfortunately for 
the IPCC, the details don't 
match.  The Southern Hemisphere, containing fewer aerosols, should
be warming 
more rapidly -but it isn't.
The final blow has just been dealt to the IPCC
house-of-cards by NASA climate 
scientist Dr.  James Hansen, an IPCC stalwart (who revived the
global warming 
scare a 
decade ago when he blamed the 1988 U.S.  drought on the greenhouse
effect.) 
Now, he's back, writing in the Proceedings of the august National
Academy of 
Sciences: 
"The forcings that drive long-term climate change aerosols,
clouds, land-use 
patterns are not known with an accuracy sufficient to define 
future climate change." Why then should one trust the
predictions of climate models?
* The carbon dioxide-warming connection: 
cause and effect?  It has become an article of faith that CO2
increases are the 
cause of the warmings marking the end of the ice ages observed in
the climate record 
in the past million years.  
Now comes news from precise Antarctic ice-core data that while
warmings and CO2 
increases are indeed correlated, the CO2 increases lag the warmings
by about 
1,000 years.  So much for the 
cause-effect relationship so dear to the hearts of global-warming
promoters.
* Sea 
level Rise from global warming?  Don't believe it: First of all,
sea level has 
been rising at average rate of about 7 inches per century for
several 
centuries, and nobody quite knows why.  But it is certainly not due
to climate 
changes or any human 
influences.
The climate did warm sharply between 1900 and 1940,
recovering from the 
previous cold centuries of the 
"Little Ice Age"; can we trace the effect ofthis warming
on sea level?  Many glaciers are still 
melting as a result of the higher temperatures compared to 100
years ago.  
Also, ocean 
water expanded, as most substances do when their temperature is
raised.  But 
the sea-level data taken during this period suggest that both of
these effects 
were overcome by an increased evaporation from the ocean surface,
followed by 
more rain -which turned to ice over the polar regions and increased
ice 
accumulation there.  The 
net result: a transfer of water from the ocean to the polar ice
caps, and a 
slowing down of the ongoing sea-level rise.
There is a lesson to be learned here.  Should the climate
warm again for any 
reason - it is likely to further depress sea-level rise.
* The bugs are coming: Really?: Activists 
allege that climate warming promotes the spread of mosquitoes
carrying 
frightful tropical diseases; but rapid and widespread air travel is
a likely 
dominating factor.  Now they've been trumped by Professor Peter
McEwen of the 
University of Wales who predicts an invasion of cockroaches and
other nasties 
that 
will inundate Great Britain, 
"steal our food and suck our blood."
At the Kyoto conference (December 1997) everything bad was
blamed on global 
warming - even though it is not happening.  The prize goes to the
Japan 
Environmental Times ("All the Earth News Without Fear or
Favor") 
report that deadly Australian 
"red-back" spiders were found by a factory worker in
Osaka (which boasts an international 
airport). 
"Scientists attribute the first discovery of the species in
Japan to the warmer 
climate." (Comment: Maybe the little beasts swim faster when
the ocean is warmer.  It's 
a thought.)
* Health effects from pollutants: The good news: Some good
news for a change: 
Judge Samuel C.  Poynter of the U.S.  District Court in Alabama
appointed a 
panel of independent scientists to investigate and report on the
health effects 
of breast implants; they found 
none worth mentioning. In North Carolina, U.S.  District Court
Judge Thomas 
Osteen threw out the EPA claim 
"secondhand" cigarette smoke 
causes lung 
cancer.  Smoke may be irritating and obnoxious, but that's not
quite the same as 
evidence for lung 
cancer: the correlation is 
"not statistically significant." Meanwhile, the American
Council on Science and Health has published Facts vs.  
Fears, a review of the greatest unfounded health scares of recent
times; they 
range from the 1959 
"Cranberry Scare" to DDT, Love Canal, asbestos in
schools, and cellular phones causing brain 
tumors.
Other good news: There finally may be a detection technique
to measure directly 
the damage to DNA, the genetic material in human cells, from minute
quantities 
of chemicals or radiation.  The first experiments, published in
Science in 
1998, indicate the existence of a 
"threshold," below which any 
damage is repaired by the cell's own repair mechanism.  Too bad
that this 
result didn't appear earlier; a lot of laboratory rats had to die
after being 
exposed to megadoses of suspected carcinogens.
* The ozone layer revisited: Where are the casualties?  And
some more good news 
- sort of: The 1987 Montreal Protocol that 
led to the ban on chlorofluorocarbons ("Freons") was
based on studies that predicted dire health consequences (to the
tune of $32 trillion(!), according to the EPA -from even a 5
percent depletion in the 
stratospheric ozone layer.  Well, the ozone layer has now thinned
by about that 
amount, but where are the 
feared consequences - the millions of skin 
cancers, cataracts and impaired immune systems leading to
uncontrollable epidemics?  
Could it be that the Environmental Protection Agency exaggerated
just a tiny 
little bit in order to promote the CFC ban?  Far be it for me to
suggest that 
EPA would engage in such a 
dastardly scheme or even intimate that AIDS is spread by ozone
depletion.
There's so much more to tell; but there is no space left. 
Better explore the 
web at www.sepp.org
S.  Fred Singer, an atmospheric physicist, is the president
of the Science 
& Environmental Policy Project 
based in Fairfax.  He is emeritus professor of environmental
sciences at the 
University of Virginia and former director of the U.S.  Weather
Satellite 
Service.  
Comments on this posting?
Click here to
post a public comment on the Trash Talk
Bulletin Board.
Click here to send a private
comment to the Junkman.
Material presented on this home page constitutes opinion of
Steven J. Milloy.
Copyright © 1998 Citizens for the Integrity of
Science. All rights reserved on original material. Material
copyrighted by others is used either with permission or under a
claim of "fair
use." Site developed and hosted by WestLake
Solutions, Inc.