The FORUM by SEPP and Virginia Scientists and Engineers for Energy and Environment (VA-SEEE) is being rescheduled to tentatively 5 pm on Sunday June 20 in the Auditorium of the Ernst Community Cultural Center of the Annandale Campus of Northern Virginia Community College at 8333 Little River Turnpike, Annandale. Topics will include some of the latest developments in global warming issues. All are welcome. To defray the costs of the auditorium, a donation of $5.00 per person is suggested. Firm commitments will be announced as soon as possible. (www.vaseee.org)

Quote of the Week

“Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful people can change the world.”

– Margaret Mead

THIS WEEK:

by Ken Haapala, Executive Vice President, SEPP

The Fourth International Conference on Climate Change held by the Heartland Institute ended Tuesday. The conference featured 74 speakers on a diversity of topics relating to climate change. Perhaps Professor Richard Lindzen of MIT summed up the results of the conference best. He said we should no longer be called skeptics. Skepticism implies an existence of a plausible scientific position. Global warming alarmism is no longer plausible.

Not everyone agrees as to the causes of the recent warming, which is as developing science should be. However, over the four conferences there seems to be a direction of convergence in ideas. One, the IPCC’s assumptions that increasing water vapor will amplify carbon dioxide- caused warming is wrong. The temperature change from a doubling of carbon dioxide is likely to be no more than 1 degree Celsius. Two, the IPCC models likely have causation as related to clouds backwards – lack of clouds causes warming not the other way around. Three, natural variations of the climate system that are ignored by the IPCC are important to climate change. An example is the Pacific Decadal Oscillation. Also, natural variations may be influenced by changes external to the earth, such as solar activity and cosmic radiation. Not everyone agrees as to the extent of external influences.

Also coming from different directions, the work of Lindzen, Spencer, and others indicates that the climate system has a negative feedback mechanism -- a dampening effect on carbon dioxide-caused warming rather than suggest are suggesting that a doubling of atmospheric carbon dioxide will produce a warming of no more than 0.5 degrees Celsius, well within natural variation.

The work of a number of scientists, such as Don Easterbrook, suggests we are entering into a cold period. If so, there is significant reason to be concerned. The work of climate pioneer HH Lamb demonstrated that cold periods are harmful to mankind and warm periods are generally beneficial.

There is much to be learned, such as what causes El Niños similar to the one that now appears to be ending? The El Niño caused the global temperatures of the first part of the year, as measured from satellites, to be significantly warmer than normal. Of course, alarmists will claim that this warming is “proof” of humancaused global warming. However, the IPCC rejects the idea that El Niños cause warming; thus such claims by alarmists contradict the IPCC. Ian Plimer speculates that El Niños may be caused by undersea volcanoes, which certainly is intriguing.

If governments would only get away from the egocentric view that humans are the cause of climate change, we may begin to understand the actual causes and be able to adapt to changes as Lamb so hoped.

The proceedings of the full conference are being posted on the web site of the Heartland Institute, http://www.heartland.org/. It is well worth a visit or several visits to listen to illuminating lectures on issues relating to climate change.

Just in time to support the Kerry-Lieberman Cap and Tax bill, the National Academy of Sciences published three reports advocating action on global warming. This is a dangerous step for the Academy because if it is wrong, and the earth cools, it is likely the Academy will significantly lose the trust of the American public. The reports are referenced below, and the science to justify them will be discussed in future issues of TWTW.

The Kerry-Lieberman bill is the topic in several articles below. As discussed in last week’s TWTW, the Kerry web site says, in effect, that the revenues raised by the bill with have three cuts. The first cut goes to the green industry, the second cut to the Federal Government for deficit reduction, and the final cut to the consumer. An article on the bill from the Wall Street Journal is reproduced below as well as a rebuttal from Senators Kerry and Lieberman. Strangely, the good Senators fail to mention the cut to the Federal Government.

As mentioned in prior TWTWs, the most powerful lobbying group pushing for Cap and Tax is USCAP, an alliance of Big Business and Big Green – large non-profit organizations claiming an environmental agenda. The IRS requires all non-profits to file a form 990 stating, among other things, total revenues. Forbes published a list of the 200 largest charities in the US for 2009. Of these, five are members of USCAP. In descending order by revenues in the Forbes list they are: The Nature Conservancy, World Wildlife Fund, Environmental Defense Fund, Natural Resources Defense Council, and National Wildlife Federation. Their total revenues in 2009 exceeded $1,500,000,000 ($1.5 Billion).

http://www.forbes.com/lists/2009/14/ charity-09_The-200-Largest-U.S.-Charities_ Name_8.html

Yesterday was the final day to respond to EPA’s announcement for public comment on its plans to address “ocean acidification.” SEPP recommended that: “EPA should do nothing. The science is misleading, inadequate, and any actions based on it are most likely to be destructive and wrong.” Lowering a chemical solution with a pH between 7.9 and 8.2 by 0.2 does not acidify it but merely lessens its alkalinity.