PLEASE NOTE:
*
CCNet 8/2003 - 30 January 2003
-------------------------------
"Unfortunately, domestic tracking devices failed to register
the meteorite when it approached the planet or when it
moved in the atmosphere. But an American satellite designed
for missile launching registered the meteorite. As the space
object wasn't registered in Russia, neither the RF EMERCOM,
nor the Ministry of Defense or astronomers from Irkutsk
warned local population about the meteorite approaching the
Earth. The problem is that Russian network of optical space
surveying is out of date. In fact, Russian astronomers and
military men controlling movement of space objects cannot run
effective control over the space above Russia's territory.
The fact that Russian astronomers failed to register the
large meteorite that dropped last September proves
ineffectiveness of Russian astronomic services."
--Pravda, 28 January
2003
"Mazanek leads NASA's Comet/Asteroid Protect System, a
program that would expand on the Near-Earth Object Program
to include the detection of long-period comets, as well as
small asteroids and short-period comets that pose an Earth
impact threat. The space-based system, not to be in place
for at least 25 years, would provide constant monitoring and a
system to divert and modify the orbits of threatening
objects."
--Leslie Mullen,
Astrobiology Magazine, January 2003
(1) COMETS: HOW BIG A THREAT TO EARTH?
National Geographic News, 28 January 2003
(2) A BROKEN NETWORK: RUSSIAN CONCERNS ABOUT LACKING NEAR EARTH
SPACE OBSERVATIONS
Pravda, 28 January 2003
(3) COMPLEX LIFE, BY JOVE!
Leslie Mullen, Astrobiology Magazine, 20
January 2003
(4) IS THIS HOW LIFE ON EARTH BEGAN?
Paul Davies, 21 January 2003
(5) JMU'S TTL WINS PRESTIGIOUS CHINA EXPORT AWARD
Peter Bond <PeterRBond@aol.com>
(6) COMET C/2002 X5 (KUDO-FUJIKAWA)
Mark Kidger <mrk@ll.iac.es>
(7) MARS, IMPACTS AND LIFE
Michael Paine <mpaine@tpg.com.au>
(8) WHAT ABOUT WATER ON MARS?
Worth Crouch <doagain@jps.net>
(9) OPINION: "EUROPE AND AMERICA MUST STAND UNITED"
The Times, 30 January 2003
(10) AND FINALLY: GEOLOGISTS SHOW HOMER GOT IT RIGHT
Nature Science Update, 29 January 2003
=================
(1) COMETS: HOW BIG A THREAT TO EARTH?
From National Geographic News, 28 January 2003
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2003/01/0128_030128_comets.html
John Roach
Earth-bound asteroids grab newspaper headlines for good reason.
Scientists say the fallout of an asteroid several city blocks
wide smacking into the planet would be catastrophic. Mass
extinctions, runaway infernos, erratic climate fluctuations, and
devastating impacts on human civilization are just some of the
scenarios imagined.
Why, then, does the threat of a comet impact with
Earth-potentially as dire if not worse than an asteroid-rarely
leak onto the pages of the popular press?
"Primarily because the rate of comet impacts on Earth is not
as great as the rate of asteroid impacts," said Daniel
Durda, a senior research scientist at the Southwest Research
Institute in Boulder, Colorado.
Most comets, and potentially some asteroids, have orbits that
bring them close to Earth only once every 200 years or longer.
Such bodies are known to astronomers as long-period objects.
The rate of long-period comet impacts on Earth is on the order of
one every 32 million years, whereas the rate of comparably-sized
asteroid impacts is more like one per every 500,000 years.
"When-note that I do not say if-we find a comet which has
some potential to hit Earth, it might cause an even bigger
sensation than potential asteroid impactors," said Robert
Jedicke, an asteroid expert at the University of Arizona in
Tucson.
The Threat
The consequences of comet and asteroid impacts on Earth are
roughly comparable. Both would cause widespread destruction and
loss of human life, said Jedicke.
"Big chunks of rock with a little ice, an asteroid, or big
chunks of ice with a little rock, a comet, create a lot of damage
when they impact Earth," he said. "[It's] like getting
hit on the head by a stone with an icy coating or an iceball with
a lot of rock in it-it's going to hurt your head."
A key difference is that long-period objects, like comets, will
impact Earth with much greater speed than short-period objects,
said Dan Mazanek, an engineer at NASA's Langley Research Center
in Hampton, Virginia.
"If we happen to come across a long-period object that is
dense, it would not have to be large to produce the same kinetic
energy of a one-kilometer [0.6-mile] near-Earth asteroid,"
he said. "To me, that seems like something worthwhile to
investigate."
Consider this example. An asteroid 0.6 mile (1 kilometer) wide
with a density of 187 pounds per cubic foot (3,000 kilograms per
cubic meter) traveling at 12 miles per second (20 kilometers per
second) would impact Earth with a force approximately 15 times
greater than the world's total nuclear arsenal. A comet of just
over half the size and one-third the mass traveling at 37 miles
(60 kilometers) per second could achieve an impact of similar
force if it were to strike Earth. "Size matters," said
Mazanek. "But so does density and speed."
Protection
Some astronomers are working to safeguard the Earth from
potential impact by comets or other near-Earth objects in orbit
around the Sun. The Near-Earth Object Program at NASA's Jet
Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, California, coordinates the
study of these objects.
As near-Earth objects are detected, scientists perform
calculations on their orbits to determine if or when they pose a
threat to impact Earth. The hope is that astronomers can detect
all near-Earth objects decades before they would potentially
impact Earth.
Meanwhile, other scientists are busy trying to figure out how to
throw such threatening objects off course, thus mitigating the
pending doom.
Long-period objects like comets, however, are not easily detected
until they enter the solar system.
"A long-period object by definition may not have any records
of sightings in written history," said Mazanek. "If it
came back into the solar system and it was on [an Earth-bound
trajectory], we would not have much warning."
Mazanek leads NASA's Comet/Asteroid Protect System, a program
that would expand on the Near-Earth Object Program to include the
detection of long-period comets, as well as small asteroids and
short-period comets that pose an Earth impact threat. The
space-based system, not to be in place for at least 25 years,
would provide constant monitoring and a system to divert and
modify the orbits of threatening objects.
Confirmation of a long-period object on an impact trajectory
would be possible at least a year before impact, allowing more
time to take defensive action than current detection systems
allow.
The problem is that not much could be done if a long-period
object on an Earth-bound trajectory were detected today, said
Durda.
"The worst scenario I can think of is a
multi-kilometer-diameter, long-period comet discovered several
months out on an impact trajectory as it is entering the inner
solar system," he said. "There is absolutely nothing we
could do about it at this point in time. Nothing."
Copyright 2003, National Geographic
==========
(2) A BROKEN NETWORK: RUSSIAN CONCERNS ABOUT LACKING NEAR EARTH
SPACE OBSERVATIONS
From Pravda, 28 January 2003
http://english.pravda.ru/main/2003/01/28/42648.html
Technique designed for astronomic observation has experienced a
serious revolution. Thanks to it, and as a result of usage of
charge transfer device matrixes as radiation detectors, even
small amateur telescopes can register dangerous meteorites
approaching the Earth before they hit the planet's surface.
Unfortunately, this revolution had no effect for the Russian
optical tracking complex; Russian specialists observing the near
space and the Solar system are currently practically blind in
this respect.
Large meteorites drop on the Earth rather often (sic). As is
known, within ten years US's nuclear detection system and spy
satellites registered about 250 strong explosions caused by
pieces of asteroids, comets and large meteorites that dropped
(sic) on the Earth. When such objects from space drop in densely
populated areas, they can entail lots of troubles there. For
instance, if the famous Tunguska meteorite had lingered for some
time more, it would have dropped in Russia's European part, but
not in Siberian taiga. It is not ruled out (sic) that the
meteorite would have ruined the Russian capital completely. The
latest object from space dropped on the Russian territory on
September 25, 2002. When it dropped, a strong explosion sounded
in Siberian taiga, near the city of Bodaibo in Russia's Irkutsk
region, at 3:00 a.m. A special expedition is to be organized next
spring for investigation of the explosion's consequences and for
study of the object itself.
Unfortunately, domestic tracking devices failed to register the
meteorite when it approached the planet or when it moved in the
atmosphere. But an American satellite designed for missile
launching registered the meteorite. As the space object wasn't
registered in Russia, neither the RF EMERCOM, nor the Ministry of
Defense or astronomers from Irkutsk warned local population about
the meteorite approaching the Earth. The problem is that Russian
network of optical space surveying is out of date. After the
breakup of the USSR, many stations for optical surveying of
near-Earth objects remained on the territories of newly
established independent states: in Ukraine, in Central Asia and
in the Caucasus region. The system for near-Earth space control,
that was created on the basis of observatories at universities
and teacher training institutes in 1957, is completely outdated.
In fact, Russian astronomers and military men controlling
movement of space objects cannot run effective control over the
space above Russia's territory. The fact that Russian astronomers
failed to register the large meteorite that dropped last
September proves ineffectiveness of Russian astronomic services.
One of the reasons why a revolution took place in astronomy five
years ago was that photoplates were replaced with charge transfer
device matrixes as radiation detectors. Such matrixes are
installed in all modern video cameras, digital photo cameras or
control systems in large supermarkets. A telescope with the
charge transfer device matrix allows to register and measure
everything that the device detects. Surveying with the help of
the charge transfer device successfully replaced time-taking
photographic methods of astronomic observations. Unfortunately,
attitude of the Russian government to domestic science produced
an unfavorable effect: Russian astronomy is lagging far behind
the world astronomy, as majority of telescopes in Russia are not
equipped with charge transfer devices. And this is at the time
when not only professional, but also amateur astronomers in other
countries have such telescopes. As experience of cooperation
between such amateurs and Russia's Pulkovo observatory shows, a
well organized surveying system consisting of small and average
telescopes with charge transfer devices is very effective for
tracking of moving space objects. This experience can be used for
bringing Russian surveying services to the level of effective
operation.
For this purpose, a program for supply of new equipment to
institutions of higher education has been recently launched. In
connection with this program, it would be reasonable to produce
domestic charge transfer device matrixes for those telescopes
that are used in universities of Russia. Production of such
matrixes can be financed partially at the expense of Russia's
Ministry of Defense. This measure would kill two birds with one
stone. On the one hand, astronomers in Russian universities would
get an opportunity to organize lectures on a modern level and to
attract youth more actively to scientific studies, searches of
newest stars, movement of comets, asteroids and meteorites, for
instance. On the other hand, this would allow the national
defense surveying services to use wonderfully equipped telescopes
for control of the space. For this very reason tracking stations
are spread all over the territory of Russia.
Astronomers of the Pulkovo observatory could actively participate
in solution of this problem, as the observatory developed methods
for prompt definition of celestial orbits as a result of surveys
involving charge transfer devices; the observatory also developed
mathematical support for processing and control of the surveys.
All these measures would make Russian astronomic services more
effective and allow to register meteorites before they drop on
the Earth.
Copyright 2003, Pravda
============
(3) COMPLEX LIFE, BY JOVE!
From Astrobiology Magazine, 20 January 2003
http://www.astrobio.net/news/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=359&mode=thread&order=0&thold=0
By Leslie Mullen
One of the tenets of astrology is that the positions of the
planets affect us. For instance, the position of the planet
Jupiter in your chart is supposed to indicate good luck for a
certain aspect of your life.
In an eerie echo of astrology, some scientists are now saying
that the position of Jupiter in our solar system was very good
luck for life on Earth.
Jupiter is about 5 astronomical units (AU) away from the Sun -
far enough away from Earth to not have interfered with the
development of our planet, and yet close enough to
gravitationally deflect asteroids and comets, limiting the number
of dangerous impacts.
Impacts by asteroids and comets can create cataclysmic events
that destroy life - witness the demise of the dinosaurs 65
million years ago, widely believed to have been brought about by
a "killer" asteroid impact. Without Jupiter, instead of
being hit with a killer asteroid every hundred million years or
so, we'd get one every 10,000 years. This reduction in impacts
enabled the Earth to develop both simple and complex forms of
life.
But gas giant planets like Jupiter don't always help in the
development of complex life. Consider, for instance, that while
Jupiter deflects many asteroids away from Earth, it also is
responsible for most of the asteroids in the first place. When
planetesimals were clumping together to form the terrestrial
planets, the gravitational influence of Jupiter prevented a fifth
planet from forming. Instead, today there is the asteroid belt
that lies between Mars and Jupiter - a sad echo of the
planet-that-never-was.
"Only a small fraction of the original material was left
behind to become the asteroid belt," says Alan Boss of the
Carnegie Institution of Washington. He says that Jupiter excited
this material to high orbital eccentricities, causing much of it
to collide with the Sun and the growing terrestrial planets.
"Jupiter does not prevent asteroid impacts on the Earth - it
causes them," says Boss. "Asteroids can still be kicked
out of their orbits and sent on paths that intersect the
terrestrial planets."
Mars also was affected by Jupiter's gravity during the early
formative years. Mars is only half the size and one-tenth the
mass of Earth, prevented by Jupiter from accumulating enough mass
to become an Earth-like world capable of sustaining complex life.
The lower mass of Mars, in combination with its low magnetism,
prevented the planet from retaining an atmosphere - a vital
necessity for life to exist and thrive.
If Jupiter were a little more massive, or if it was closer to the
Sun, the Earth might have suffered the same fate as Mars. If
Jupiter were close enough to the Sun to reside in the habitable
zone - 0.8 AU to 1.7 AU for our solar system, or roughly from the
orbit of Venus to the orbit of Mars - then the Earth and the
other terrestrial planets would never have formed at all.
Jupiter's gravitational influence would have prevented rocky
debris from coalescing into planets. The inner solar system
instead would have become a barren asteroid belt.
"Habitable zones tend to be only a few AU in width, so if
there is a Jupiter-mass planet inside the habitable zone, it is
highly unlikely that another planet of any mass could form or
exist so close by," says Boss. "Instead, the only hope
for habitability in such systems would be on moons orbiting the
Jupiter-mass planet."
Could it be that a solar system devoid of gas giants might have
the best chance for developing life? If gas giants like Jupiter
and Saturn had never formed in our solar system, three Earth-like
planets might have developed instead of just one. Lacking the gas
giants, Uranus and Neptune-like icy planets likely would have
formed in the Jupiter-Saturn region. This system would have been
relatively asteroid-free, since most of the rocky debris in the
early solar system would've coalesced into planets.
But a Jupiter-free solar system would still have to contend with
comets - small bodies of water ice that, in our solar system,
come from places like the Kuiper Belt and the Oort cloud. Comet
impacts can be as disastrous to life as asteroid impacts.
"In systems without asteroid belts, impactors come from the
comet belts," says Donald Brownlee, an astronomer at the
University of Washington in Seattle. "There is evidence that
most stars form distant comet belts around them."
George Wetherill of the Carnegie Institution of Washington has
suggested that without Jupiter and Saturn, there would be many
more comets in the Kuiper Belt. These comets would wander into
the inner solar system so frequently that the Earth would be
struck by a major comet impact every 100,000 years.
Despite the devastation caused by asteroid and comet impacts, a
solar system free of these bodies may not be the best thing for
the evolution of life.
For one thing, comets may be necessary for life to emerge on
terrestrial planets. It is thought that comets act as delivery
systems for organic material and water, elements that were
necessary for the origin and development of life on Earth.
According to Brownlee, Jupiter's scattering of cometary debris
probably delivered most of our oceans.
Although asteroid and comet impacts can destroy life, they also
set the stage for new evolutionary life forms to emerge. By
clearing a planet of the more dominant organisms, other life
forms can move to fill in the recently vacated ecological niches.
"If Jupiter was not there, or if it was smaller or further
away, then there might not be an asteroid belt and thus no
asteroid impacts," says Brownlee, "This can be good or
bad depending on the situation. The dinosaurs were certainly not
fans of the asteroids, but then they might not ever have evolved
without the asteroids."
The evolution of complex life on Earth owes a lot to happenstance
situations like asteroid or comet impacts. Not only did dinosaurs
probably owe their very existence to such impacts, but so too do
humans. If the asteroid impact that killed the dinosaurs had
never occurred, perhaps our ancestors would not have been able to
evolve beyond the small rodents that constituted the Mammalian
branch 65 million years ago.
Jupiter planets - rare or commonplace?
How often do gas giants appear in other solar systems? In our
search for planets outside our solar system, all the planets
discovered to date are gas giants like Jupiter and Saturn. This
does not mean that all the planets to be found are gas giants,
however. An inherent bias in the search method is that it can
only detect very massive planets.
Almost all the extrasolar planets found so far were detected with
the radial velocity, or "Doppler" technique. This
technique looks at how stars are affected by the gravity of an
orbiting planet. Over the course of an orbit, the planet will
pull at the star from different sides. Scientists measure the
Doppler shift of the starlight to tell when the star is moving
slightly away from us or toward us, and from this they can
roughly determine the mass and orbit of the planet that causes
the shift.
Over 100 Jupiter-mass planets have been found to date, from a
survey of over 1,000 stars - nearly all the solar-type stars
within 30 parsecs. However, Jupiters that are further away from
their stars take longer to complete an orbit, and therefore
require longer periods of astronomical observation. These stars
might harbor many more Jupiters that have not yet been detected.
Several extrasolar giants are extremely close to their stars, and
many scientists believe, due to the conditions necessary for
gaseous planet formation, that they must have formed further away
from their stars and then migrated inward. Such behavior would be
a death warrant for life on inner terrestrial planets like Earth,
causing the planets to be flung outside of the solar system, away
from the heat and light of their star. The highly elliptical
orbits of many extrasolar Jupiters are thought to be caused by
such orbital turf battles.
Estimating the number of Jupiter-mass planets in the galaxy
greatly relies on our understanding of planet formation. For a
long time, it was thought that gas giants formed the same way
terrestrial planets did - by the slow accretion of matter over
many millions of years. However, the accretion model has a
fundamental problem - how do gas giants accumulate enough gas
before the gaseous disk around a young star dissipates?
"(Jupiter-mass planets) are made of gas, and gas is lost
very early in some solar systems due to intense ultraviolet
irradiation from nearby stars," says Brownlee. "The
success of Jupiter formation may vary with location and time due
to the build up of heavy elements in the galaxy."
Boss's disk instability model suggests a different manner of gas
giant formation. In his model, the disk of gas and dust that
swirl around a young star develop points of instability. These
disturbed areas become gravitational wells, accumulating more and
more matter until they form the gas giant planets.
A recent computer model by Lucio Mayer and Thomas Quinn of the
University of Washington, which was based on Boss's disk
instability model, found that gas giants like Jupiter can form in
only 1,000 years. Their computer simulation produced planets 2 to
12 Jupiter masses, with elongated orbits rather than the more
circular orbits of the planets in our own solar system.
"If the disk instability mechanism can work, then most
planetary systems should have gas giant planets," says Boss.
"However, if core accretion is the mechanism that forms gas
giants, then most planetary systems may only have failed cores
that grew too slowly to accrete enough gas to become gas giants.
In other words, they would be full of ice giants like Neptune
instead. Only observations will prove which is right."
What's Next
Understanding the role that Jupiter plays in our own solar system
can help astronomers narrow their search for habitable planets
around other stars. While current planet search techniques are
limited to the detection of very massive planets, finding a
planet similar to Jupiter in mass and orbital distance might
indicate places where Earth-like planets could be found.
After 15 years of observations, an extrasolar planet with an
orbital distance similar to Jupiter's was detected in 2002. This
planet, orbiting the star 55 Cancri in the constellation Cancer,
orbits at approximately 5 AU. However, the planet has a mass
about 4 times that of Jupiter, and this larger mass may affect
the inner solar system in ways our own Jupiter does not.
In addition, this solar system contains two other Jupiter-mass
planets in tight orbits around their star: one at .115 AU, the
other at .241 AU. These inner gas giants suggest there probably
aren't any terrestrial planets within the star's habitable zone.
Still, scientists are optimistic about finding other Jupiter-mass
planets at similar orbital distances in the near feature. Such
solar systems will be prime candidates for NASA's Terrestrial
Planet Finder, a space-born telescope designed to take visual
images of Earth-mass planets. The Terrestrial Planet Finder is
due to be launched sometime between 2012 and 2015.
Copyright 2003, Astrobiology Magazine
=========
(4) IS THIS HOW LIFE ON EARTH BEGAN?
From The Daily Telegraph, 21 January 2003
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/connected/main.jhtml?view=DETAILS&grid=P8&targetRule=10&xml=%2Fconnected%2F2003%2F01%2F25%2Fecfmars.xml
By Paul Davies
The recent discovery that exotic microbes teem in the rocks
hundreds of metres beneath the floor of the Pacific Ocean looks
set to fuel the controversy over where and when life began. And
it will also considerably boost hopes for life on Mars.
When H G Wells wrote War of the Worlds in the 1890s, belief in
life on the Red Planet was widespread. Astronomers even produced
maps showing networks of canals they thought had been built by
water-deprived Martians. These fanciful notions were knocked on
the head in the 1960s when the first space probes to visit Mars
revealed a barren, cratered terrain.
The coup de grace came in 1976 when the US space agency Nasa
landed two Viking spacecraft on the surface to search for signs
of biological activity. Data showed a freeze-dried desert bathed
in ultra-violet radiation. Scooped up Martian dirt was analysed,
and not a single bacterium was found. Mars was red and dead.
In recent years, however, sentiment has begun to shift. Several
forthcoming Mars missions, notably Britain's Beagle 2 designed by
Prof Colin Pillinger of the Open University, will seek out
telltale signs that Mars has, or at least once had, some form of
life. So what has changed?
Life as we know it requires liquid water, and photographs of Mars
show river valleys and flood channels. There are hints of lakes
and even a small ocean. All are dried up now, but results from
the Mars Odyssey probe suggest an abundance of ice locked up in
the form of permafrost. The water is still there, but frozen.
Three and a half billion years ago it was a different story. Mars
had a thick atmosphere that created intense greenhouse warming.
It also had extensive volcanoes. Running water was in abundance.
Such warm, wet conditions were ideal for life. On Earth, the
oldest microbes are found clustering around volcanic vents on the
ocean floor. Mars probably had similar environments billions of
years ago that could have hosted such organisms.
Another key factor in the reappraisal of Mars is the discovery
that life on Earth extends deep into the crust. The new results
by Prof Stephen Giovannoni and colleagues at Oregon State
University, Corvallis, confirm the existence of a pervasive
hidden biosphere that may be kilometres deep.
This subterranean life thrives without sunlight, exploiting
dissolved gases and fluids percolating up from the torrid depths.
The primary producers are microbes that can convert inorganic
substances directly into living material using chemical energy
alone.
The significance of this discovery for Mars is that, though the
surface is hostile to life, the warmer subsurface may be more
congenial. Miles down, liquid water aquifers might harbour hardy
organisms of the sort found beneath the sea bed in the Pacific.
And even if Mars is dead today, life could have clung on
underground for billions of years.
In fact, Mars may even have been a more favourable planet than
Earth for life to get going in the first place. For a start, it
was spared the colossal impact that created the moon and melted
Earth's crust. Scientists now recognise that cosmic impacts have
played a major role in the story of life.
For the 700 million or so years that followed the formation of
the solar system 4.5 billion years ago, a barrage of giant
asteroids pounded the planets. On Earth, these impacts would have
swathed the globe with incandescent rock vapour, boiling the
oceans and sterilising the rock beneath.
On Mars, life could have been shielded from the bombardment by
taking up residence in the deep subsurface. Being smaller than
Earth, the Red Planet cooled quicker, rapidly dissipating the
fiery heat of its formation. When Earth's crust was still a
searing hell, the Martian subsurface could have been comfortable
for heat-tolerant microbes of the sort now living near volcanic
vents.
Ironically, the same impacts that threatened early life in the
solar system might also have served to propagate it. A comet
slamming into Mars would blast billions of tons of rocks into
space. A few per cent of this ejected material will eventually
hit Earth. A couple of dozen meteorites are known to have come
from Mars, and estimates suggest that, on average, about one Mars
rock per month reaches our planet.
It seems inevitable that, if there were once abundant microbes on
Mars, some of them would have reached Earth by hitching a ride on
Martian meteorites. Cocooned inside a large rock, they would be
screened from the worst effects of radiation and protected from
burning up as they plunged into the Earth's atmosphere.
Experiments using superguns in New Mexico and at the University
of Kent confirm that bacteria could withstand the shock of being
blasted off Mars. Moreover, the Martian meteorites collected so
far were not subjected to lethal temperatures during their
violent ejection. It seems likely that at least some resilient
microbes could have made the journey unscathed.
This raises the tantalising prospect that Mars may be the cradle
of terrestrial life. One of the puzzles about life on Earth is
that it established itself so quickly after the bombardment
abated 3.8 billion years ago. In Western Australia there are 3.5
billion-year-old rocks containing fossil bacteria. Nearby are
stromatolites, thought to be the product of ancient microbial
mat-building. There is even a hint of life in Greenland rocks as
old as 3.85 billion years, although those claims are contentious.
Clearly life didn't spring into existence ready-made in the form
of fully-fledged bacteria, so there must have been an extended
even earlier period of evolution. But given the battering Earth's
surface took from asteroids and comets, it looks more and more
likely that this pre-history took place beyond our planet.
If life began on Mars and evolved to the point of bacteria by,
say, four billion years ago, then it had plenty of chance to
infect our planet. A rain of microbe-laden Martian debris would
have fallen on Earth throughout the bombardment. Possibly Mars
life took root here many times, only to be exterminated by the
next big impact. Eventually, some of these incoming colonists
would have flourished, probably by spreading into the sheltered
subterranean depths where microbial life still lurks today. From
this precarious niche, they evolved into the vast diversity of
life we see today, from mouse to man.
If this theory is right, then history has turned full circle
since H G Wells penned his alien scare story. Far from being our
enemies, the Martians are our ancestors.
Paul Davies is in The Australian Centre for Astrobiology at
Macquarie University in Sydney. This article is based on his
Michael Faraday Prize lecture "The Origin of Life" to
be given at The Royal Society on January 27, before scientists
and media gather at an event sponsored by The Daily Telegraph and
Novartis.
Mars, the appearance of aliens and fate of the human race will be
discussed at the Cheltenham Festival of Science which starts on
June 4. To order a brochure, call 01242 237377, email
festivalbrochure@cheltenham.gov.uk or visit
www.cheltenhamfestivals.co.uk
Copyright 2003, The Daily Telegraph
=============
(5) JMU'S TTL WINS PRESTIGIOUS CHINA EXPORT AWARD
From Peter Bond <PeterRBond@aol.com>
THIS PRESS RELEASE FROM LIVERPOOL JOHN MOORES UNIVERSITY IS
FORWARDED BY PETER BOND, ROYAL ASTRONOMICAL SOCIETY PRESS OFFICER
(SPACE SCIENCE).
*****************************************************************************************
27 January 2003
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
UNIVERSITY COMPANY WINS PRESTIGIOUS CHINA EXPORT AWARD
On 27 January, Telescope Technologies Limited (TTL), a company
owned by Liverpool John Moores University, received the
prestigious China Export of the Year Award for 2002. The
Award was made in recognition of the achievement of TTL in
winning a contract to build the largest astronomical
telescope in China.
The Award was presented by HRH The Duke of York, the UK's Special
Representative for International Trade and Investment, at a
ceremony in London to Mr. Aldham Robarts, Chairman of the
Company.
TTL has pioneered use of advanced technology to build the world's
largest robotic telescopes. The telescope for China is
being built for the Yunnan Astronomical Observatory, Chinese
Academy of Sciences. It will have a mirror 2.4 metres in diameter
and will take two years to manufacture. It will be sited at
a mountain Observatory 3200 metres in altitude near the historic
city and tourist destination of Li Jiang in the Province of
Yunnan. When installed, the telescope will be capable of
unsupervised, fully autonomous operation for many nights of
observations. The telescope is ideally suited to monitoring many
hundreds of variable astronomical objects such as supernovae,
gamma-ray bursters, and cataclysmic variable stars as well as
searching for Earth-like planets in our Galaxy by observation of
gravitational-lensing effects. The telescope in China will be
capable of being linked to similar TTL robotic telescopes on La
Palma, Canary islands; Hawaii; and Australia to form a global
network for monitoring objects 24 hours a day and simultaneously
at different wavelengths.
TTL is based at and owned by Liverpool John Moores University and
has one of the world's most highly qualified and experienced
telescope design teams (with expertise in mechanical, optical,
software and control engineering). Staff come from both
astronomical and industrial backgrounds. The core members
of the team originate from the Royal Greenwich Observatory. The
company closely collaborates with the Astrophysics Institute of
the University, whose staff have developed the robotic scheduling
software (the most advanced of its kind) for the telescope.
Liverpool John Moores University, founded in 1823, is a large
city-based university with over 20,000 students studying over 200
courses at undergraduate and postgraduate level. The University
has played a vital role in the cultural renaissance of Liverpool
and regeneration of the city. New advances in digital technology
and science have placed the University at the forefront of
exciting developments in areas such as multimedia and space
exploration.
The China Export of the Year Award is given by the 48 Group Club
who this year celebrate 50 years of building business relations
between the UK and China. This organisation has, within its
ranks, an unmatched pool of Chinese business expertise.
============================
* LETTERS TO THE MODERATOR *
============================
(6) COMET C/2002 X5 (KUDO-FUJIKAWA)
From Mark Kidger <mrk@ll.iac.es>
Dear Benny:
I was interested in you item on Comet C/2002 X5 (Kudo-Fujikawa)
yesterday.
Unfortunately, reality has caught up with this comet and although
it is
moderately bright, it looks unlikely that it will get past
magnitude 4. The
comet passes perihelion tomorrow and is just 2 degrees from the
Sun. As far as
I am aware it has not been observed with the naked-eye, nor does
it look likely
that it will be. In fact, as SOHO comets go, it will be
reasonably bright, but
far from the most spectacular comet that SOHO has seen.
In contrast, there is a second comet that is approaching the Sun
that will
reach perihelion at half the distance of C/2002 X5 and which has
been behaving
in a very singular manner. Comet C/2002 V1 (NEAT) has received
little publicity
because it appears to be a very small object and it was expected
to fade out
before perihelion but, to everyone's surprise, it is now well
inside the
Earth's orbit (current heliocentric distance 0.76AU) and still
brightening,
according to the data that I am receiving, as a 6th power law,
although this
still represents a significant decrease in the rate of
brightening over
previous levels.
C/2002 V1 (NEAT) is now actually as bright as C/2002 X5
(Kudo-Fujikawa) and
could get much brighter still. Although a few weeks ago it had
become
extremely difuse, visual observers are now showing the comet to
be much more
condensed again, which suggests that it may even survive through
to perihelion.
Nominally, C/2002 V1 (NEAT) would reach a magnitude around -10 if
it were to
follow its current evolution and be a really spectacular object
in the SOHO
images. I think that it is very unlikely that it will get this
bright, but it
is quite unprecented that a small comet continues brightening so
fast so close
to the Sun. Whatever happens, it will be extremely interesting to
see how it
behaves from here on in. Will it be disrupted? When will its
brightening
slow down to normal rates of a 2nd or 3rd power law? Whatever
happens it is
likely that around perihelion on Fenruary 18th, the comet should
be magnitude
0 or brighter and a much more spectacular object for
SOHO-watchers.
Regards,
Mark Kidger
===============
(7) MARS, IMPACTS AND LIFE
From Michael Paine <mpaine@tpg.com.au>
Early Mars: Oceans Away?
http://www.astrobio.net/news/article365.html
"several researchers during the 1980s noted that large,
early asteroid impacts "would induce hydrothermal phenomena
and could produce small valley networks....If the impact scenario
is correct, the river valley networks are not a good place to
look for evidence of life, Toon says. "It's just not the
right place; they are probably ephemeral." A better place,
he says, are the much younger gullies, which were apparently fed
by hydrothermal water. "They tapped into underground
aquifers for a long life, maybe millions of years," Toon
says.
Mike
=============
(8) WHAT ABOUT WATER ON MARS?
From Worth Crouch <doagain@jps.net>
Dear Dr. Peiser,
Are we drinking Martian water in our mixed drinks that came our
way by the comet express? Could cosmic collisions have knocked
off the Martian oceans? Might we be the descendants of microbes
from Mars, or do we just know people who have microbial Martian
brains? Since NASA's Mars Global Surveyor sent pictures that
showed valleys and gullies, which some believe were dug out by
ice flows, floods, or even oceans the existence of water on Mars
has excited people's imagination.
A few meteorites have been identified as Martian, because of
their profile by US space probes, and one meteorite from Mars
suggests the red planet had water. On January 23, 2003 the
Theodore Monod Consortium in France determined a Martian basalt
meteorite had a crystallization pattern that conforms to the
presence of ancient water.
The Augite in the basalt crystallized before pigeonite, and
studies have shown this can only happen under high pressure in
liquid magma when there is a significant quantity of dissolved
water. Martian meteorites are believed to have been kicked off
the surface of the planet by an asteroid or comet collision
millions of years ago. And although meteorite, NWA 1669, which
fell in the Western Sahara hasn't been dated its chemical profile
matches that of Mars.
Mars was probably impacted by another comet or asteroid 16
million years ago and debris was sent hurtling into space, some
of which reached Earth as another Martian meteorite ALH84001.
This event must have been a major catastrophe on Mars; yet on
Earth the resulting meteor was little more than a streak in the
sky. The catastrophe was probably significant enough to
extinguish Martian life if it existed, and the existence of
Martian life is not out of the question, since Rod-shaped
structures found on the meteorite have been interpreted as tiny
fossilized bacteria by some.
So there is evidence Mars had water and life. Also the indication
that in the past liquid water created oceans and erosion on the
Martian landscape brings the vision of an Earthlike atmosphere
with clouds and rain.
However, the point isn't that Mars had water, or even life, or
that Martian water and life might have been blasted to Earth
millions of years ago. What is significant is, whatever Mars had
it was blown off into oblivion by cosmic impacts and Earthlings
could face the same fate if an asteroid/comet defense isn't
established. After all shouldn't we Earthlings have a greater
ability to defend our planet than the poor stupid Martian
bacteria had defending theirs?
Sincerely,
Worth F. Crouch
doagain@jps.net
============
(9) OPINION: "EUROPE AND AMERICA MUST STAND UNITED"
From The Times, 30 January 2003
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,482-559907,00.html
THE real bond between the United States and Europe is the values
we share: democracy, individual freedom, human rights and the
Rule of Law. These values crossed the Atlantic with those who
sailed from Europe to help create the USA. Today they are under
greater threat than ever.
The attacks of 11 September showed just how far terrorists -
the enemies of our common values - are prepared to go to destroy
them. Those outrages were an attack on all of us. In standing
firm in defence of these principles, the governments and people
of the United States and Europe have amply demonstrated the
strength of their convictions. Today more than ever, the
transatlantic bond is a guarantee of our freedom.
We in Europe have a relationship with the United States which has
stood the test of time. Thanks in large part to American bravery,
generosity and far-sightedness, Europe was set free from the two
forms of tyranny that devastated our continent in the 20th
century: Nazism and Communism. Thanks, too, to the continued
cooperation between Europe and the United States we have managed
to guarantee peace and freedom on our continent. The
transatlantic relationship must not become a casualty of the
current Iraqi regime's persistent attempts to threaten world
security.
In today's world, more than ever before, it is vital that we
preserve that unity and cohesion. We know that success in the
day-to-day battle against terrorism and the proliferation of
weapons of mass destruction demands unwavering determination and
firm international cohesion on the part of all countries for whom
freedom is precious.
The Iraqi regime and its weapons of mass destruction represent a
clear threat to world security. This danger has been explicitly
recognised by the United Nations. All of us are bound by Security
Council Resolution 1441, which was adopted unanimously. We
Europeans have since reiterated our backing for Resolution 1441,
our wish to pursue the UN route and our support for the Security
Council, at the Prague Nato Summit and the Copenhagen European
Council.
In doing so, we sent a clear, firm and unequivocal message that
we would rid the world of the danger posed by Saddam Hussein's
weapons of mass destruction. We must remain united in insisting
that his regime is disarmed. The solidarity, cohesion and
determination of the international community are our best hope of
achieving this peacefully. Our strength lies in unity.
The combination of weapons of mass destruction and terrorism is a
threat of incalculable consequences. It is one at which all of us
should feel concerned. Resolution 1441 is Saddam Hussein's last
chance to disarm using peaceful means. The opportunity to avoid
greater confrontation rests with him. Sadly this week the UN
weapons inspectors have confirmed that his long-established
pattern of deception, denial and non-compliance with UN Security
Council resolutions is continuing.
Europe has no quarrel with the Iraqi people. Indeed, they are the
first victims of Iraq's current brutal regime. Our goal is to
safeguard world peace and security by ensuring that this regime
gives up its weapons of mass destruction. Our governments have a
common responsibility to face this threat. Failure to do so would
be nothing less than negligent to our own citizens and to the
wider world.
The United Nations Charter charges the Security Council with the
task of preserving international peace and security. To do so,
the Security Council must maintain its credibility by ensuring
full compliance with its resolutions. We cannot allow a dictator
to systematically violate those Resolutions. If they are not
complied with, the Security Council will lose its credibility and
world peace will suffer as a result.
We are confident that the Security Council will face up to its
responsibilities.
José María Aznar, Spain
José Manuel Durão Barroso, Portugal
Silvio Berlusconi, Italy
Tony Blair, United Kingdom
Václav Havel, Czech Republic
Peter Medgyessy, Hungary
Leszek Miller, Poland
Anders Fogh Rasmussen, Denmark
===========
(10) AND FINALLY: GEOLOGISTS SHOW HOMER GOT IT RIGHT
From Nature Science Update, 29 January 2003
http://www.nature.com/nsu/030127/030127-4.html
Trojan geography in Homer's Iliad matches sediment record of
Dardanelles coastline.
PHILIP BALL
Homer knew his geography, say US researchers. The ancient Greek
writer's description of the war fought around Troy is consistent
with a new reconstruction of the way the region looked about
three millennia ago1.
In his Iliad, Homer recounts how the city of Troy was besieged
and finally conquered by the army of the Spartan king Menelaus,
who sought to reclaim his wife Helen from her abductor, prince
Paris. This is thought to have happened around 1250 BC.
Homer's account of the siege and battles give several clues about
the lay of the Trojan plain. Then, in the first century AD, the
Greek writer Strabo expanded on the description in his book
Geography, by which time Troy was known as New Ilium.
Ancient Troy is thought to have stood at a site called Hissarlik
in present-day Turkey; archaeological excavations have revealed
the remains of a city. There are, in fact, several different
ancient Troys, as the settlement was built and destroyed many
times since the third millennium BC. These ruins now perch on the
edge of a plateau overlooking a river flood plain of sand, silt
and marshland.
When Troy was first built around 3000 BC, say John Kraft, of the
University of Delaware in Newark, and his colleagues, it was on
the coast of a great bay that filled most of the plain.
Today, however, Troy's environs look very different. Little by
little, silt from the Simois and Scamander rivers (today called
the Dumrek Su and Kara Menderes), which flow into the bay, moved
the Dardanelles coastline several kilometres north, leaving Troy
high and dry.
The researchers tracked these changes back through time by
radiocarbon dating the fossils in columns of sediment drilled
from the rivers' flood plain. Their analysis revealed where, at
different times, the ground was once a swamp, a brackish lagoon,
or earlier still, a flooded bay. The investigation was begun in
1977 and has been directed by Kraft's collaborator Ilhan Kayan of
Ege University in Izmir, Turkey .
The Greek army, Homer tells us, camped on the Aegean cost to the
west of Troy, and drew up their ships "on the shore of the
surging sea well away from the fighting". Kraft's team
figures that this camp was situated on a promontory along the
west of the former Bay of Troy, which the Greeks defended with a
"deep ditch" to the south that prevented the Trojans
from advancing up the narrow finger of land.
The researchers also located the "ford of the fair-flowing
river" Scamander. Here, according to Homer, Achilles
"broke the Trojan line" and forced many of the Trojans
over the steep riverbanks into the deep, swift water. By Strabo's
time, the plain was probably much farther north, so that the
promontory was no longer evident and the two rivers were able to
flow together before emptying into the retreating bay.
The team's findings show that Strabo's judgement was unfailingly
acute when he spoke of the geography of the Trojan War. He
realized that alluvial deposition had changed the coast since
Homer's day, and he seems to have guessed rightly when he stated
that the Greek camp and ship station were situated "20
stades [about 4 kilometres] from Ilium".
References
Kraft, J. C., Rapp, G., Kayan, I. & Luce, J. V. Harbor areas
at ancient Troy: sedimentology and geomorphology complement
Homer's Iliad. Geology, 31, 163 - 166, (2003). |Article|
© Nature News Service / Macmillan Magazines Ltd 2003
--------------------------------------------------------------------
CCNet is a scholarly electronic network. To
subscribe/unsubscribe, please contact the moderator Benny J
Peiser <b.j.peiser@livjm.ac.uk >. Information circulated on
this network is for scholarly and educational use only. The
attached information may not be copied or reproduced for any
other purposes without prior permission of the copyright holders.
The fully indexed archive of the CCNet, from February 1997 on,
can be found at http://abob.libs.uga.edu/bobk/cccmenu.html.
DISCLAIMER: The opinions, beliefs and viewpoints expressed in the
articles and texts and in other CCNet contributions do not
necessarily reflect the opinions, beliefs and viewpoints of the
moderator of this network.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
*
CCNet TERRA 7/2003 - 29 January 2003
-------------------------------------
"As an Arctic frost chills two-thirds the nation and kills
hundreds
in Bangladesh, some answers may come from changes in the Arctic
itself.
As several scientists have warned, global warming will be full of
surprises. Warming over the past half-century has already brought
more
erratic and extreme weather. Some climatologists are increasingly
concerned
about the stability of the climate system itself and the
potential for
abrupt shifts - to warmer or even much colder states."
--Paul R. Epstein and James J. McCarthy, The Boston Globe,
28 january 2003
"In the southeastern U.S., we've had declining temperatures
over the
past 110 years. Would this be evidence that human impacts are
causing the
temperature to fall?"
--John Christy, University of Alabama in Huntsville
"With logic apparently in the deep-freeze, several global
warming
apocalysts have stated that the outbreak of record-breaking low
temperatures in late January and early February [1996] is exactly
what we should expect as global warming kicks in. That's
right-global
warming causes record cold."
--World Climate Report, February 1996
(1) SOUTH ASIA'S WORST COLD SPELL IN 40 YEARS WINDS DOWN, LEAVING
1,935 DEAD
Associated Press, 28 January 2003
(2) NEW COLD WAVE HITS PARTS OF INDIA
The Times of In dia, 29 January 2003
(3) COLD COMFORT
Tech Central Station, 24 January 2003
(4) WHY THE GLOBAL DEEP FREEZE?
The Boston Globe, 28 January 2003
(5) RECORD COLD CAUSED BY GLOBAL WARMING?
World Climate Report, February 1996
(6) WEST ANTARCTIC ICE SHEET HAS BEEN MELTING FOR 10,000 YEARS
CO2 Science Magazine, 29 January 2003
(7) COSMIC RAYS: CAN THEY INFLUENCE CLIMATE ON CENTENNIAL AND
MILLENIAL TIME
SCALES?
CO2 Science Magazine, 29 January 2003
(8) WHAT MADE THE "MEDIEVAL WARM PERIODE" WARM?
CO2 Science Magazine, 29 January 2003
(9) NO 'DRAMATIC' SEA LEVEL RISE IN TASMANIA
www.john-daly.com,
25 January 2003
(10) THE LOMBORG CASE, RISK ASSESSMENT AND "HUMOR" - A
REPLY TO BENNY
PEISER.
Andrew Glikson <geospec@webone.com.au>
(11) SCIENTIFIC METHOD AND CULTURAL RELATIVISM IN THE LOMBORG
ARGUMENT
Max Wallis <WallisMK@Cardiff.ac.uk>
(12) "ARE YOU PAID BY AMERICAN OIL COMPANIES?"
Nathalie Bugeaud <planetary@free.fr>
(13) CCNet, NEO-CATASTROPHISM AND SCIENTIFIC SCEPTICISM
Benny J Peiser <b.j.peiser@livjm.ac.uk>
============
(1) SOUTH ASIA'S WORST COLD SPELL IN 40 YEARS WINDS DOWN, LEAVING
1,935 DEAD
>From Associated Press, 28 January 2003
http://www.recorder.ca/cp/World/030128/w012815A.html
NEW DELHI (AP) - Cloudy weather and occasional sunshine have
pushed
temperatures up in northern India, ending the worst South Asian
cold spell
in 40 years, officials said Tuesday.
The frigid weather has claimed 1,935 lives in India, Nepal and
Bangladesh
since mid-December. People began wearing light clothes in New
Delhi as the
temperature reached 25 degrees Monday, five degrees above normal,
an officer
at the weather office said. The day's low was 13.5.
No new deaths were reported in South Asia on Tuesday. The death
toll stood
at 1,100 in India, 786 in Bangladesh and 49 in Nepal from the
bitter cold
and icy Himalayan winds that lashed the region, officials said.
The three-week spell was the coldest in 40 years in the Indian
states of
Rajasthan, Punjab, Haryana, New Delhi, Uttar Pradesh and Bihar,
the weather
officer said. In the past, cold spells typically lasted seven to
10 days...
============
(2) NEW COLD WAVE HITS PARTS OF INDIA
>From The Times of In dia, 29 January 2003
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/cms.dll/html/uncomp/articleshow?artid=35800328
NEW DELHI: After a brief respite, Himachal was again in the grip
of cold
wave with higher reaches experiencing heavy snowfall as sharp
showers pelted
northern region breaking the prolonged dry spell.
The entire tribal belt and higher hills in Himachal had fresh
snowfall while
rains coupled with icy winds lashed mid and lower hills reviving
cold wave
conditions in the state.
=========
(3) COLD COMFORT
>From Tech Central Station, 24 January 2003
http://www.techcentralstation.com/1051/envirowrapper.jsp?PID=1051-450&CID=1051-012403F
By Nick Schulz
Does a frigid January mean the threat of climate change is over?
As the
headline on the front of Wednesday's New York Daily News put it
"Global
Warming, Huh?"
In the northeast and parts of the midwest, the temperature has
not risen
above freezing since January 14. It's gotten so cold, the crime
rate is down
in New York City - it's apparently too cold to burgle.
Meteorologists expect
the cold front to last into next week.
But low temperatures this winter don't disprove the
global-warming theory
any more than warm temperatures last summer confirm it. Despite
this, we
often hear from some scientists, the media, and politicians how
the 20th
century was the warmest on record and how greenhouse gases - in
particular
those caused by human use of fossil fuels - are contributing to a
catastrophic global warming.
"The evidence of global warming keeps piling up, month after
month, week
after week," said Vice President Al Gore, back in the hot
summer of 1998.
"How long is it going to take before these people in the
Congress get the
message? People are sweltering out here."
And just last summer, Europe was hit with bad flooding and the
Danube
spilled over its banks. Rather than blame a fickle Mother Nature,
some chose
to blame mankind. "This [flooding] definitely has to do with
global warming.
We must change something now. Those nations that really are
careless with
the environment should have to compensate," said Gallus
Cadonau of the Swiss
Greina Foundation.
And when human beings aren't causing floods, they're apparently
causing
droughts. "This is the first drought... where the impact of
human-induced
global warming can be clearly seen," David Karoly, a former
professor of
meteorology at Australia's Monash University said two weeks ago.
All of these assertions are cold comfort to people in many parts
of the
world experiencing one of the worst freezing spells in recent
memory.
"London was blanketed under more snow than it has seen in 11
years...
Freezing conditions enveloped the country," the Independent
reported this
month. "The whole northern hemisphere, from Florida to
Finland, Germany to
Japan, was in the grip of a cold snap that seemed more in line
with a new
Ice Age," the Daily Telegraph revealed last week.
"As a monthlong cold wave hammers parts of India, Bangladesh
and Nepal, it
is the poor who fare the worst in the daily fight against
dropping
temperatures," the AP reported. The cold is already
responsible for over 100
deaths in Bangladesh.
So what's going on? For starters, there's a lot of what climate
scientists
call "natural variability" at work. That's a fancy way
of saying that
climate has always changed and will continue to change on its own
over time
- despite the inputs and influences of volcanic eruptions or the
sun or
human-made greenhouse gases. This makes it difficult to predict
what will
happen in the future or to ascertain precisely what factors -
such as
greenhouse gases - will influence global climate and in what way.
Dr. John Christy of the Department of Atmospheric Science and
Earth System
Science Laboratory at the University of Alabama in Huntsville
points out
that "in the southeastern U.S., we've had declining
temperatures over the
past 110 years. Would this be evidence that human impacts are
causing the
temperature to fall?"
Of course not. Just as the current cold spell isn't proof that
global
warming isn't happening. But neither is a flood, a drought, a
melting
glacier, or a hot summer where "people are sweltering"
proof that global
warming is happening.
The currently available climate science tells us that a lot of
healthy
skepticism is in order anytime anyone says recent weather
conditions and
climate changes point to global warming. In the mean time, good
news could
be on the horizon for the shivering masses around the world.
Britain's
Meteorological Office warned less than a month ago that 2003 is
set to
become the hottest year on record. If the Office turns out to be
correct,
just don't call it global warming.
Copyright 2003, Tech Central Station
====================
(4) WHY THE GLOBAL DEEP FREEZE?
>From The Boston Globe, 28 January 2003
http://www.boston.com/dailyglobe2/028/oped/Why_the_global_deep_freeze+.shtml
By Paul R. Epstein and James J. McCarthy, 1/28/2003
WHY IS IT SO FRIGID WHEN THE GLOBE IS WARMING?
As an Arctic frost chills two-thirds the nation and kills
hundreds in
Bangladesh, some answers may come from changes in the Arctic
itself.
First, if you had any doubts, we are in an unusually deep cold
spell, with
snow and records falling across the South. Driving conditions are
hazardous
(and sometimes tragic) as pedestrians and the homeless face
bitter winds and
icy ''orthopedic weather.'' Ice dams are blocking Latvian ports,
winds and
storms are battering Europe, Portugal is freezing, Vietnam has
lost
one-third its rice crop, and the cold has caused close to 2,000
deaths in
usually temperate South Asia.
As several scientists have warned, global warming will be full of
surprises.
Warming over the past half-century has already brought more
erratic and
extreme weather. Some climatologists are increasingly concerned
about the
stability of the climate system itself and the potential for
abrupt shifts -
to warmer or even much colder states. Can we make sense of the
present cold
snap?
Part of the explanation comes from changes to our north.
Warming causes ice to melt, forming cold fresh water. And
increased input of
cold fresh water to the ocean can affect weather patterns as well
as global
ocean circulation.
Recent warming in the Northern Hemisphere has melted a lot of
North Polar
ice. Since the 1970s the floating North Polar ice cap has thinned
by almost
half.
A second source of cold fresh water comes from Greenland, where
continental
ice is now melting at higher elevations each year. Some melt
water is
trickling down through crevasses; lubricating the base,
accelerating ice
''rivers,'' and increasing the potential for sudden slippage.
A third source of cold fresh water is rain at high latitudes.
Overall ocean
warming speeds up the water cycle, increasing evaporation. The
warmed
atmosphere can also hold and transport more water vapor from low
to high
latitudes. Water falling over land is enhancing discharge from
five major
Siberian rivers into the Arctic, and water falling directly over
the ocean
adds even more fresh water to the surface.
The cold, freshened waters of the North Atlantic accelerate
transatlantic
winds, and this may be one factor driving frigid fronts down the
eastern US
seaboard and across to Europe and Asia.
It is too early to know how long the current cold spell will
last, and time
and hindsight will be needed to reveal all the factors
contributing to the
present chill. But the ice itself and pollen and marine fossils
reveal that
cold reversals have interrupted warming trends in the past.
The North Atlantic Ocean can freshen to a point where the North
Atlantic
deep water pump - driven by sinking cold, salty water that is, in
turn,
replaced by warm Gulf Stream waters - can suddenly slow down.
Some 13,000
years ago, when the globe was emerging from the last Glacial
Maximum and
continental ice sheets were thawing, the Gulf Stream abruptly
changed course
and shot straight across to France. The Northern Hemisphere
refroze - for
the next 1,300 years - before temperatures jumped again in just
several
years, warming the world to its present state.
In the past few years the northern North Atlantic has freshened,
and since
the 1950s the deep overflow between Iceland and Scotland has
slowed by 20
percent.
Since cold reversals occurred naturally, one may ask whether
humans can
influence these cycles as well.
Natural variability and human influence together explain the
observed
changes in the North Atlantic. Calculations (of orbital cycles)
indicate
that our hospitable climate regime was not likely to end due to
natural
causes any time soon. But due to the burning of fossil fuels,
atmospheric
levels of carbon dioxide are now greater than at any time in the
last half
million years. The recent buildup of heat-trapping greenhouse
gases is
forcing the climate system in new ways and into uncharted seas.
The hopeful news is that unstable systems can be restabilized.
But
substantial reductions in greenhouse gas emissions will be needed
in the
next few years to stabilize the atmospheric concentrations and
reduce the
human-generated forces pushing on the climate system.
In order to change directions, however, we must first slow down.
And slowing
down means burning much less coal, oil, and gas and cutting far
fewer trees.
Significant incentives will be needed to simultaneously solve the
problems
of energy, the environment, and the economy. But clean
development through
renewable energy can become the engine of growth for this 21st
century and
provide the best insurance for a healthier, more stable, and more
secure
future.
Dr. Paul R. Epsteinis associate director of the Center for Health
and the
Global Environment at Harvard Medical School. James J. McCarthy
is professor
of oceanography at Harvard University and was co-chair of the
IPCC 2001
Assessment, Working Group II.
This story ran on page A15 of the Boston Globe on 1/28/2003.
© Copyright 2003 Globe Newspaper Company.
============
(5) RECORD COLD CAUSED BY GLOBAL WARMING?
>From World Climate Report, February 1996
http://www.greeningearthsociety.org/climate/previous_issues/vol1/v1n13/feature1.htm
Taxpayers complain that scientists waste their hard-earned money
because of
press releases like "A recent government study has shown
that overweight
people consume more fat than people who are not
overweight." You don't need
a doctorate to grasp the obvious.
Similarly, the untrained but informed reader can often smell a
rat (or a
rabbit). With logic apparently in the deep-freeze, several global
warming
apocalysts have stated that the outbreak of record-breaking low
temperatures
in late January and early February [1996] is exactly what we
should expect
as global warming kicks in. That's right-global warming causes
record cold.
Here, we'll instead examine the validity of the hypothesis that
cold air
masses should get colder as levels of atmospheric trace gases
increase.
Specifically, let's look at how polar and Arctic air masses form
and how
these systems might change in an enhanced greenhouse world.
Figure 1. Departure of average temperature from normal for
the period Jan.
28 through Feb. 3, 1996 (from Climate Analysis Center).
Cold Air Mass Formation
The world's coldest air masses form over the high latitude
continental
plains (and over the frozen Arctic Ocean) in winter. Air moves
over an
extensive snow- and ice-covered surface and begins to cool by
emitting its
warmth (longwave infrared radiation) both toward the ground and
off into
space. As long as the air is warmer than the snowpack, it will
continue to
cool until equilibrium is attained (the air and the surface reach
the same
temperature). Simultaneously, the snow and ice are radiating away
energy
(losing heat) to both the atmosphere and to space. Since
these
high-latitude climes are perpetually snow- or ice-covered in
winter, they
serve as an ideal breeding ground for cold air masses.
But the weather has to cooperate to provide optimal conditions
for cold air
mass formation. A high pressure system is a necessary
ingredient. This type
of system, characterized by calm winds and clear skies, provides
the
conditions that are ideal for maximum radiative loss.
The final piece of the puzzle is residence time. The longer the
air mass
remains in place over the snowpack, the colder it will get. Once
the jet
stream configuration changes to allow the air mass to drift
southward (which
it almost always does in winter), then the midlatitudes are
primed for a
cold air outbreak like the one that chilled the eastern
two-thirds of the
nation a few weeks ago.
So a strong cold air outbreak requires a high pressure system to
be in place
for a substantial length of time (preferably one week or more)
over an
extensive snow- or ice-covered surface. Certain configurations of
the jet
stream allow for extensive and very cold air masses to form while
others
move the systems out of the region every few days.
Cold Air and Global Warming
Greenhouse gases (carbon dioxide, water vapor, CFCs, etc.) absorb
radiation
emitted from the surface of the earth and then radiate this
energy in all
directions (both to the surface and to space). As atmospheric
concentrations
of these gases increase, we would expect an increase in the
amount of
radiation from the atmosphere to the surface and less total loss
of heat
from the snowpack to space.
So what should happen to these cold air masses in a greenhouse
world? If
less radiation escapes from the snow and ice to space and the
amount of
radiation from the atmosphere back to the surface increases, then
these cold
air masses should be getting warmer over time. In fact, Larry
Kalkstein's
research group at the University of Delaware believes they found
some
evidence of warming within the coldest air masses in Alaska and
Canada (see
Vol. 1, No. 8) but none in Russia.
Figure 2. Top: The snow and ice lose a considerable amount
of energy into
space (large arrow at right), which allows for rapid cooling to
take
place-resulting in very cold air masses. Bottom: The
addition of carbon
dioxide reduces the energy lost from the snow and ice into space
and
increases the amount absorbed by the atmosphere. Under
these conditions,
less cooling occurs-leading to warmer air masses.
There are other complicating factors, however. For example, if
polar air
masses have longer residence times in these source regions, they
will
typically reach a lower temperature before heading southward. Any
historical
changes in residence times will affect the trends. In addition,
systematic
changes in the atmospheric circulation will influence the air
mass residence
times. Each of these topics will be explored in detail in later
issues. But
here is the bottom line: We find no trends in polar air
mass residence
times, and the changes that have been observed in the atmospheric
circulation patterns are the opposite of what we would expect in
a
"greenhouse-warmed" atmosphere.
So those of you who sniffed out this rat were right. In an
enhanced CO2
atmosphere, cold air masses should be warmer than in the past.
Global
warming should not cause the earth to be cooler. Of course, if a
government
study produced that finding (which, incidentally, it did), it
might make
some taxpayers really mad.
References:
Kalkstein, L.S., P.C. Dunne, and R.S. Vose, (1990).
Detection of climatic
change in the western North American Arctic using a synoptic
climatological
approach. J. Climate, 3, 1153-1167.
Kalkstein, L.S., P.C. Dunne, and H. Ye, (1993). Reply, J.
Climate, 6,
1476-1478.
==========
(6) WEST ANTARCTIC ICE SHEET HAS BEEN MELTING FOR 10,000 YEARS
>From CO2 Science Magazine, 29 January 2003
http://www.co2science.org/journal/2003/v6n5c1.htm
Has the "Unprecedented Warming" of the Last Century Had
Any Effect on West
Antarctic Ice Sheet Dynamics?
Reference
Stone, J.O., Balco, G.A., Sugden, D.E., Caffee, M.W., Sass III,
L.C.,
Cowdery, S.G. and Siddoway, C. 2003. Holocene deglaciation of
Marie Byrd
Land, West Antarctica. Science 299: 99-102.
Background
"The fate of humankind is linked to that of the remote West
Antarctic Ice
Sheet (WAIS) through global sea levels." So writes Ackert
(2003) in his
Science glaciology perspective on the report of Stone et al.
(2003), who
describe trends of deglaciation over parts of this crucially
important polar
ice sheet throughout the Holocene. Does their work reveal, as
Ackert asks,
"the early stages of rapid ice sheet collapse, with
potential near-term
impacts on the world's coastlines?"
If one pays any attention at all to the harangues of climate
alarmists, one
might assume this question has already been answered - and
answered in the
affirmative - especially in light of their oft-repeated claim
that the
increase in mean global air temperature of the past hundred years
is
"unprecedented over the past millennium." One might
also assume the same in
light of the fact that climate alarmists typically do suggest we
are
witnessing the early stages of West Antarctic Ice Sheet
disintegration,
especially when a large chunk of ice goes "crack in the
night," escapes from
its frigid homeland, and sets sail upon the Southern Ocean. The
research of
Stone and his colleagues, however, goes a long way towards
putting these
baseless claims to a well-deserved rest.
What was done
Working on western Marie Byrd Land, Stone et al. collected and
determined
cosmogenic 10Be exposure dates of glacially-transported cobbles
in elevation
transects on seven peaks of the Ford Ranges that are located
between the ice
sheet's present grounding line and the Clark Mountains some 80 km
inland.
Based on these ages and the elevations at which the cobbles were
found, they
determined a history of ice-sheet thinning over the past
10,000-plus years.
What was learned
The scientists say their data show that "the exposed rock in
the Ford
Ranges, up to 700 m above the present ice surface, was
deglaciated within
the past 11,000 years" and that "several lines of
evidence suggest that the
maximum ice sheet stood considerably higher than this." They
also report
that the consistency of the exposure age versus elevation trends
of their
data "indicates steady deglaciation since the first of these
peaks emerged
from the ice sheet some time before 10,400 years ago" and
that the mass
balance of the region "has been negative throughout the
Holocene."
Continuing, Stone et al. say their results "add to the
evidence that West
Antarctic deglaciation continued long after the disappearance of
the
Northern Hemisphere ice sheets and may still be under way,"
and they report
that the ice sheet in Marie Byrd Land "shows the same
pattern of steady
Holocene deglaciation as the marine ice sheet in the Ross
Sea," where ice
"has thinned and retreated since 7000 years ago,"
noting further that "there
is strong evidence that the limit of grounded ice in both regions
- and in
Pine Island Bay - is still receding."
What it means
As long contended by scientists who disagree with
climate-alarmist claims
that we are witnessing CO2-induced "early stages of rapid
ice sheet
collapse," the work of Stone et al. convincingly
demonstrates that the
current thinning and retreat of the West Antarctic Ice Sheet are
merely
manifestations of a slow but steady deglaciation that has been
going on and
on and on, ever since the beginning-of-the-end of the last great
ice age.
Although this phenomenon is unabashedly used by climate alarmists
to scare
people into believing anthropogenic CO2 emissions are rapidly
leading to the
demise of the WAIS, Stone et al. say something quite different,
i.e., that
"the pattern of recent change is consistent with the idea
that thinning of
the WAIS over the past few thousand years is continuing."
Ackert makes the
point even plainer, when he says "recent ice sheet dynamics
appear to be
dominated by the ongoing response to deglacial forcing thousands
of years
ago, rather than by a recent anthropogenic warming or sea level
rise."
So what's new with the West Antarctic Ice Sheet? Nothing. Nothing
at all.
Reference
Ackert Jr., R.P. 2003. An ice sheet remembers. Science 299:
57-58.
Copyright © 2003. Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide
and Global Change
===========
(7) COSMIC RAYS: CAN THEY INFLUENCE CLIMATE ON CENTENNIAL AND
MILLENIAL TIME
SCALES?
>From CO2 Science Magazine, 29 January 2003
http://www.co2science.org/edit/v6_edit/v6n5edit.htm
In a recent review paper in Science, Carslaw et al. (2002) begin
their essay
on "Cosmic Rays, Clouds, and Climate" by noting that
the intensity of cosmic
rays varies by about 15% over a solar cycle, due to changes in
the strength
of the solar wind, which carries a weak magnetic field into the
heliosphere
that partially shields the earth from low-energy glactic charged
particles.
When this shielding is at a minimum, allowing more cosmic rays to
impinge
upon the planet, more low clouds have been observed to cover the
earth,
producing a tendency for lower temperatures to occur. When the
shielding is
maximal, on the other hand, less cosmic rays impinge upon the
planet and
fewer low clouds form, which produces a tendency for the earth to
warm.
The authors further note that the total variation in low cloud
amount over a
solar cycle is about 1.7%, which corresponds to a change in the
planet's
radiation budget of about one watt per square meter (1
Wm-2). This change,
they say, "is highly significant when compared ... with the
estimated
radiative forcing of 1.4 Wm-2 from anthropogenic CO2
emissions." However,
because of the short length of a solar cycle (11 years), the
large thermal
inertia of the world's oceans dampens the much greater global
temperature
change that would have occurred as a result of this radiative
forcing if it
had been spread out over a much longer period of time, so that
the actual
observed warming is something a little less than 0.1°C.
Much of Carslaw et al.'s review focuses on mechanisms by which
cosmic rays
might induce the synchronous low cloud cover changes that have
been observed
to accompany their intensity changes. They begin by briefly
describing the
three principle mechanisms that have been suggested to function
as links
between solar variability and changes in earth's weather: (1)
changes in
total solar irradiance that provide variable heat input to the
lower
atmosphere, (2) changes in solar ultraviolet radiation and its
interaction
with ozone in the stratosphere that couple dynamically to the
lower
atmosphere, and (3) changes in cloud processes having
significance for
condensation nucleus abundances, thunderstorm electrification and
thermodynamics, and ice formation in cyclones.
Focusing on the third of these mechanisms, the researchers note
that cosmic
rays provide the sole source of ions away from terrestrial
sources of
radioisotopes. Hence, they further refine their focus to
concentrate on ways
by which cosmic-ray-produced ions may affect cloud droplet number
concentrations and ice particles. Here, they concentrate on two
specific
topics: what they call the ion-aerosol clear-air mechanism and
the
ion-aerosol near-cloud mechanism. Their review suggests that what
we know
about these subjects is very much less than what we could know
about them,
which further suggests that these areas are much deserving of
funding for
future research, in view of the likelihood that new knowledge in
these areas
may be the key to resolving the primary question asked in the
title of our
Editorial; for as Carslaw et al. forthrightly report, many
scientists
believe that "it is inconceivable that the lower atmosphere
can be globally
bombarded by ionizing radiation without producing an effect on
the climate
system."
So, do solar-mediated changes in cosmic ray intensities influence
climate on
centennial and millennial time scales? In a provocative plot that
suggests a
positive answer to this question, Carslaw et al. depict a
composite history
of cosmic ray intensities derived from four independent proxies,
two of
which extend all the way back to 1700. Comparing this plot with
what we
believe to be the most accurate temperature history of the
Northern
Hemisphere, i.e., that derived by Esper et al. (2002), we note
that for
almost all of the 18th century, cosmic ray intensity declined
modestly,
while air temperature slowly rose. Then came a sharp rise in
cosmic ray
intensity that was immediately followed by a sharp drop in
temperature. This
change, in turn, was followed by a sharp decline in cosmic ray
intensity
that was immediately followed by a sharp upturn in temperature.
Thereafter,
the cosmic ray intensity leveled off, rose slightly and then
declined in
undulating fashion to the end of the record, while temperature
leveled off,
dropped slightly and then rose in undulating fashion to the end
of the
record, as would be expected to occur in light of what is
currently known
about the cosmic ray-cloud connection.
Commenting on the last century of change, Carslaw et al. point
out that the
cosmic ray intensity declined by about 15% over this period,
"owing to an
increase in the solar open magnetic flux by more than a factor of
2." They
further report that "this 100-year change in intensity is
about the same
magnitude as the observed change over the last solar
cycle." In addition,
we note that the cosmic ray intensity was already much lower at
the start of
the 20th century than it was just after the start of the19th
century, when
the Esper et al. record indicates the planet began its
nearly-two-century-long recovery from the chilly depths of the
Little Ice
Age.
Clearly, these observations strongly suggest that solar-mediated
variations
in the intensity of cosmic rays bombarding the earth are indeed
responsible
for the temperature variations of the past three centuries. They
provide a
much better fit to the temperature data than do atmospheric CO2
data; and as
Carslaw et al. remark, "if the cosmic ray-cloud effect is
real, then these
long-term changes of cosmic ray intensity could substantially
influence
climate." It is this possibility, they say, that makes
it "all the more
important to understand the cause of the cloudiness
variations," which is
basically the message of their paper, i.e., that we must work
hard to deepen
our understanding of the cosmic ray-cloud connection, as it may
well hold
the key to resolving what they call this "fiercely debated
geophysical
phenomenon." We therefore propose that funding for
relevant research be an
integral part of the next five-year thrust of the U.S. Global
Change
Research Program.
Dr. Sherwood B. Idso
Dr. Keith E. Idso
References
Carslaw, K.S., Harrizon, R.G. and Kirkby, J. 2002. Cosmic rays,
clouds, and
climate. Science 298: 1732-1737.
Esper, J., Cook, E.R. and Schweingruber, F.H. 2002. Low-frequency
signals in
long tree-ring chronologies for reconstructing past temperature
variability.
Science 295: 2250-2253.
Copyright © 2003. Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide
and Global Change
==========
(8) WHAT MADE THE "MEDIEVAL WARM PERIODE" WARM?
>From CO2 Science Magazine, 29 January 2003
http://www.co2science.org/subject/s/summaries/solarmwp.htm
How much of an influence the sun has exerted on earth's climate
during the
20th Century is a topic of heated discussion in the area of
global climate
change. The primary reason for differing opinions on the subject
derives
from the fact that although numerous studies have demonstrated
significant
correlations between certain measures of solar activity and
various climatic
phenomena (Reid, 1991, 1997, 1999, 2000), the magnitude of the
solar
radiative forcing reported in these studies is generally so small
it is
difficult to see how it could produce climatic effects of the
magnitude
observed (Broecker, 1999). Supporters of solar effects theories
counter by
saying that various positive feedback mechanisms may amplify the
initial
solar perturbation to the extent that significant changes in
climate do
indeed result. In this summary, we highlight some of the recent
scientific
literature that demonstrates the viability of such solar-climate
linkages
and supports the emerging belief that small changes in the sun's
energy
output produced the Medieval Warm Period, which was likely the
warmest
climatic interval of the past millennium.
Many solar-climate studies utilize tree-ring records of 14C as a
measure of
solar activity, because solar activity (including variations in
the number
of sunspots and the brightness of the sun) influences the
production of
atmospheric 14C, such that periods of higher solar activity yield
a lower
production and atmospheric burden of 14C (Perry and Hsu,
2000). This being
the case, it can be appreciated that as trees remove carbon from
the air and
sequester it in their tissues, they are recording a history of
solar
activity that could be influencing earth's atmosphere-ocean
system. Thus,
the history of 14C contained in tree rings has been examined by a
number of
authors as a proxy indicator of solar activity and compared with
various
indices of climate.
A good example of this type of work is the study of Hong et al.
(2000), who
developed a high-resolution ð18O record from plant cellulose
deposited in a
peat bog in the Jilin Province of China (42° 20' N, 126° 22'
E), from which
they report finding "an obvious warm period represented by
the high ð18O
from around AD 1100 to 1200" in which "the northern
boundary of the
cultivation of citrus tree (Citrus reticulata Blanco) and
Boehmeria nivea (a
perennial herb), both subtropical and thermophilous plants, moved
gradually
into the northern part of China [where] it has been estimated
that the
annual mean temperature was 0.9-1.0°C higher than at
present." In comparing
their ð18O temperature record with changes in atmospheric 14C
derived from
tree rings, the authors report a "remarkable, nearly one to
one,
correspondence," which led them to conclude that the
temperature history of
this region was "forced mainly by solar variability."
Verschuren et al. (2000) also utilized a 14C record as a proxy
for solar
activity, comparing it with a decadal-scale history of
precipitation in
equatorial east Africa over the past 1000 years. The
results of their
analysis revealed that this region was significantly drier than
it is today
during the Medieval Warm Period from AD 1000 to 1270.
Tropical Venezuela,
on the other hand, appears to have experienced higher
precipitation during
the Medieval Warm Period, which Haug et al. (2001) attribute to
variations
in solar activity.
Castagnoli et al. (2002) searched for solar-induced variations in
the ð13C
record of the foraminifera Globigerinoides rubber obtained from a
sediment
core retrieved from the Gallipoli terrace of the Gulf of Taranto
(39°45'53"N, 17°53'33"E) over the past 1400 years,
finding that this
parameter increased from about 0.4 per mil to 0.8 per mil during
the
climatic transition from the Dark Ages Cold Period to the
Medieval Warm
Period. Comparing the ð13C record with historical aurorae
and sunspot time
series revealed it was "associable in phase" and
disclosed "a statistically
significant imprint of the solar activity in [the] climate
record."
In North America, an analysis of more than 700 pollen diagrams by
Viau et
al. (2002) reveals the existence of a major vegetation transition
that
"culminat[ed] in the maximum warming of the Medieval Warm
Period 1000 years
ago." In discussing the origin of this transition, the
authors state that
"although several mechanisms for such natural forcing have
been advanced,
recent evidence points to a potential solar forcing (Bond et al.,
2001)
associated with ocean-atmosphere feedbacks acting as global
teleconnections
agents." The latter authors examined deep-sea sediment
cores retrieved from
the North Atlantic and cosmogenic nuclides sequestered in the
Greenland ice
cap (10Be) and Northern Hemispheric tree rings (14C), finding a
dominant
solar-climate link over the past 12,000 years and concluding that
the
Medieval Warm Period "may have been partly or entirely
linked to changes in
solar irradiance."
Two additional papers, both model-based studies, also point to a
significant
role for the sun in producing earth's Medieval Warm Period
climate. Using a
version of the Goddard Institute for Space Studies GCM, Shindell
et al.
(2001) estimated climatic differences between the period of the
Maunder
Minimum in solar irradiance (mid-1600s to early 1700s) and a
century later,
when solar output was relatively high for several decades. The
results of
their analysis led them to conclude that "colder winter
temperatures over
the Northern Hemispheric continents during portions of the 15th
through the
17th centuries (sometimes called the Little Ice Age) and warmer
temperatures
during the 12th through 14th centuries (the putative Medieval
Warm Period)
may have been influenced by long-term solar variations."
In the second of these studies, Perry and Hsu (2000) developed a
simple
solar-luminosity model and used it to estimate total solar-output
variations
over the Holocene. The model output was well correlated
with the amount of
14C in well-dated tree rings extending back through the Medieval
Warm
Period, which finding, in the words of the authors,
"supports the hypothesis
that the sun is varying its energy production in a manner that is
consistent
with the superposition of harmonic cycles of solar
activity."
So what specific changes in solar activity are responsible for
producing the
mild climate of the Medieval Warm Period? Some authors have
targeted the
approximate 11-year sunspot cycle as a primary suspect (Parker,
1999; Rigozo
et al., 2001). Compared to the cold Little Ice Age, the
mean annual number
of sunspots observed during the Medieval Warm Period was nearly
40 times
greater (Rigozo et al., 2001). Similarly, analyses of other
solar
parameters by Rigozo et al. indicate that the strengths of the
solar radio
flux, the solar wind velocity, and the southward component of the
interplanetary magnetic field were 1.89, 1.10 and 2.54 times
greater during
the Medieval Warm Period than the Little Ice Age.
How do these small changes in solar activity bring about
significant and
pervasive shifts in earth's global climate, such as the Medieval
Warm
Period? In answer to this question, which has long plagued
proponents of a
solar-climate link, Bond et al. (2001) describe a scenario
whereby
solar-induced changes high in the stratosphere are propagated
downward
through the atmosphere to the earth's surface, where they likely
provoke
changes in North Atlantic Deep Water formation that alter the
global
Thermohaline Circulation. In light of the plausibility of
this scenario,
they suggest that "the solar signals thus may have been
transmitted through
the deep ocean as well as through the atmosphere, further
contributing to
their amplification and global imprint."
Concluding their landmark paper, Bond et al. say the results of
their study
demonstrate that earth's climate system "is highly sensitive
to extremely
weak perturbations in the sun's energy output," noting also
that their work
"supports the presumption that solar variability will
continue to influence
climate in the future." Consequently, it is clear
there is ample reason for
defending the premise that the Medieval Warm Period was a result
of
solar-mediated phenomena that may once again be conspiring to
return the
planet to a similar state of warmth.
References
Bond, G., Kromer, B., Beer, J., Muscheler, R., Evans, M.N.,
Showers, W.,
Hoffmann, S., Lotti-Bond, R., Hajdas, I. and Bonani, G. 2001.
Persistent
solar influence on North Atlantic climate during the
Holocene. Science 294:
2130-2136.
Broecker, W. 1999. Climate change prediction. Science 283: 179.
Castagnoli, G.C., Bonino, G., Taricco, C. and Bernasconi, S.M.
2002. Solar
radiation variability in the last 1400 years recorded in the
carbon isotope
ratio of a Mediterranean sea core. Advances in Space
Research 29:
1989-1994.
Haug, G.H., Hughen, K.A., Sigman, D.M., Peterson, L.C. and Rohl,
U. 2001.
Southward migration of the intertropical convergence zone through
the
Holocene. Science 293: 1304-1308.
Hong, Y.T., Jiang, H.B., Liu, T.S., Zhou, L.P., Beer, J., Li,
H.D., Leng,
X.T., Hong, B. and Qin, X.G. 2000. Response of climate to solar
forcing
recorded in a 6000-year delta18O time-series of Chinese peat
cellulose. The
Holocene 10: 1-7.
Parker, E.N. 1999. Sunny side of global warming. Nature 399:
416-417.
Perry, C.A. and Hsu, K.J. 2000. Geophysical, archaeological, and
historical
evidence support a solar-output model for climate change.
Proceedings of the
National Academy of Sciences USA 97: 12433-12438.
Reid, G.C. 1991. Solar total irradiance variations and the global
sea
surface temperature record. Journal of Geophysical Research
96: 2835-2844.
Reid, G.C. 1997. Solar forcing of global climate change since the
17th
century. Climatic Change 37: 391-405.
Reid, G.C. 1999. Solar variability and its implications for the
human
environment. Journal of Atmospheric and Solar-Terrestrial
Physics 61(1-2):
3-14.
Reid, G.C. 2000. Solar variability and the Earth's climate:
introduction and
overview. Space Science Reviews 94(1-2): 1-11.
Rigozo, N.R., Echer, E., Vieira, L.E.A. and Nordemann, D.J.R.
2001.
Reconstruction of Wolf sunspot numbers on the basis of spectral
characteristics and estimates of associated radio flux and solar
wind
parameters for the last millennium. Solar Physics 203: 179-191.
Shindell, D.T., Schmidt, G.A., Mann, M.E., Rind, D. and Waple,
A. 2001.
Solar forcing of regional climate change during the Maunder
Minimum.
Science 294: 2149-2152.
Verschuren, D., Laird, K.R. and Cumming, B.F. 2000.
Rainfall and drought
in equatorial east Africa during the past 1,100 years.
Nature 403: 410-414.
Viau, A.E., Gajewski, K., Fines, P., Atkinson, D.E. and Sawada,
M.C. 2002.
Widespread evidence of 1500 yr climate variability in North
America during
the past 14,000 yr. Geology 30: 455-458.
Copyright © 2003. Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide
and Global Change
===========
(9) NO 'DRAMATIC' SEA LEVEL RISE IN TASMANIA
>From www.john-daly.com,
25 January 2003
Recent publicity arising from a study by the Universities of
Southampton and
Tasmania of an old sea level benchmark at Port Arthur, Tasmania,
claims
`dramatic' sea level rise of about 13cm since the mark was first
struck back
in 1841.
These claims are based primarily on statistical probability
modelling and
are unsupportable when viewed in the context of physical and
documentary
evidence available surrounding the benchmark. The study claims
the benchmark
was originally set 44.5cm above the mean level of the sea (as it
existed in
1841). Since it now sits at 31.5 cm above (see photo), the
difference - 13cm
- is claimed to be evidence of sea level rise.
However, the man responsible for putting the mark there, explorer
Sir James
Clark Ross stated explicitly and several times in his 1846 book
that the
mark was placed at mean sea level (as he estimated it to be), not
at a point
44.5cm above as claimed by the study. Other evidence surrounding
the
original placing of the benchmark is less clear, but we do have
one positive
measurement of where the benchmark stood relative to sea level
taken in 1888
by the then Government meteorologist, Commander J. Shortt R.N. He
found the
mark to be 34cm above sea level - only 2½ cm different to its
current
position.
This suggests a sea level rise since 1888 of only 2½cm, not 13cm
as claimed
by the study. This small rise of 2½ cm is fully consistent with
a survey of
long-term tide gauges around the Australian coast carried out
recently by
the National Tidal Facility in Adelaide, which found a sea level
rise rate
of only 0.3 mm/yr, equivalent to a sea level rise of 3cm over a
century.
Even the current sea level in the inner cove of Port Arthur
itself is lower
than that indicated by a tide gauge which the study claims
existed there in
the early 1840s.
The 1888 measurement by Cmdr. Shortt suggests sea levels rose an
incredible
44.5 - 34 = 10½ cm in only 47 years, at a time of global cooling
when quite
the opposite should occur. While the study dismissed the Cmdr.
Shortt
measurement as inaccurate, with no clear explanation given for
that view, it
is much more probable that the study simply got the original
benchmark
height wrong and that the 1888 measurement by Cmdr. Shortt was
sound.
Complicating the issue further is the possibility, expressed by
Cmdr. Shortt
himself, that numerous earth tremors in the early 1880s,
unprecedented
either before or since, may have uplifted the land significantly.
Indeed,
this was his stated reason for making the measurement in the
first place,
having received reports of just such an effect from islands in
the Bass
Strait. Land uplift from the 1880s tremors would displace the
benchmark
upwards from its original position if the benchmark had indeed
been placed
at mean sea level as stated clearly by James Clark Ross.
In addition, modern tide gauges located at Hobart and Spring Bay
on either
side of the Port Arthur site, on the same coast, show no sea
level rise at
all since their installation during the 1980s.
The weight of physical and documentary evidence shows that sea
level rise
around Tasmania, and indeed Australia as a whole, is only very
slight, and
that this study is seriously in error. The reason may well be the
over-reliance on statistical probability modelling at the expense
of
physical and documentary evidence.
John L. Daly, Tasmania, 25 Jan 2003
(A full report on the above issue will appear on this website on
Sunday 2nd
February 2003)
============================
* LETTERS TO THE MODERATOR *
============================
(10) THE LOMBORG CASE, RISK ASSESSMENT AND "HUMOR" - A
REPLY TO BENNY
PEISER.
>From Andrew Glikson <geospec@webone.com.au>
Dear Benny
Thank you for your reply (CCNet, 15.1.02) to my communication
"The Lomborg
case, the Washington-based World Watch Institute's statement and
scientific
ethics" (14.1.03).
For the editor of a web bulletin dedicated to alerting mankind
against the
"doomsday asteroid" it is surprising you are so
critical of scientists
pointing to environmental degradation, not least since the
current rate of
species loss has been compared to the effect of a large asteroid
impact.
You refer to "doom-laden scientific, climatological or
environmental
prognostication". However, it is thanks to warning by
scientists over
several decades, despite opposition by vested interests, which
ensued in
limited reduction in the production of CFC gases and hopefully
arrest of
ozone depletion. Individuals researchers may include pessimists,
optimists
or in-between, but in the majority of cases, thanks to the
scientific peer
review system, their reports and publications represent the best
assessments
of current processes available to us.
Discussions are colored by economic interests and ideological
value
judgements: Asteroid defense schemes can be expected to be
welcome by the
aerospace industry. The climate change issue is hardly welcome by
the fossil
fuel industries. Many natural scientists, including myself,
develop a sense
of reverence toward 4 billion years of terrestrial evolution and
are
concerned with the destructive effects of Homo Sapiens acting as
if it is
God.
What are needed are rigorous risk assessments. Authority on
terrestrial
ecosystems resides in the life sciences - botany, zoology, soil
science,
marine science. Unfortunately contributions in these fields are
relatively
rare in CCNet. Skeptics exist in all fields, some still question
evolution
and plate tectonics. Once a majority scientific view is formed,
the onus is
on the skeptics to advance relevant scientific arguments, or else
there
skepticism may merely betray lack of familiarity with relevant
evidence and
publications.
In your reply (CCNet 15.1.03) you write: "Which brings me to
Andrew's most
astonishing proclamation: "either the terrestrial forests,
hydrosphere and
atmosphere are being severely degraded, or they are not, both can
not be
true (CCNet 14.1.03)". Your point is not understood since,
inherently, due
to flow mixing the global hydrospheric and atmospheric systems
are
intimately intertwined, as exemplified by ozone depletion,
greenhouse gases,
pollution and the relation between deforestation and salination.
You quote "... the same disparity between the ecological
problems of poor
and underdeveloped countries (which are mainly due to poverty,
corruption
and political mismanagement) and significant environmental
improvements in
wealthy and technologically developed countries is evident with
regards to
forests, waters and atmospheric pollution." However,
severe environmental
degradation is not unique to poor underdeveloped countries, as
shown in
Australia - a modern country, where the continental forest
coverage rate
declined from 15 to 7 percent, salination claims over 20 percent
of arable
land, top soils are thinning, mid-US-like dust bowl-type wind
erosion is
increasing, the Great Barrier Reef is under strain due to coral
bleaching
with rising water temperatures and pollution.
Local reversals occur, such as green-leafing of suburban
dwellings or desert
irrigation schemes, which hardly compensate for global
deforestation (over
30% in the Amazon).
The unfortunate reality of global warming has been confirmed,
among other,
by the American Geophysical Union Council, stating "Present
understanding of
the Earth climate system provides a compelling basis for
legitimate public
concern over future global and regional scale changes resulting
from
increased concentrations of greenhouse gases..." (Eos, 1999,
80, p.454)" and
by the Australian CSIRO - assessments based on hard science.
The cold snaps highlighted in CCNet are not necessarily evidence
for global
cooling but more likely the short term reversals predicted in
studies of
global warming.
I agree it is nice to have the occasional light touch on heavy
issues. On
the other hand, the selective use of humor to ridicule opposing
views can
only discourage balanced debate. The story you quote of the
professor and
the "end of the world" has no relevance. The labeling
of opposed scientific
views as "witch hunts" or "Moscow show
trials" is not even funny - the
difference between the expression of scientific views by a
scientific
committee and a "show trial" is the difference between
scientific freedom
and a state execution.
I am glad to note the extensive subscription to CCNet, thanks no
doubt to
its wealth of information and your own splendid efforts. It does
not follow
that readers necessarily subscribe to the particular editorial
views
promoted through prioritization, selective pre-ambling of favored
views and
derogatory labeling of opposed views - an approach which, in my
view, is
inconsistent with the objective spirit of true science.
Yours Truly
Andrew Glikson
21.1.03
==============
(11) SCIENTIFIC METHOD AND CULTURAL RELATIVISM IN THE LOMBORG
ARGUMENT
>From Max Wallis <WallisMK@Cardiff.ac.uk>
Dear Benny,
Andrew Glikson argued in CCNet TERRA 4/2003 (15 January) for
using the
scientific method to analyse Lomborg's work.
Your own response (15 January) rightly pointed out that there's
no (easy)
answer to certain questions, eg. are forests globally being
severely
degraded. Agreement may be lacking on what is severe degradation,
while
information may be inadequate or contested on the extent and
health of
forests.
To most of us, this does not vitiate use of the scientific
method, even if
the answer is not yet clear. Social scientists may point out the
term
"severe degradation" is a social construct, conditioned
by our existing
knowledge base and our ethical framework. Judging the
validity of multiple
answers depends on the interplay of scientific and cultural
factors, so the
argument goes.
Danish economists who last week stood up for Lomborg (Environment
Daily
1362, 14/01/03) challenged the Committee on Scientific Dishonesty
to define
the "standards of good scientific practice" which Mr
Lomborg is alleged to
have violated. Economics professor Kjeld Møller Pedersen
said: "the
question in the social sciences is always whether such a standard
exists. I
don't think it does."
However, the David Irving trial over "holocaust denial"
did provide a test
last year for unremitting sceptics. Irving argued with skill that
the
knowledge base (gas chambers, numbers of deaths etc.) of his
opponents was
questionable, in order to make his own sceptical position seem
tenable. But
Irving lost - the Court validated calling his writings
"holocaust denial"
and, in effect, defined a standard of intellectual honesty.
A definition of good scientific practice would include more than
intellectual honesty - standards of record keeping and data
reporting;
completeness (including referencing of opposing views) and
justifying generality, avoiding value-laden terms ('witch hunt')
though not
excluding colourful wording where technically defined. One might
include
ethical values, like respect for differing standpoints and
cultural
sensitivities (don't use "Nazi" in the Israel-Palestine
argument). There's
no unique set, but such standards are included in various
professional codes
of practice.
I can't myself see it's appropriate to apply the "scientific
honesty" test
to Bjorn Lomborg, a non-scientist. Cavalier with scientific
studies and
arguments he may be, as in the debate in Scientific American, but
his
critics have to re-frame their charges, if any such are warranted
when we
uphold intellectual diversity as well as intellectual honesty.
But Benny, you didn't complete your lengthy response to Andrew
Glikson. I
support him in upholding the scientific method and testing
Lomborg's
arguments by it. Are you with the extreme cultural relativists,
who maintain
there are no standards, but only tests of internal consistency
and power of
discourse?
Max Wallis
23 Janaury 2003
-----------------------------------------------------------
Max Wallis wallismk@cf.ac.uk
Cardiff Centre for Astrobiology tel. 029 2087
6436
2 North Road
Cardiff University CF10
2DY
==============
(12) "ARE YOU PAID BY AMERICAN OIL COMPANIES?"
>From Nathalie Bugeaud <planetary@free.fr>
just a short question. since the short cold spell we have now
balming warm
weather here in France
in the middle of January 15-18 degrees, unusual for January. why
don't you
mention that? are you paid by American oil companies?
Nathalie Bugeaud MD
Hospital Deux-Sèvre, FRANCE
=========
(13) CCNet, NEO-CATASTROPHISM AND SCIENTIFIC SCEPTICISM
>From Benny J Peiser <b.j.peiser@livjm.ac.uk>
Since 1997, CCNet has been one of the leading scientific networks
which
focuses on all aspects of what is generally called
"neo-catastrophism".
While the hazard due to comets and asteroids has been the main
focal point
of this network, CCNet has addressed other research areas and
questions
regarding catastrophic disruptions of humand and societal
evolution. I doubt
whether there is any other scholarly forum that is as familiar
and
up-to-date with the research on natural catastrophes, abrupt
environmental
events and civilisation collapse during the Holocene.
What we have learned from these studies and debates is that each
and every
one of the past breakdowns of societies were mainly prompted by
natural
causes, in particular cooling events and droughts. Warming
periods, on the
other hand, have predominantly coincided with historical periods
of economic
progress, technological advancement and social improvement.
Equally important, research has shown that natural disasters have
always
been blamed on humans, in particular on religious or political
enemies,
often leading to violent upheavals and bloody revolutions. As I
have pointed
out on a number of occasions, there is a strong historical link
between
climatic and environmental stress situations and organised
witch-hunts and
political rioting.
There can be no doubt about the reality of environmental
degradation in many
parts of the world. However, it is worth remembering that this
process has
been ongoing throughout history. Besides, we can see clear signs
of a
reversal in many parts of the developed world where environmental
conditions
in many areas (such as sanitation, drinking water, air pollution,
reforestation, etc.) have improved significantly over the last
two decades.
Evidently, these counter-measures were stimulated by research
findings;
however, they could only be implemented as a result of surplus
capital
accumulated by the open societies of the free world.
Andrew Glikson quite rightly argues that "once a majority
scientific view is
formed, the onus is on the skeptics to advance relevant
scientific
arguments." In the context of climate catastrophism, this is
exactly what
CCNet has been trying to do. Given the considerable complexity of
the
terrestrial climate and the sun-earth system, I believe it is
reasonable to
heed the caution of those scientists who argue that we are far
from
understanding (let alone regulating) the basic dynamics of
climate change.
After all, we do not know why neither the satellite nor the
weather-balloon
temperature records show any warming from 1979 to the present.
The
contrasting surface temperature records which do show a slight
warming trend
fail to give any indication whether this trend is due to the
so-called
greenhouse effect or natural climate variation - or both. And how
do we
explain the cooling trend from 1930 to 1979? In short, the
controversy is
not about "the scientific method" but its (current)
inability to fully
explain the complexities of - let alone predict - climate
variability. As
long as we are unable to explain the evident inconsistencies that
fly in the
face of climate alarmism, attempts to associate scientific
scepticism with
Holocaust denial can only be regarded as political incitement.
They don't
deserve to be taken seriously.
Benny Peiser
--------------------------------------------------------------------
CCNet is a scholarly electronic network. To
subscribe/unsubscribe, please
contact the moderator Benny J Peiser < b.j.peiser@livjm.ac.uk
>. Information
circulated on this network is for scholarly and educational use
only. The
attached information may not be copied or reproduced for
any other purposes without prior permission of the copyright
holders. The
fully indexed archive of the CCNet, from February 1997 on, can be
found at
http://abob.libs.uga.edu/bobk/cccmenu.html.
DISCLAIMER: The opinions,
beliefs and viewpoints expressed in the articles and texts and in
other
CCNet contributions do not necessarily reflect the opinions,
beliefs and
viewpoints of the moderator of this network.
--------------------------------------------------------------------