"Climate alarmists worry - or claim they worry - that
greenhouse-induced warming will dramatically lower the water levels
of the Great Lakes. However, over what they claim to be the century
that has exhibited the greatest warming of the entire past millennium, there
has been no net change in the water level of any of the Great Lakes. In
addition, over the past two decades of what they typically refer to as
unprecedented warming, the four lakes have exhibited their greatest
stability and highest water levels of the past century." 
  --CO2 Science Magazine, 1 May 2002

"As technology improves, we're gaining a better understanding of
other variables that affect climate, from cloud changes and "carbon
sinks" (forests that soak up carbon dioxide) to solar radiation and
volcanic aerosols. I'm not suggesting that all environmental warnings are
groundless, only that we shouldn't swallow every doomsday scenario whole.
Factory smokestacks aren't the only source of hot air."
     --Edwin Feulner, Washington Times, 28 April 2002

    Harvey Leifert <>

    Harvey Leifert <>

    Harvey Leifert <>

    Associated Press, 30 April 2002

    CO2 Science Magazine, 1 May 2002

    CO2 Science Magazine, 1 May 2002

    CO2 Science Magazine, 1 May 2002

    Tech Central Station, 29 April 2002

    National Center for Policy Analysis, 25 April 2002

     Space Daily, 30 April 2002

     Washington Times, 28 April 2002

     Glasgow Herald, 30 April 2002


>From Harvey Leifert <>

American Geophysical Union
AGU Journal Highlights - 29 April 2002

Increasing aerosol levels over the Indian subcontinent during the past 30
years have caused a significant surface cooling in the region. Krishnan and
Ramanathan's analysis ["Evidence of surface cooling from absorbing
aerosols"] revealed a 0.3 degree Celsius [0.5 degrees Fahrenheit] cooling in
the area since the 1970s, which they attribute to manmade emissions from
fossil fuels. The aerosols, including black carbon and sulfur dioxide, form
a brownish haze that spreads over the region during winter and spring
months, absorbing incoming solar radiation in the
atmosphere and preventing the heat from reaching the surface. Air pollution
levels are nearly halved during the rainy and windy summer and fall, with
increases in the ground temperature seen
during those seasons. The researchers' measurements, taken from data
generated during the 1999 Indian Ocean Experiment (INDOEX), help explain the
effects of aerosols, but also raise the
possibility that the region is rapidly cooling underneath the layer of haze,
in spite of large solar absorption by the black carbon, while warming in
unpolluted regions.

R. Krishnan, Indian Institute of Tropical Meteorology, Pune, India;
Veerabhadi Ramanathan, Center for Atmospheric Sciences,Scripps Institution
of Oceanography, University of California, San Diego, California.

Source: Geophysical Research Letters (GRL) paper
10.1029/2001GL014687, 2002


>From Harvey Leifert <>

The first report on long-term carbon flux variations in the lush Amazon
basin reveals that the area fluctuates between acting as a carbon-absorbing
"sink" and as a carbon source over periods of up to 25 years. The study by
Botta et al. ["Long-term variation of climate and carbon fluxes over the
Amazon basin"] analyzes 60 years of temperature and precipitation data from
the early 20th century and finds short-, intermediate-, and long-term
climate patterns in the region that affect carbon variability. Previous
research, based solely on short-term data of generally less than five years,
has shown that the Amazon, on average, acts as a globally significant sink
for terrestrial carbon. The researchers' model concludes that the tropical
area can act as a carbon sink, but that just relying on short-term
observations can lead to incorrect conclusions about the local carbon
balance and an incomplete understanding about managing carbon and other
greenhouse gas emissions worldwide.

Aurelie Botta, Navin Ramankutty, and Jonathan A. Foley, Center for
Sustainability and the Global Environment (SAGE), University of Wisconsin,
Madison, Wisconsin.

Source: Geophysical Research Letters (GRL) paper
10.1029/2001GL013607, 2002


>From Harvey Leifert <>

The Amery Ice Shelf in Antarctica is nearly twice as large as previously
reported, according to a study that finds that the shelf's  "grounding
zone," where floating ice connects to the land, is
further upstream than expected. Fricker et al. ["Redefinition of the  Amery
Ice Shelf, East Antarctica, grounding zone"] used satellite radar altimetry
to determine that floating ice extended more than 240 kilometers [150 miles]
further south than any researchers had predicted. Several other methods,
including global positioning and imagery techniques, confirmed their
results. The revelation alters the shape and dimensions of the ocean cavity
beneath the ice shelf, which has implications for estimating ocean
circulation, tides, and modeling studies of freezing and melting near the
South Pole. Their calculations suggest that the Amery Ice Shelf is nearly
72,000 square kilometers [28,000 square miles], roughly the size of the
state of Ohio. The previous estimate for the shelf was approximately 40,000
square kilometers [20,000 square miles]. It is the third-largest shelf in
the Antarctic, dwarfed by the massive Filchner-Ronne and Ross shelves.

Helen Amanda Fricker, Scripps Institution of Oceanography, University of
California-San Diego;
Ian Allison, Glenn Hyland, Andrew Ruddell, Neal Young, Antarctic Cooperative
Research Centre and Australian Antarctic Division, Hobart, Australia;
Richard Coleman, University of Tasmania, CSIRO Marine Research and Antarctic
Cooperative Research Centre, Australia;  Matt King, University of Tasmania,
Australia;  Kim Krebs, Charles Sturt University, Australia;  Sergey Popov,
Polar Marine Geological Survey Expedition, St. Petersburg, Russia.

Source: Journal of Geophysical Research-Solid Earth (JGR-B)
paper 10.1029/2001JB000383, 2002

II. Ordering information for science writers

Journalists and public information officers of educational and scientific
institutions (only) may receive one or more of the papers cited in the
Highlights by sending a message to Emily Crum at, indicating which one(s). Include your name, the name of your
publication, and your phone and fax number. State whether you prefer to
receive the paper(s) as pdf attachments by
email or as a fax.

The Highlights and the papers to which they refer are not under AGU embargo.

Contact: Harvey Leifert
Public Information Manager
American Geophysical Union
2000 Florida Avenue, N.W.
Washington, DC 20009

Phone (direct): +1 (202) 777-7507
Phone (toll-free in North America): (800) 966-2481 x507
Fax: +1 (202) 328-0566


>From Associated Press, 30 April 2002

House bill would increase emphasis on science in EPA decision-making

By JIM ABRAMS, Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON - The House moved Tuesday to give scientists a bigger say at the
Environmental Protection Agency, which has been assailed by industry and
environmental groups for not giving enough weight to science in its rulings.
"Science should be at the beginning, middle and end of the agency's
decision-making process," said Rep. Vernon Ehlers, R-Mich., a former
university physics teacher who sponsored the legislation. He said that
people currently seeking either more or fewer environmental rules doubt that
the EPA uses science appropriately.

The legislation, passed by voice vote, creates a new deputy director for
science and technology to coordinate scientific research at the agency. It
also gives the head of the EPA Office of Research and Development the
additional title of "chief scientist," and gives that official a five-year
term to ensure the continuity of scientific work across administrations.

Ehlers said that a longer set term for the chief scientist would decrease
political pressures on the office. The bill must still be considered by the

EPA Administrator Christie Whitman has expressed opposition to the
legislative effort to create a new high-level position. Whitman has already
taken steps to designate one of her top assistants as her science adviser
and has moved aggressively to expand the use of sound science in decisions,
said agency spokeswoman Steffanie Bell. She said Whitman had requested $627
million for the Office of Research and Development in fiscal 2003, up $35
million from the amount granted this year.

The National Academy of Sciences, in a 2000 report, said that the agency's
scientific practices have been criticized frequently since it was
established in 1970. NAS also said that, despite some improvements, there
was "a continuing basis for many of the scientific concerns" about the
regulatory process.

Such concerns have been expressed by environmentalists and those affected by
EPA regulations, particularly during the transition between the Clinton and
Bush administrations.

Sen. Ted Stevens, R-Alaska, said in Senate hearings last year that an
ongoing effort to make the EPA a full Cabinet-level department must be
accompanied by assurances that the agency makes decisions based on science
rather than politics. He said Alaskans were "being held hostage" by EPA
rules influenced by radical environmentalists.

Also last year, the Bush administration, citing inconclusive science,
revoked a Clinton administration rule to reduce the levels of arsenic in
drinking water. Seven months later, after another study, the Clinton rules
were adopted.

Environmentalists have accused the EPA of depending too heavily on industry
figures concerning pesticides, global warming and lead pollution. The White
House has rejected an EPA study showing the levels of emissions controls
needed to protect human health and the environment.

"The EPA's work is too important to suffer from poor perception," said Rep.
Constance Morella, R-Md. "As the agency with primary oversight over the
nation's environment, the scientific basis for EPA's regulatory decisions
must be beyond reproach."

Alys Campaigne, legislative director for the Natural Resources Defense
Council, said her group supported Ehlers' efforts, but she said the bill
doesn't go far enough to address such concerns as balanced representation on
scientific panels, disclosure of potential conflicts of interest and
adequate funding.

Copyright 2002, AP


>From CO2 Science Magazine, 1 May 2002

Larson, G. and Schaetzl, R. 2001. Origin and evolution of the Great Lakes.
Journal of Great Lakes Research 27: 518-546.

What was done
As indicated by the title of their article, Larson and Schaetzl review what
is know about the origin and evolution of the Great Lakes of North America:
Lake Superior, Lake Huron-Michigan, Lake Erie and Lake Ontario. We report on
their findings relative to one of the major concerns they discuss, namely,
the worry that "increased evaporation under a possible greenhouse-enhanced
climate, coupled with even more consumptive use of the Great Lakes waters,
could lead to lower lake levels in the near future."

What was learned
>From graphs of lake level fluctuations of the Great Lakes from 1915 to 1998,
we note that the lowest levels of the lakes occurred at about 1926 for Lake
Superior, 1962 for Lake Huron-Michigan, 1933 for Lake Erie, and 1934 for
Lake Ontario. We also note that the longest sustained period of high lake
levels for all of the Great Lakes occurred over the last 30 years. In
addition, lake levels at the end of the record are essentially the same as
those at the beginning of the record.

What it means
Climate alarmists worry - or claim they worry - that greenhouse-induced
warming will dramatically lower the water levels of the Great Lakes.
However, over what they claim to be the century that has exhibited the
greatest warming of the entire past millennium, there has been no net change
in the water level of any of the Great Lakes. In addition, over the past two
decades of what they typically refer to as unprecedented warming, the four
lakes have exhibited their greatest stability and highest water levels of
the past century.

These observations fly in the face of all the climate alarmists' horror
stories, suggesting that either the consequences they predict to follow on
the heels of global warming are wrong or their global temperature history of
the past millennium is wrong ... or both are wrong.  Based on their poor
track record in representing reality, we lean towards the latter
Copyright 2002.  Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change


>From CO2 Science Magazine, 1 May 2002

China has a long history, written and otherwise, of strong typhoon
landfalls.  Liu et al. (2001) capitalize on the first of these good fortunes
by meticulously wading through a wealth of historical documents pertaining
to this phenomenon in southern China's Guangdong Province, where the
pertinent records stretch all the way back to AD 975.

The scientists' research reveals an approximate 50-year cycle in the
frequency of these storms that suggests, in their words, "an external
forcing mechanism."  In addition, the researchers discovered that "the two
periods of most frequent typhoon strikes in Guangdong (AD 1660-1680,
1850-1880) coincide with two of the coldest and driest periods in northern
and central China during the Little Ice Age."

In an even more expansive study, Hayne and Chappell (2001) studied a series
of storm ridges at Curacoa Island on the central Queensland shelf (1840'S,
14633'E) that were deposited over the past 5,000 years, in order to test
the climate-alarmist claim that, as they put it, "global warming leads to an
increase of cyclone frequency or intensity."

With respect to the first of these storm properties, they found that
"cyclone frequency was statistically constant over the last 5,000 years."
With respect to the second characteristic, they also could find "no
indication that cyclones have changed in intensity," even when sea surface
temperatures at the start of the record were about 1C warmer than they are

In conclusion, real-world studies from lands bordering on the Pacific Ocean
show pretty much the same things that are indicated by studies from other
places around the globe: if there are any changes at all in the
characteristics of hurricane-type storms when the planet warms, the
tendencies that exist are for such storms to become less frequent and
weaker. Hence, if the planet continues to warm throughout the 21st century,
we would expect to see this welcome trend continue.

Hayne, M. and Chappell, J.  2001.  Cyclone frequency during the last 5000
years at Curacoa Island, north Queensland, Australia.  Palaeogeography,
Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology 168: 207-219.

Liu, K.-b., Shen, C. and Louie, K.-s.  2001.  A 1,000-year history of
typhoon landfalls in Guangdong, southern China, reconstructed from Chinese
historical documentary records.  Annals of the Association of American
Geographers 91: 453-464.
Copyright 2002.  Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change


>From CO2 Science Magazine, 1 May 2002

Lawlor, T.E.  1998.  Biogeography of great mammals: Paradigm lost?  Journal
of Mammalogy 79: 111-1130.

What was done
On the basis of evolving theory and an ever-increasing body of pertinent
data, the author reexamined biogeographic relationships of mammals that are
found on mountaintops in the Great Basin of western North America.  This
effort was undertaken with the objective of determining their future
well-being in the face of anticipated climate-driven changes in their

What was learned
Contrary to the conclusions of earlier more simplistic studies that
predicted dramatic global warming-induced reductions in the numbers of
different types of mammals in this region, Lawlor concluded that "virtually
no extinctions can be expected from a projected 3C rise in temperature."

What it means
The results of this study and those of several others (Grayson, 2000;
Grayson and Madson, 2000; Fleishman et al., 2001) stand in stark contrast to
the doom-and-gloom predictions of climate alarmists, who incessantly claim
that global warming will lead to a mass extinction of species nearly
everywhere on earth because, as they say, plants and animals will not be
able to migrate fast enough to keep up with the climatic zones to which they
are currently most accustomed, or alternatively, they will literally "run
out of places to run" when the migration is upward as opposed to poleward.
As simple-sounding as that fearsome hypothesis is, more complex studies,
such as the one reviewed here, indicate it is simply wrong, because plants
and animals are simply not the simpletons climate alarmists make them out to
be, as they possess a wide array of strategies for coping with environmental
change and recolonizing former territories after having once been forced out
of them.

Fleishman, E., Austin, G.T. and Murphy, D.D.  2001.  Biogeography of Great
Basin butterflies: revisiting patterns, paradigms, and climate change
scenarios.  Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 74: 501-515.

Grayson, D.K.  2000.  Mammalian responses to Middle Holocene climatic change
in the Great Basin of the western United States.  Journal of Biogeography
27: 181-192.

Grayson, D.K. and Madson, D.B.  2000.  Biogeographic implications of recent
low-elevation recolonization by Neotoma cinerea in the Great Basin.  Journal
of Mammalogy 81: 1100-1105.
Copyright 2002.  Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change


>From Tech Central Station, 29 April 2002

By Howard C. Hayden 04/29/2002 
For over a century, the world has faced a continuing energy crisis. We would
run out of oil in 20 years, the alarmists clamored. Maybe some time the
predictions will come true: just because somebody has been crying, "Wolf!"
for a long time doesn't mean that there is no wolf. The real crisis hasn't
happened, but it most likely will happen eventually.

Fortunately, during the century, we have learned how to harness nuclear
energy, of which the supply is, to all intents and purposes, infinite. In
case we actually run out of fossil fuels, we will still have plenty of
energy. That is, we do not have an energy crisis and we will never have an
energy crisis unless we go out of our way to manufacture one.

Among those crying, "Wolf!" are many utopians who want to impose their solar
theocracy on other people, and have been beating their drum for decades. For
example, Ralph Nader said in 1978, "Everything will be solar in 30 years."
In that same year, Denis Hayes, appointed by Jimmy Carter to be the first
head of the Solar Energy Research Institute (now the national Renewable
Energy Laboratory) predicted "... 50% solar by the end of the century." In
1977, Hayes predicted, "By 2025, humanity could obtain 75% of its energy
from solar resources ..."

The benighted White House Council on Environmental Quality of the Carter
administration expected (in 1979) that we would get a quarter of our energy
from solar sources by the turn of the century. They beamed, "For the year
2020 and beyond, it is now possible to speak hopefully, and unblushingly, of
the United States becoming a solar society."

Even as late as 1990, the misnamed Union of Concerned Scientists predicted
that by 2000, renewable energy's fraction of the U.S. energy budget would

Reality has not been kind to these folks. The fraction of our energy from
renewable sources has steadily declined from 8.47% in 1979 to 7.3% at the
present. But that figure itself is misleading, because the overwhelming
majority of it comes from two venerable sources - biomass (mostly firewood)
and hydropower. The contribution from the highly promoted "solar solutions
to the energy problem" - direct solar heat, photovoltaics, solar-thermal
electrical production, and wind - amounts to a trifling one part out of
about 850.

With that history as background, let us discuss one highly promoted example
from the recent news. Green Mountain Energyhas announced that construction
on Houston's largest solar facility has begun. The power plant, if that's
not an overstatement, will consist of 440 solar panels and will produce 43
kilowatts of electrical power - in bright sunlight, that is.

Minuscule as it is, the 43-kW figure is a vast overestimate. Actual
experience with solar power plants of all types shows that the average
output is between 15% and 20% of the nameplate power. That is, we can expect
the Green Mountain project to produce about 8 kW on the average. In the
course of a year, the solar power station should produce about 70,000

To put that figure in perspective, it would take over 110,000 such PV
stations to produce as many kilowatt-hours in a year as one run-of-the-mill
nuke or large coal-fired (1-billion watt) power station with a 90% capacity

Building 110,000 of those PV stations would be a great boon to newspapers,
because they could have a front-page article on the subject every day for
the next 300 years. By that time, maybe the Israeli-Palestinian crisis will
no longer be front-page news. But if the Mideast crisis is still vying for
space on Page 1, build another 110,000 of "Houston's largest" to generate
another billion watts.

Keep it up until all 400 billion watts are solar, and a mere 44 million of
them later - enough for daily front-page news for 120,000 years -- and there
will be enough electricity to run the United States of today. Providing,
that is, there is a way to store and recover the energy those plants
generate for use at night, not to mention on rainy and cloudy days.

Howard C. Hayden is professor emeritus of physics at the University of
Connecticut, author of The Solar Fraud: Why Solar Energy Won't Run the World
and editor of The Energy Advocate

2002 Tech Central Station 


>From National Center for Policy Analysis, 25 April 2002

Daily Policy Digest

Environmental Issues / Global Warming

Thursday, April 25, 2002   
Throughout the negotiations leading to the Kyoto Protocol, which set targets
for countries to reduce carbon dioxide emissions by 2010 to below those of
1990 levels, supporters claimed the costs would be minimal. But a new report
on Europe show that Kyoto stands to inflict devastating damage to the
economies of European Union (EU) nations.

According to new estimates by the economic and energy consultancy DRI-WEFA:

Compliance with the Kyoto Protocol will cost Germany and Britain about 5
percent of their Gross Domestic Product (GDP) and increase unemployment by
1.8 million and one million respectively.

The Netherlands is set to lose 3.8 percent of its GDP and 240,000 jobs, and
Spain 5 percent and one million jobs.

These DRI-WEFA findings assume a best case scenario in which efficient and
widespread carbon dioxide trading will reduce the burden imposed by the
emissions reductions -- meaning it could be worse.

Furthermore, all European nations will see rising heating fuel, gasoline,
diesel and electricity prices. By 2010, prices will have risen by 10 percent
to 20 percent.

Spain has a large trucking fleet, which will be seriously harmed by a 25
percent increase in the price of diesel.

Electricity prices will more than double for Germany, Britain and the
Netherlands, causing widespread economic harm.

And the cost of heating oil would rise by nearly 50 percent.

The U.S. agreed to reduce emissions 7 percent, and the EU as a whole 8
percent. Germany and Britain thought they could do better and agreed to
reductions of more than 10 percent. Climate alarmists in Europe want to
reduce emissions 60 percent by 2050.

However, a recent scientific report from the European Science and
Environment Forum demonstrates that there isn't a consensus that man is to
blame for much of recent warming, and costs of warming have been modest.

Source: Roger Bate (European Science and Environment Forum), "Kyoto May Cost
You Your Job," Wall Street Journal Europe, April 22, 2002.

For text,,SB1019425221944735080.djm,00.html

For more on ESEF

For more on Global Warming

Copyright 2002 National Center for Policy Analysis - All rights reserved.


>From Space Daily, 30 April 2002

Washington (AFP) Apr 30, 2002

Secretary of State Colin Powell on Tuesday urged the American scientific
community to play a broader role in shaping US foreign policy but jokingly
confessed a personal ineptitude in the field.

Powell said science played an integral role in the fights against terrorism
and HIV/AIDS as well as debates over global climate change, sustainable
development and trade matters, and implored members of the National Academy
of Sciences to boost involvement in those areas.

But Powell, who has long made light of his less-than-stellar academic
performance as a geology major at the City College of New York in the 1950s
before he entered the military, lamented his own poor scientific

"I happen to hold a Bachelor of Science degree in geology from the City
College of New York and my great contribution to the field of science is
that I never entered it," he told the academy's 139th annual conference.

"The leaders at the City College of New York, back in 1954, awarded me a
Bachelor of Science degree in geology under the condition that I would enter
the army and never come out," Powell said to peals of laughter from the

"It took me four-and-a-half years to receive this degree in a very strenuous
four-year program," he continued, to more laughter.

"And they truly were delighted when I took my C average and left the City
College of New York and went into the Army, never to be seen again."

Powell drew further laughter and applause as he went on to describe how his
persona non gratis status had been modified by the City College elders as
his career blossomed and he became chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
before retiring and then being named Secretary of State.

"Now I am considered one of the greatest sons of City College, called upon
for all kinds of fund-raising activity that so many of you are familiar with
from your own academic background," he said.

Powell stressed the critical role played by science and technology in
defining and conducting foreign policy, noting in particular its relevance
in the post-September 11 world, after four hijacked planes hit New York,
Washington and a field in Pennsylvania.

"Since September 11th, all of us have been acutely aware of the danger from
terrorist threats and anthrax scares, cyberthreats and weapons of mass
destruction," he said.

Powell also urged the members of the academy to reach out to America's youth
and explain the challenges and opportunities science can provide in the new

"As focused as we all are on terrorism and other clear and present dangers,
we must not let the perils of our age blind us to the great promise that
exists in this 21st century," Powell said.

"Science and statecraft ... can and must work together for a safer,
healthier, better world in many more areas than the ones I just mentioned:
missile defense, climate change, energy, you name it."

All rights reserved. 2002 Agence France-Presse.


>From Washington Times, 28 April 2002

Edwin Feulner

For a long time now - indeed, since the first Earth Day in 1970 -
self-styled environmentalists have been warning the rest of us that our
planet is spinning its way toward ecological Armageddon.

It's a depressing litany: Melting glaciers, rising temperatures, violent
weather, crop failures and nearly all of it, we're told, the fault of human
beings engaged in such unforgivable activities as creating businesses,
driving cars and, well, breathing.

"We humans are about as subtle as the asteroid that wiped out the
dinosaurs," New Scientist magazine says. "The damage we do is increasing. We
are heading for cataclysm." The Washington-based Worldwatch Institute finds
"the key environmental indicators are increasingly negative." And Greenpeace
predicts that "half the Earth's species are likely to disappear in the next
75 years."

It sounds pretty frightening until you look beyond the headlines. Then you
discover such claims rest mostly on hype, rather than on science.

Take forests. They're shrinking, right? That's what the Worldwatch Institute
says - "fact" dutifully parroted in classrooms and newsrooms nationwide. But
as Danish professor Bjorn Lomborg points out in his book, "The Skeptical
Environmentalist," Worldwatch makes this sweeping claim without sources.
Data available from the United Nations show that "forest cover has remained
remarkably stable over the second half of the 20th century," Mr. Lomborg
writes, and actually appears to have increased slightly.

Mr. Lomborg, by the way, is a former Greenpeace member who originally set
out to prove that Julian Simon, the late economist who had spent years
debunking environmental doomsayers, was wrong. But, time after time, he
found the facts supported Mr. Simon.

How about air pollution? We're told that's on the rise. And it is - in the
developing world. In industrialized countries such as the United States,
where the total number of car miles traveled has more than doubled in the
past 30 years, emissions have decreased by a third and the amount of
pollutants such as lead by 80 percent and more. Why? Because, Mr. Lomborg
says, only nations with growing economies can afford clean-air technology.

Then there's global warming. The conventional wisdom is that climate change
can be explained as simple cause-and-effect: As greenhouse gases (such as
carbon dioxide) rise, so do average temperatures. Industrial activities
belch these gases into the air, trigger warming and invite environmental

But is it really that simple? The fact is, many scientists admit that we
can't be sure how much of an impact human activity has on global

One study, for example, conducted by NASA's Goddard Institute for Space
Studies, suggests carbon dioxide may not be the biggest contributor to
greenhouse gases. Even a report from the National Academy of Sciences (a
global-warming advocate) says there is "considerable uncertainty in current
understanding of how the climate system varies naturally and reacts to
emissions of greenhouse gases." It says warnings about the "magnitude of
future warming should be regarded as tentative and subject to future
adjustments (either upward or downward)."

But why be surprised? As Kenneth Green of the Reason Public Policy Institute
notes, we've been taking temperature readings for a relatively short portion
of the Earth's total life-span (about the last 150 years).

As technology improves, we're gaining a better understanding of other
variables that affect climate, from cloud changes and "carbon sinks"
(forests that soak up carbon dioxide) to solar radiation and volcanic

I'm not suggesting that all environmental warnings are groundless, only that
we shouldn't swallow every doomsday scenario whole. Factory smokestacks
aren't the only source of hot air.
Edwin Feulner is president of the Heritage Foundation.

2002 News World Communications, Inc.


>From Glasgow Herald, 30 April 2002

THIS morning, as I looked out of my window across Loch Fyne, there was a
substantial fresh overnight fall of snow on Ben Cruachan and the Argyllshire
mountains, and even on the lower hills. It brought a temporary reflective
pause to my cornflake consumption as it was, after all, only yesterday that
the climate-change theorists told us that there will shortly be no snow at
all in much of Scotland, even in the dead of winter.

In all the years of my now chronologically challenged existence I cannot
recall such amounts of snow falling in what is almost early May, and
wondered if the proponents of climate change have not got their terminology
wrong and actually mean global colding rather than global warming

I am more sceptical than ever about the computer-driven drivel of the
climate-change theorists, and hope their axioms will soon be busted in the
way that the theories of the ozone-hole cult have now been largely

Alan Clayton,

1 Letters Way, Strathlachlan, Argyll.

CCNet is a scholarly electronic network. To subscribe/unsubscribe, please
contact the moderator Benny J Peiser < >. 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 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.

CCCMENU CCC for 2002