Discussion:
Solar Activity A Dominant Factor In Climate Dynamics
(too old to reply)
Bonzo
2007-04-25 06:50:59 UTC
Permalink
By Dr Theodor Landscheidt

Schroeter Institute for Research in Cycles of Solar Activity

Nova Scotia, Canada

http://www.john-daly.com/solar/solar.htm



1. "Solar Constant" Variations in the 11-Year Sunspot Cycle and Climatic
Effects

Atmospheric circulation, the cause of weather, is driven by the sun's
energy. Climate is the integral of weather over periods of more than a
year. This integral also depends on the flux of solar energy. The same
applies to variations in the energy flux caused by the sun's varying
activity. Satellite data show that the "solar constant" S is variable. The
solar irradiance decreased from the sunspot maximum 1979 to the minimum
1986, increased again on the way to the next maximum in the 11-year sunspot
cycle, and decreased anew in the descending phase. This came as a surprise
as it is plausible that the dark sunspots with their strong magnetic fields
impede the free flux of energy from the sun's interior to the outside. Yet
P. V. Foukal and J. Lean [22] have shown that bright faculae in the vicinity
of sunspots increase even more than sunspots when the activity grows
stronger, so that an irradiance surplus is established.



IPCC scientists hold that the corresponding variation in the solar constant
(Delta S) is smaller than 0.1% and has no impact on climate that could count
in comparison with the greenhouse effect [94]. Yet they fail to appreciate
that quotes of 0.1% in the literature refer to the absolute amplitude of the
sinusoidal variation in the solar constant, not the whole change from
minimum to maximum, or from maximum to minimum [25, 32, 39]. Figure 1 after
C. Fröhlich [25] shows this distinctly. The data at the top of the figure,
designated by `HF', represent NIMBUS-7 measurements. The smoothed curve
shows the 81-day running average related to the interval of three solar
rotations of 27days. The horizontal axis indicates the investigated period,
above in years, below in days since the first day of 1980. The vertical axis
measures the solar constant S in W/m2. The scale in the middle of Figure 1
indicates the range of 0.1%. When this scale is taken to measure the
variation in the smoothed curve from the sunspot maximum 1979 to the minimum
in 1986, the result is Delta S approximately equal to - 0.22%. IPCC
scientists cannot object to this higher value on the grounds that it is not
a common practice to assess the total variation in such a way. They proceed
equally by relating the rise in global temperature to the minimum at the end
of the 19th century and not to the long-term temperature mean.



According to satellite measurements, the mean value of the solar constant is
S = 1367 W/m2. 0.22% of this amount of energy equals 3 W/m2 . This result
may also be read from Figure 1. The maximum of the smoothed curve is at
1374.2 W/m2 and the minimum at 1371.2 W/m2 . The variation of 0.22% does not
affect climate in its entirety. The solar constant defines the amount of
energy which just reaches the outside of the earth's atmosphere. 30% of
this energy is not absorbed by the atmosphere, but reflected. Furthermore,
it has to be taken into account that the irradiated sectional area of the
earth constitutes only a quarter of the surface to which this thermal energy
has to be distributed. So there is only 239 W/m2 available to heat the
atmosphere. Consequently, the variation of 3 W/m2 has only a climate effect
of 0.53 W/m2 . How this affects global temperature depends on the general
circulation model used to assess the climate sensitivity. C. Fröhlich [25]
proceeds from a value between 0.3° and 1.4° C / W/m2 . When we choose the
mean value 0.85° C / W/m2 to avoid an overestimation, the climate effect of
0.53 W/m2 yields a temperature effect of 0.45° C. The chosen mean value lies
within the range given in the literature [19, 31, 33, 82, 87, 89, 115]. Even
if a four times longer smoothing interval is chosen as in Figure 1, the
variation of the solar constant reaches 2.2 W/m2 [74] with a temperature
effect of 0.33° C.



Variations in global temperature of 0.45° or 0.33° C in the course of seven
years cannot be considered negligible. This all the more so as the observed
rise of temperature during the last hundred years amounts to merely 0.4° C.
From the value 0.5° C, quoted in the literature, 0.1°C has to be subtracted
because it is due to urban warming that causes a spurious rise in global
temperature [39]. Observed climate data, which follow the rhythm of the
11-year sunspot cycle, indicate that the effect of irradiance variations on
the atmosphere is enhanced by positive feed-back processes or stochastic
resonance. This form of resonance involves the cooperative interplay of
random and periodic stimuli. Noise can improve the response to small
periodic or quasiperiodic signals so that the small input is able to entrain
large scale fluctuations [80, 116]. This effect is strongest in nonlinear
systems with a high level of noise.



The atmosphere meets these conditions. K. Labitzke and H. van Loon [51] have
discovered a statistically significant connection between
temperature-dependent 30-hP heights in the stratosphere and extrema in the
11-year sunspot cycle, which involves the troposphere and is strongest in
special geographical regions. It is an indication of feed-back or resonance
amplification that the temperature difference in the stratosphere between
minimum and maximum of the 11-year cycle reaches 1.8° C and in the
troposphere still 0.9° C [50]. In the Subtropic troposphere this difference
even amounts to 2° C [70]. Northern and Southern Hemisphere show such
sunspot related temperature patterns in a mirror-symmetric way. The
geographic distribution of the temperature effect corroborates the
hypothesis that a modulation of Hadley cell circulation is involved [95].
Experiments with models have shown that winds in the lower stratosphere can
have an impact on circulation in the troposphere [84]. Strong temperature
variations following the course of the 11-year sunspot cycle were not only
observed in recent decades. According to M. Stuiver, P. M. Grootes, and T.
F. Braziunas [109] the GISP delta 18O climate record shows a close
correlation with the 11-year sunspot cycle for hundreds of years. This data
point to a regional temperature variation of 2.6° C following the sunspot
rhythm.



2. Gleissberg Cycle of Solar Activity and Climate Change



As to climate, seven years is a rather short interval. A climatic effect
caused by total irradiance variations becomes more effective when its impact
lasts longer. The Milankovitch theory in its modern form shows that a change
of 0.1% effective during a very long interval can release a real ice-age
[49]. So it may be expected that the 90-year Gleissberg cycle of sunspot
activity, which modulates the intensity of the 11-year cycle, possesses a
considerable potential to accumulate an effective surplus of irradiance, or
to induce a steadily decreasing level of radiant flux density, particularly
since the Gleissberg cycle can reach a length of 120 years [58]. Figure 2
after J. A. Eddy [17] shows the strong intensity variations in the 11-year
sunspot cycle. When we connect the peaks by an enveloping curve, minima in
the Gleissberg cycle emerge around the years 1670 (Maunder minimum), 1810,
and 1895. They are marked by black arrows. Each of these secular sunspot
minima coincided with cool climate in the Northern Hemisphere. The deeper
the level of solar activity fell, the deeper sank the temperatures.



In Figure 3 after E. Friis-Christensen and K. Lassen [24] this connection
becomes quite evident. The thick curve shows the Northern Hemisphere surface
temperature (right scale), while the thin line represents the length of the
11-year sunspot cycle (left scale) covering the years 1865 to 1985.
Occasionally, this impressive synchronism is objected to on the grounds that
the length of the cycle should be of no import, as only the intensity of
sunspot activity would count in a potential climate effect. Yet the length
of the 11-year cycle is a measure of its intensity. Short cycles generate
high sunspot maxima, wheras long cycles are characterized by weaker sunspot
activity. Friis-Christensen and Lassen have shown that the close correlation
extends back to the 16th century [68]. C. J. Butler [10] corroborated these
results when he investigated English temperature data since 1796. Together
with the results elaborated by Labitzke and van Loon this is an indication
that the solar influence on climate is considerably stronger than IPCC
scientists assume.



Those scientists who spread anxiety in the eighties by predicting climate
catastrophees cannot plead that at this time there were not any publications
pointing to a relation between solar activity and climate that had to be
taken seriously. The relationship in Figure 4 was presented at the
international climate symposium "Weather and Climate Responses to Solar
Variations" in Boulder, Colorado, as early as 1982 [55]. The plot shows a
temperature time series after H. H. Lamb and C. D. Schönwiese at the bottom,
radiocarbon data after J. E. Eddy [16] - proxy data reflecting solar
activity - covering the interval 1000 to 1950 at the top, and in the middle
data I had derived from a semiquantitative model of cyclic solar activity. S
and M mark the Spoerer minimum and the Maunder minimum of sunspot activity,
while O points to the medieval climate optimum which coincided with very
strong solar activity. The synchronism of these three time series, covering
950 years, extends the connection elaborated by Friis-Christensen and Lassen
550 years farther back into the past and opens a possibility of long-range
forecasts, as the data in the second curve are based on calculations that
can be extended far into the future. On this basis, I forecasted, in 1982,
that we should expect declining temperatures after 1990 and probably a new
Little Ice Age around 2030. In further papers I specified this prediction
[58, 59, 63]. I also expected considerably weaker sunspot activity after
1990. The slowly ascending new sunspot cycle, which started in May 1996,
seems to follow the predicted trend.



When satellite observations had established that the solar constant is
variable, phenomenological regression models were developed which assess the
variations in irradiance in past decades and centuries. The model developed
by D. V. Hoyt and K. H. Schatten [39], shown in Figure 5, is based on proxy
data related to secular changes in the convective energy transport or the
convective velocities in the sun. They include the solar cycle length, the
equatorial solar rotation rate, and sunspot structure. This solar-irradiance
model has only two parameters: the amplitude of variations of the 11-year
cycle and the Gleissberg cycle. The thick curve in Figure 5 shows the output
of the model. The corresponding vertical axis on the left measures the
irradiance in W/m2. The dashed curve represents the smoothed annual mean
Northern Hemisphere temperature variations (right scale) for 1700 - 1879
from B. S. Groveman and H. E. Landsberg [28], and for 1880 to the present
from J. E. Hansen and S. Lebedeff [30]. The two curves show a close
correlation that points to a strong link between solar activity and climate.



As direct measurements of Delta S are not available before 1978, it is
important that observations of the surface magnetism of solar type stars
have yielded variations in irradiance up to 0.6% [84]. Variations of this
order in the sun's activity could explain climate features like the "Little
Ice Age", especially if it is assumed that the general magnetic network,
which covers the photospheric surface even in a sunspot minimum, vanishes
during activity lulls of the Maunder minimum type. Every fourth of the
observed stars is in a state comparable to the Maunder minimum of the sun
[84]. One star - HD 3651 - was even observed just in transition between the
cyclic and the Maunder minimum phase. It showed periodic behaviour for about
12 years and then stopped fluctuating as its surface activity dropped to
very low levels [84]. This indicates that the sun has a much stronger
potential of irradiance variation than assumed. The satellite observations
since 1978 cover only a small part of the sun's range of variability. S.
Baliunas and W. Soon [2] have shown in addition that short star cycles
produce stronger magnetic activy and irradiance than long cycles. This
confirms the results published by Gleissberg, FriisChristensen and Lassen.



When measuring the equivalent width of the high excitation photospheric line
of C 5380 Å in the solar irradiance spectrum since 1978, W. Livingston
discovered that it increased in strength by 0.081 mÅ within 12 years. This
implies a temperature increase of 4.6° K, an order of magnitude greater than
the variation observed by satellites. Since change in the intensity of
absorption lines points to change in the irradiance, D. V. Hoyt and K. H.
Schatten [39] assume that there are components of varying irradiance beyond
sunspots, faculae, and the magnetic network which are not yet known. A
candidate could be those recently discovered huge streams of electronically
charged plasma flowing beneath the surface of the sun, which ring the solar
poles at about 75° latitude and resemble jet streams in the earth's
atmosphere. There is also plasma flow similar to the earth's trade winds
[104]. As these plasma streams move about 10% faster than their
surroundings, the resulting shear induces concentrations in the magnetic
fields "frozen" in the plasma which lead to stronger magnetic activity. It
is to be expected that research into these features will result in a new
index and a better explanation of solar activity. The steady increase in the
intensity of the line C 5380 Å over 12 years, observed by Livingston, is
independent of the 11-year cycle. It seems to point to a longer cycle of
solar activity. Is this the Gleissberg cycle, or a new yet unknown cycle?



3. Variations in the Sun's Ultraviolet Radiation and Climate Models



Change in the ultraviolet radiation of the sun is much greater than in the
range of visible radiation. The ultraviolet range of the spectrum lies
between 100 Å and 3800 Å. Wavelengths below 1500 Å are called extreme
ultraviolet (EUV). The variation in radiation between extrema of the 11-year
sunspot cycle reaches 35% in the EUV- range [119], 20% at 1500 Å [21], and
7% around 2500 Å [34,97]. At wavelengths above 2500 Å, the variation reaches
still 2% [21]. At the time of energetic solar eruptions, the UV-radiation
increases by 16%. At a sunspot maximum the EUV-radiation raises the
temperature in the Ionosphere by 300% in relation to the minimum [21]. Yet
most important is that the UV-radiation below 2900 Å is completely absorbed
by ozone in the stratosphere. The resultant rise in temperature is augmented
by positive feed-back, as the UV-radiation also generates new ozone.
Satellite observations show that the ozone content grows by 2% from sunspot
minimum to maximum [113]. D. Rind and J. Overpeck are working on a model
which explains how the rising temperature in the stratosphere influences the
circulation in the troposphere. J. D. Haigh [29] has already assessed this
effect in quantitative terms and shows that temperature in the Subtropics
and North Atlantic storm tracks are especially affected.



Variations in radiation are not the the sun's only way to influence climate.
Between energetic solar eruptions and galactic cosmic radiation modulated by
the solar wind on the one hand and electric parameters of the atmosphere on
the other, exist couplings, the strength of which varies by 10% in the
course of days, years, and even decades [113]. The most important change is
to be found in the downward air-earth current density, which flows between
the ionosphere and the surface. R. Markson and M. Muir [71] have shown how
this affects the thunderstorm activity, while B. A. Tinsley [113] assumes
that electrically induced changes in the microphysics of clouds
(electrofreezing) enhance ice nucleation and formation of clouds. These
approaches have the advantage to be independent of dynamic coupling between
different layers of the atmosphere, since these variations affect the whole
atmosphere. Therefore, IPCC scientists who allege that there are not any
physical explanations of a solar impact on climate change must be unaware of
the relevant literature.



4. Cosmic Radiation, Solar Wind, and Global Cloud Coverage



The most convincing argument yet, supporting a strong impact of the sun's
activity on climate change, is a direct connection between cloud coverage
and cosmic rays, discovered by H. Svensmark and E. Friis-Christensen [111]
in 1996. It is shown in Figure 6. Clouds have a hundred times stronger
effect on weather and climate than carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. Even if
the atmosphere's CO2 content doubled, its effect would be cancelled out if
the cloud cover expanded by 1%, as shown by H. E. Landsberg [53]. Svensmark'
s and Friis-Christensen's result is therefore of great importance. The thin
curve in Figure 6 presents the monthly mean counting rates of neutrons
measured by the ground-based monitor in Climax, Colorado (right scale). This
is an indirect measure of the strength of galactic and solar cosmic rays.
The thick curve plots the 12-month running average of the global cloud cover
expressed as change in percent (left scale). It is based on homogeneous
observations made by geostationary satellites over the oceans. The two
curves show a close correlation. The correlation coefficient is

r = 0.95.



Short-range variations in the intensity of cosmic rays, caused by energetic
solar eruptions, have the same effect, though shorter. The plot shows that
strong cosmic rays go along with a larger cloud cover, whereas weak cosmic
rays shrink the cloud cover. The global cloud coverage diminished from its
peak at the end of 1986 to its bottom in the middle of 1990 by more than 3%.
According to observations by V. Ramanathan, B. R. Barkstrom, and E. F.
Harrison [91], clouds have a net cooling effect of -17 W/m2 . Svensmark and
Friis-Christensen [111] conclude from the diminution of this cooling effect
between 1986 and 1990 that the solar irradiance has increased by about 1.5
W/m2 within these three and a half years. A change of this order is quite
remarkable, since the total radiative forcing by carbon dioxide accumulated
since 1750 has been estimated by the IPCC not to go beyond 1.5 W/m2 . This
means that cosmic rays, strongly modulated by solar activity, achieve an
effect within three and a half years for which the accumulation of carbon
dioxide in the atmosphere needs centuries. This shows clearly to what extent
the greenhouse effect has been overestimated in comparison with the solar
contribution to climate change, which turns out to be the most important
factor.




There is also a physical explanation of the effect: the secondary ions
produced by the cosmic rays serve as condensation nuclei with hygroscopic
properties that enhance the formation of clouds [4, 15, 23]. Meanwhile, H.
Svensmark [112] has extended his investigation that now covers the interval
1980 to 1996. As before, the correlation between cloud cover and cosmic rays
is very close. Indirect measurements of the intensity of cosmic rays, which
register myons instead of neutrons, go back to 1937. When H. Svensmark [112]
compared these data with global temperature in the Northern Hemisphere, he
again found a strong correlation which indicates that the connection between
cosmic rays, cloud cover, and global temperature is real.



The primary cause of the solar modulation of cosmic rays is not the level of
sunspot activity, but the varying strength of the solar wind. This
supersonic outflow of plasma originates in the very hot corona of the sun
and carries ionized particles and magnetic field lines from the sun. While
it is expanding towards the boundary of the solar system, cosmic ray
particles interacting with it lose energy. When the solar wind blows
heavily, cosmic rays are weak, and when the solar wind is in a lull, cosmic
rays become strong. The highest velocities in the solar wind are caused by
energetic solar eruptions and coronal holes. Strong eruptions (flares and
eruptive prominences) avoid sunspot maxima and even occur close to sunspot
minima. So sunspots are not a good indicator of solar wind strength [65]. As
cosmic rays, which have such a strong impact on cloud cover, are strongly
modulated by eruptional features of the sun's activity, the solar
contribution to climate change can no longer be considered negligible. This
is all the more so as the already described changes in irradiance have an
additional effect.



D. Rind and J. Overpeck [93] have shown that at least half of the rise in
temperature since the end of the Little Ice Age can be attributed to the
parallel rise in the sun's irradiance. D. Hoyt and K. H. Schatten [39] judge
their elaborate results as follows: "From the record, we believe the sun
plays a major role in natural secular climatic changes on time scales of
decades to centuries.". E. S. Posmentier, W. H. Soon, and S. L. Baliunas
[88, 107] eventually derive from a model based on the same solar factors as
in the Hoyt-Schatten-model that 78% of the rise in temperature between 1885
and 1987 can be explained by the sun's varying irradiance. An additional
statistical experiment corroborates this result, though it omits the
Svensmark effect and other solar-terrestrial relationships which are
independent from irradiance. There is not much room left for the
anthropogenic greenhouse effect. H. N. Priem [90] aptly remarks:



"Recent studies show that solar variability rather than changing CO pressure
is an important, probably the dominant climate forcing factor ... The
current and anticipated fleet of spacecraft devoted to the study of solar
and solar-terrestrial physics will therefore pobably prove to have more
bearing on the understanding and forecasting of climate change than the
orchestrated assessments by politically motivated international panels
biased towards global warming exclusively by the enhanced greenhouse
effect."



The discovery by Svensmark and Friis-Christensen highlights the IPCC
objection (that exogenic factors are energetically too weak to have an
impact on global temperature), as pointing in the wrong direction. Primary
cosmic rays, which regulate cloud coverage, inject a total energy into the
atmosphere equal to the intensity of starlight in the night skies [23]. J.
G. Roederer [95] comes closer to reality with his remark:



"The energy argument, however, is not valid for highly nonlinear, complex
systems such as the coupled atmosphere-ocean-cryosphere-biosphere. It is
well known that complex systems can behave chaotically, i.e. follow very
different paths after the smallest change in initial or boundary conditions,
or in response to the smallest perturbation. In a highly nonlinear system
with large reservoirs of latent energy such as the
atmosphere-ocean-biosphere, global redistributions of energy can be
triggered by very small inputs, a process that depends far more on their
spatial and temporal pattern than on their magnitude."



5. Failure of Climate Predictions by IPCC Scientists



Precise forecasts that prove correct are a sharp criterion for efficient
science. The protagonists of global warming remain empty-handed in this
respect in spite of great material and personal expense. In the eighties S.
Schneider from the National Center for Atmospheric Research in Boulder,
Colorado, predicted in his book "Global Warming" a huge jump in temperature,
polar ice melting away, seas surging across the land, famine on an epidemic
scale, and ecosystem collapse. Today this is no longer taken seriously. Yet
other climatologists, too, made forecasts in the eighties they no longer
maintain. C. D. Schönwiese [99], usually critical and cautious in his
statements, still predicted in 1987 a 4.5° C rise in temperature until 2030,
though only as an upper limit. He thought that the sea level in the German
Bay could rise by 1.5 m till 2040 and in the ocean around India even 2 to 3
m. A projection of his temperature forecast yields 11.8° C for the year
2100. At the climate conference in Villach in 1985 similar predictions were
presented to the public. The IPCC still predicted in 1990 and 1992 that
global temperature would rise 1.9° - 5.2° C until 2100 [100] and thought
that a rise in sea level by 1.10 m was possible [36].



All these predictions have turned out to be untenable. It is accepted that
global temperature has risen by 0.5° C in the last hundred years. Yet during
the last fifty years the temperature has remained approximately at the same
level, even though 70% of the anthropgenic carbon dioxide contribution was
injected into the atmosphere during this time. From 1940 to 1970 the
temperature fell, and according to satellitite data available since 1979,
which are in good accord with balloon data [27], the trend in the lower
troposphere has remained at -0.06° C per decade. The IPCC prediction made in
1992 proved so exaggerated that it had to be adjusted to reality three years
later by reducing the rise range to 1° - 3.5° C by 2100. As to sea level
rise, the IPCC meanwhile acknowledges (in accordance with a consensus in the
specialized literature [3]) that sea level has risen by merely 18 cm in the
last hundred years. According to M. Baltuck et al. [3] it is very probable
that the rising sea level is due to natural causes and not to man's
contribution to the greenhouse effect.



The discrepancy between IPCC forecasts and observed data stands out very
clearly as to temperatures in the polar regions. The general circulation
models, presented by the IPCC in 1990, predict for the regions near the
poles in a CO2 doubling scenario a rise in temperature of more than 12° C
[13]. If this were true, in the last 40 years with their steep increase in
CO2 concentration, a warming trend with a temperature rise of several °C
should have emerged. The opposite is true [20]. A joint investigation by
American, Russian and Canadian scientists shows that the surface
temperatures in the Arctic region observed between 1950 and 1990 are going
down. They fell 4.4° C in winter and 5° C in autumn [43]. Satellite data
too, available since 1979, do not indicate rising temperatures [105]. This
agrees with data published by the world Glacier Monitoring Network in
Zurich, according to which 55% of the glaciers in high latitudes are
advancing compared with 5% around 1950.



The main reason of the incompatibility of IPCC forecasts and observed data
is the lacking suitability of the general circulation models (GCM) for the
purpose of long-range climate predictions. GCMs are an excellent tool for
research into data connections, the physics of which is just beginning to
emerge. In such cases quantitative and qualitative aspects of the data
pattern may be investigated which develop when the determining variables are
changed. The point here is learning, not predicting. The development in the
immensely complex nonlinear climate system with feed-back coupling of
atmosphere, ocean, cryosphere, and biosphere may be forecast, if at all,
only for rather short intervals.



GCMs are based on the same type of nonlinear differential equations which
induced E. N. Lorenz in 1961 to acknowledge that long-range weather
predictions are impossible because of the atmosphere's extreme sensitivity
to initial conditions. It is inconceivable that the Butterfly Effect should
disappear when the prediction interval of a few days is extended to decades
and centuries. Some climatologists concede that there is a problem. C. D.
Schönwiese [100] remarks in this respect:



"Consequently we should conclude that climatic change cannot be predicted.

It is correct that the varied and complex processes in the atmosphere cannot
be predicted beyond the theoretical limit of a month via step by step
calculations in circulation models, neither today, nor in the future. Yet
there is the possibility of a conditioned forecast. The condition is that a
special factor within the complex cause-and effect relationship is so strong
in its effect that it clearly dominates all other factors. In addition, the
behaviour of that single dominant causal factor must be predictable with
certainty or a high degree of probability."



The dominant causal factor, meant here, is the anthropogenic greenhouse
effect. However, there is no convincing evidence that this is an outstanding
factor that clearly dominates all other factors which could have an
influence on climate. The results presented here indicate clearly that the
sun's varying activity is at least a non-negligible factor and probably the
really dominant one. Furthermore, the greenhouse effect is contrary to
Schönwiese's conditions in being not predictable to a high degree of
probability, as the inadequate performance of IPCC forecasts shows. In
addition, it is quite uncertain when doubling of the atmosphere's CO2
content will occur. In the eighties it was surmised that doubling would
happen as early as 2030. Now J. P. Peixoto and A. H. Oort [86] expect
doubling in 2200. Another contentious point is how long CO2 will stay in the
atmosphere, several hundred years, or only five years? New results by P.
Dietze and T. V. Segalstad show that shorter residence times are much more
probable than the extended ones. Moreover, J. Barrett has shown that all the
energy that can be absorbed by the atmosphere is already being absorbed by
the lower atmosphere (water, aerosol, and CO2 ) under present conditions.
Finally, it has been assumed in the GCMs that the planet's population,
responsible for the anthropogenic CO2 contribution, will grow to 11.5
billion people by the end of the next century. The recent statistical survey
published by the UN, "World Population Prospects: The 1996 Revision", shows
clearly that the growth expected by the IPCC is utopian and will have to be
revised sharply downward, thus reducing the imagined threat dramatically. In
1950 - 1955 the global total fertility rate (the world average number of
children born per woman per lifetime) was five, explosively above the
replacement rate of 2.1 children. In 1975 - 1980 the fertility rate sank to
four. At present it has reached 2.8 and continues to sink. In Europe the
rate has fallen by 20% during the last ten years and is at 1.4 now. The same
applies for Russia and Japan. The developing countries are no exception. In
Bangladesh the fertility rate has fallen from 6.2 to 3.4 in just ten years.
So the CO2 output will be much lower than that estimated in the GCM
calculations.



When those equations that are thought to represent the climate system are
subjected to a first integration with the anthropogenic forcing kept
constant so that the result can be compared with a second integration based
on increasing CO2 forcing, the outcome can be considered convincing only if
the differential equations represent the physics of the climate system
exactly and completely. Yet this condition is far from being fulfilled. Not
only do we not know enough about a wealth of details of complex feed-back
problems [114], but there is also a fundamental lack of data. In addition
there are technical and mathematical difficulties. J. P. Peixoto and A. H.
Oort [86] comment aptly:



"The integration of a fully coupled model including the atmosphere, oceans,
land, and cryosphere with such different internal time scales poses almost
insurmountable difficulties in reaching a final solution, even if all
interacting processes were completely understood."



A fatal flaw however is that tiny deviations from the ideal initial
conditions may lead to quite different courses in the development of
climate. C. Wiin-Christensen and A. Wiin-Nielsen [117] have rightly pointed
out that the resulting limited predictability is insurmountable as it is
linked to the given nonlinearity of the differential equations.



6. Cycles in the Sun's Oscillation Affect Sunspots and Climate



The IPCC holds:

"Solar variability over the next 50 years will not induce a prolonged
forcing significant in comparison with the effect of increasing CO
concentrations."



However, if, contrary to the IPCC's attitude, the sun is taken seriously as
a dominant factor in climate change, this opens up a possibility to predict
climate features correctly without any support by supercomputers. A string
of examples will be presented. The chaotic character of weather and climate
does not stand in the way of such predictions. Sensitive dependance on
initial conditions is only valid with regard to processes within the climate
system. E. N. Lorenz has stressed that only non-periodic systems are plagued
by limited predictability. External periodic or quasiperiodic systems can
positively force their rhythm on the climate system. This is not only the
case with the periodic change of day and night and the Milankovitch cycle,
but also with variations in solar energy output as far as they are periodic
or quasiperiodic. The 11-year sunspot cycle meets these conditions, but
plays no predominant role in the practice of predictions. Most important are
solar cycles which are without exception related to the sun's fundamental
oscillation about the center of mass of the solar system and form a fractal
into which cycles of different length, but similar function are integrated.
The solar dynamo theory developed by H. Babcock, the first still rudimental
theory of sunspot activity, starts from the premise that the dynamics of the
magnetic sunspot cycle is driven by the sun's rotation. Yet this theory only
takes into account the sun's spin momentum, related to its rotation on its
axis, but not its orbital angular momentum linked to its very irregular
oscillation about the center of mass of the solar system (CM).



Figure 7 shows this fundamental motion, described by Newton [85] three
centuries ago. It is regulated by the distribution of the masses of the
giant planets Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, and Neptune in space. The plot shows
the relative ecliptic positions of the center of mass (small circles) and
the sun's center (cross) for the years 1945 to 1995 in a heliocentric
coordinate system. The large solid circle marks the sun's surface. Most of
the time, CM is to be found outside of the sun's body. Wide oscillations
with distances up to 2.2 solar radii between the two centers are followed by
narrow orbits which may result in close encounters of the centers as in 1951
and 1990. The contribution of the sun's orbital angular momentum to its
total angular momentum is not negligible. It can reach 25% of the spin
momentum [60]. The orbital angular momentum varies from -0.1 x 1047 to 4.3 x
1047 g cm2 s-1 , or reversely, which is more than a forty-fold increase or
decrease. Thus it is conceivable that these variations are related to
varying phenomena in the sun's activity, especially if it is considered that
the sun's angular momentum plays an important role in the dynamo theory of
the sun's magnetic activity.



Variations of more than 7% in the sun's equatorial rotational velocity,
going along with variations in solar activity, were observed at irregular
intervals [ 54, 56]. This could be explained if there were transfer of
angular momentum from the sun's orbit to the spin on its axis. I have been
proposing such spin-orbit coupling for two decades [56, 57]. Part of the
coupling could result from the sun's motion through its own magnetic fields.
As R. H. Dicke [14] has shown, the low corona can act as a brake on the sun'
s surface. The giant planets,which regulate the sun's motion about CM, carry
more than 99% of the angular momentum in the solar system, while the sun is
confined to less than 1%. So there is a high potential of angular momentum
that can be transferred from the outer planets to the revolving sun and
eventually to the spinning sun.



The dynamics of the sun's motion about the center of mass can be defined
quantitatively by the change in its orbital angular momentum. The rate of
change is usually measured by derivatives. In some respects the running
variance yields more informative results. It applies the well-known
smoothing of two, three, or more consecutive readings to variance, the
square of the standard deviation. Consecutive values of the running variance
draw attention to the variation in variability and accentuate dynamical
processes [98]. Figure 8 displays the 9-year running variance of the orbital
angular momentum for the years 730 to 1075. The 9-year running variance has
been chosen because the narrow orbits with a stronger curvature have just
this cycle length and yield interesting results. Surprisingly, the pattern
in Figure 8 is shaped by a five-fold symmetry. For the sake of simplicity I
call the features "big hands" and "big fingers". They emerge in a similar
way in past and future millenia. Their five-fold symmetry is not their only
interesting quality. They are linked to cycles which play an important part
in solar-terrestrial relations. The big hand cycle has a length of 178.8
years. P. D. Jose [41] has shown in his pioneering computer analysis of the
sun's motion that a cycle of this length appears in the sunspot data. The
strongest cycle discovered by W. Dansgaard et al. [63] in the oxygen isotope
profile in the Camp Century ice core has a length of 181 years, close to
178.8 years. This points to a relationship with climate. It is conspicuous
that the Gleissberg cycle is just half as long as the big hand cycle. J. F.
W. Negendank, A. Brauer, and B. Zolitschka [83] have found a cycle of 88
years in warves of the crater lake of Holzmaar which cover 13,000 years. The
length of the cycle of a half big hand is 89.4 years. This points again to a
connection with climate.



7. Cycles of 36 Years in Solar Activity and Climate



Cycles of big fingers have a mean length of 35.8 years (178.8 years [big
hand] / 5 = 35.76 years [big fingers]). They are closely connected with
solar activity. They coincide with maxima and minima in the Gleissberg cycle
and open up the possibility of predicting these crucial phases many years
ahead [62, 63]. As will be shown below, they also define the length of the
22.1-year magnetic cycle of sunspot activity (Hale cycle). As far as
climatic change is concerned, cycles of a length of 36 years are not new.
Francis Bacon [102] has already pointed to a cycle in the Netherlands with a
length of 35 to 40 years with cool and wet phases followed by warm and dry
periods. E. Brückner [7] discovered this cycle again in 1887. He
demonstrated that varied climatic phenomena in different regions of the
world show synchronized phases in a cycle of 33 to 37 years. He had already
surmised in those days a connection with the sun's activity. H. W. Clough
[11, 12] followed this suggestion and found the Brückner cycle not only in
12 meteorological variables, but also in sunspots and especially in
variations in the length of the 11-year sunspot cycle. D. V. Hoyt and K. H.
Schatten [39] think that the reality of the cycle is confirmed by
Scandinavian tree ring data which show its rhythm over hundreds of years.
With regard to Brückner's supposition of a connection with the sun's
activity, they ask which index of solar activity would conform with a
36-year cycle. The results presented here answer this question.



Figure 9 after P. D. Jones [40] shows the time series 1850 to 1987 of the
annual-mean surface air temperature averaged over the Northern Hemisphere,
expressed as departures in °C from the reference period 1951 to 1970. The
arrows mark the start phases of big finger cycles (BFS) that fall in the
data range. The triangle at the top of the plot points to the start phase in
1933 of a big hand cycle (BHS). BFSs 1867, 1901, and 1933 coincide with
outstanding temperature maxima in the smoothed curve. BFS 1968, however,
indicates the bottom of a downtrend that began after BHS 1933. Obviously,
this is due to a phase reversal in the BFS pattern. Contrary to statistical
investigations, the semi-quantitative model presented here can give an
explanation that seems to solve the problem of sudden phase jumps in
solar-terrestrial cycles hitherto unpredictable and unexplainable.



Experimentation with electrical and mechanical control equipment shows that
at nodal points, where the response of the system is zero, the phase can
shift by pi radians. The initial phase of a big finger cycle is such a nodal
point. Yet it is crucial that BFS 1933 is at the same time the start of a
big hand. Such nodal points higher up in the hierarchy of the fractal of
cycles derived from the sun's motion about CM induce phase reversals or
other forms of instability in subordinate cycles. This will be shown in a
string of examples. The next BHS will be reached in 2111. So the new BFS
rhythm is expected to hold for a long time. The epoch of the coming BHS
phase 2007 should go along with another bottom in the global temperature.



Often the second harmonic of finger cycles is as important as the
fundamental. The thickness of Lake Saki varves is related to local
precipitation: the thickest warves ar linked to very wet years and the
thinnest varves to very dry years [101]. I could show that maxima in the
varve thickness are consistently correlated with cycles of half big fingers
with a mean length of 17.9 years. The analysis covers the years 700 to 1894,
nearly 12 centuries. A Monte Carlo model and Student's t-test yielded t =
8.2 for 33 degrees of freedom. The null hypothesis of no connection between
the studied variables can be rejected at a high level of significance (P < 6
x10-7 ) [62].



BFSs represent minima of the running variance in the sun's orbital angular
momentum. The maxima, too, have proven relevant. I call them big finger tips
(BFT). They appear in Figure 10 which shows the Palmer Drought Index for the
U.S.A. The vertical axis measures the percentage of area covered by drought.
The arrows designate consecutive epochs of BFSs and BFTs. Prior to the big
hand start 1933, indicated by an open triangle, the starts of big fingers
(S) coincided with drought maxima and the tips (T) with minima. After BHS
1933 the correlation with the big finger phases as such continued, but a
phase reversal changed the rhythmic pattern. Now BFTs coincided with drought
peaks and BFSs with minima. The new rhythm has been stable since 1933. There
is a good chance that it will continue until the next BHS in 2111. Farmers
in the U.S.A. may expect wet climate around the next BFS in 2007.



Yet, what is the meaning of those black circles in Figure 10 which
alternately go along with drought maxima and minima and are also subjected
to a phase reversal? They mark the Golden section between BFSs and BFTs. The
five-fold symmetry in the dynamics of the sun's oscillation about the center
of mass of the solar system, visible in Figure 8, establishes a relationship
between the sun's motion and the Golden section, as this remarkable
proportion is closely related to the number 5 [45]. To show this intimate
connection, all of the corners of a regular pentagon (the fundamental
geometrical representation of the number five ) are connected by diagonals.
A five-pointed star emerges, a pentagram, the intersecting lines of which
form a complex web of Golden sections. Within this star a new pentagram
appears that contains a smaller star with further Golden section divisions,
and so on, in an infinite fractal sequence.



As illustrated in Figure 11, the Golden section divides a frame structure
like a line segment, a surface, a cycle, or any other delimited feature so
that the ratio of the whole to the larger part (major) equals the ratio of
the larger part to the smaller one (minor). Point G represents the
irrational Golden Number

G = 0.618... It divides the unit height of the temple into major (0.618...)
and minor (0.3819...). To find the major of a line segment, a cycle etc., it
has to be multiplied by 0.618. Multiplication by 0.382 yields the minor. As
the fundamental oscillation of the sun about CM depends on the masses and
the positions of the giant planets, the relationship with the Golden section
extends to the whole solar system. A. N. Kolmogorov [47], V. I. Arnol'd [1],
and J. Moser [79] have proven theoretically, that the stability of the solar
system hinges on the Golden section. This is crucial, as we know from
publications by G. J. Sussman and J. Wisdom [110] as well as J. Laskar [67]
that the orbits of all planets are chaotic. In my paper "The Cosmic Function
of the Golden Section" [64] I have shown in practice how the Golden section,
which stands for stability in polar opposition to instability, keeps the
chaotic planetary orbits stable. The mean of the ratios of the perihelion
distances of neighbouring planets from Mercury to Pluto, including the mean
radius vector of the planetoids, turns out to be very close to the Golden
number G. The difference between this mean and G is as small as 0.002.
Fivefold quantities have deep roots in Nature. There are not four, but five
physical forces. We merely have forgotten that electromagnetism is composed
of different forces. First Maxwell unified electricity and magnetism and
later on electromagnetism and the weak force was unified to constitute the
electro-weak force [44].



Figure 12 after R. Mogey [78] presents a further practical example, the
Great Lake (Michigan-Huron) water levels. After BHS 1933, marked by a filled
arrow, the deepest levels coincide with BFSs (S, filled arrows) and the peak
levels with BFTs (T, open arrows). A deep trough in the data is to be
expected around 2007 and a new peak level around 2025. The flat triangles
point to secondary peak levels, related to the minor 0.382 of the Golden
section between BFS and BFT phases.



The Golden section has left its mark, too, upon the 11-year sunspot cycle.
Reliable data are available since 1750. They show that the ascending part of
the cycle has a mean length of 4.3 years [73]. The mean cycle length amounts
to 11.05 years. The minor of the mean length falls at 4.2 years

(11.05 years × 0.382 = 4.22 years). This is close to 4.3 years. Thus, the
maximum of the 11-year cycle falls at the minor of the Golden section. The
descending wing of the cycle has the length of the major. This contributes
to the stabilization of solar activity which is characterized by phenomena
generated by instability.



Magnetic cycles of solar type stars show the same structure shaped by the
Golden section [64]. The histogram in Figure 13 after EOS [18] shows the
distribution of higly energetic solar eruptions within the 11-year cycle.
The accents are set by the Golden section within the subcycles formed by the
ascending and descending part of the whole cycle. This pattern recurs in
terrestrial cycles. The three curves in Figure 14 after H. H. Lamb [52]
connect the 11-year sunspot cycle with thunderstorm activity in central
Europe. At the top of the plot, consecutive sunspot minima and the maximum
in between are marked by small arrows. The upper curve presents for 1810 to
1934 the number of days with thunderstorm activity in Kremsmünster, the
curve in the middle for 1878 to 1934 the thunderstorm frequency in Vienna,
and the curve at the bottom the number of houses struck by lightning in
Bavaria between 1833 and 1879. The peaks in all of the curves fall at minor
and major of the solar subcycles. These Golden section phases are marked by
open triangles.



The magnetic sunspot cycle of 22.1 years, also called the Hale cycle, is the
true cycle of solar activity. Groups of sunspots are usually composed of
preceding and following spots with different magnetic polarity. With the
commencement of a new cycle the polarity reverses. Thus, the original
polarity is only restored every second 11-year cycle. When the position of
the major of the Golden section within a big finger cycle is calculated, it
falls just at the length of the Hale cycle (35.76 years × 0.618 = 22.1
years). This helps to limit the instability which is inherent in solar
activity. In climate, the Hale cycle is a dominant feature in the global
record of marine air temperatures, consisting of shipboard temperatures
measured at night [9], in the detrended Central England temperature record
for 1700 to 1950 [72], and in the drought severity index covering different
areas of the Western United States [77]. The major of the Golden section
within the cycle of the big hand (178.8 years × 0.618 = 110.5 years) yields
a similar result. Japanese scientists found a cycle of just this length in
sunspots when they applied a frequency analysis to the data [120].



8. Cycles of "Small Fingers": a Solid Basis for Predictions of Solar
Eruptions and Climate



A ubiquitous notion in present day science is the term fractal coined by B.
B. Mandelbrot. A fractal is a geometrical shape whose complex structure is
such that magnification or reduction by a given factor reproduces the
original object. Self-similarity on different scales is a pre-eminent
feature of fractals. The solar cycles derived from the sun's motion about
the center of mass form such a fractal. The big fingers in big hands contain
small hands with small fingers (SF). This becomes apparent by further
amplification. Figure 15 shows the 3-year running variance of the sun's
orbital angular momentum. The circled numbers at the top mark epochs of
BFTs. Tips of small fingers (SFT) are indicated by small numbers. Fat arrows
and small triangles point to starts of big and small fingers. The vertical
dotted line marks the initial phase of a big hand in 1933. The theoretical
mean length of cycles of small fingers is

178.8 years / 5 / 5 = 7.2 years. Yet small fingers show a higher degree of
"morphological" anomalies. There are sometimes hands that have only three or
four fully developed fingers. There is a wider range of deviations from the
mean length of small finger cycles. However, all of these variations can be
computed and predicted.



The starts of the small finger cycle (SFS) are of special importance. The
sun's orbital angular momentum L reaches extrema in these phases and dL/dt
becomes zero. In Figure 16 after R. Howard [37] two such initial phases at
the end of 1967 and the beginning of 1970 are shown. They were initiated by
heliocentric conjunctions of Jupiter, by far the largest of the giant
planets, with the center of mass CM. The vertical axis measures the sun's
rotational velocity. In both of these cases a striking jump in the sun's
rotation occurred. In former decades this phenomenon, too, was observed
[54]. As the sun's rotation on its axis and the sun's activity are connected
, it is not surprising that energetic solar eruptions accumulate around
SFSs, as I could show in a paper published in 1976 [54]. This relationship
is so reliable that predictions can be based on it. My long-range forecasts
of strong solar eruptions and geomagnetic storms, covering six years,
achieved a prediction quality of 90% though such events occur at quite
irregular intervals. Out of 75 events from quantitatively defined
categories, 68 occurred at the predicted time [57, 60, 61]. The outcome of
the forecast experiment was checked by the astronomers W. Gleissberg, J.
Pfleiderer, and H. Wöhl as well as the Space Environment Services Center in
Boulder, Colorado. The very strong geomagnetic storms in 1982 and around
1990 were also correctly predicted several years before the event [56, 60].



Forecasts of energetic solar eruptions are of importance for weather and
climate too, as they enhance the solar wind and weaken the galactic cosmic
radiation, which according to Svensmark and Friis-Christensen have a strong
impact on cloud coverage. So it is no longer inexplicable that I correctly
predicted at an international climate symposium in Boulder, three years
before the event, that the Sahelian drought would end in 1985 [55].



Figure 17 shows how closely cycles of small fingers and energetic solar
eruptions are connected. The plot presents the distribution of all X-ray
eruptions X => 6 [81], observed from 1970 to 1996, within the normalized
small finger cycle. Intense X-ray eruptions have a stronger impact than
flares categorized into classes of optical brightness. Fat arrows mark
consecutive initial phases SFS of the cycle. It is conspicuous that the
eruptions concentrate on a restricted range before and after SFS. This is
already enough to base a rough prediction on. Yet a much more differentiated
pattern emerges when the Golden section is taken into consideration. In the
plot, one half of the major of the Golden section lies after the first SFS
and the second half before the next SFS, whereas the minor is arranged in
between. The filled triangles pointing downwards after the first SFS
indicate the phases on which the eruptions concentrate. They lie just after
the first SFS, at the boundary of the first half of the major, and at minor
and major within this range. The open triangles pointing upwards just in the
middle between the filled triangles indicate lulls in eruption activity. In
the half minor range before the following SFS everything is reversed. The
patterns before and after SFS are antisymmetric. The probability that this
distribution is due to chance is P = 1.3 x 10-15 , though the sample
comprises only 33 very energetic X-ray eruptions. When 163 X-ray eruptions
in the range X = 2 to X < 6 [81] are investigated to check the pattern in
Figure 17, the sceptical null hypothesis can be rejected at the level P = 7
x 10-10. 197 X-ray eruptions in the range X = 1 to X < 2 yield P = 2.7 x
10-11 . The relationship is so manifest that dependable predictions can be
based upon it.




After the publication of this result, a further strong eruption, an X9
flare, occured on November 6, 1997. It fell exactly at one of the active
phases in Figure 17.



The primary cause of the solar modulation of cosmic rays, which regulates
cloud coverage, is not the number of sunspots, but the varying strength of
the solar wind. This was mentioned already. The highest velocities in the
solar wind up to 2500 km/sec are generated by energetic solar eruptions
(solar flares and eruptive prominences) which even contribute to cosmic
rays. These solar cosmic rays have an impact on the strength of the solar
wind, but show fluctuations different from the galactic cosmic rays that
enter the solar system from the outside. Energetic solar eruptions shun
sunspot maxima [18] and occur even close to minima. The number of eruptions
does not depend proportionally on the intensity of 11-year sunspot maxima.
Figure 18 from Solar Geophysical Data [106] displays the monthly numbers of
observed flares in sunspot cycles No 20 to 22. Cycle No 20 with the
highest monthly sunspot number R = 106 was much weaker than cycle No 21 (R =
165) and cycle No 22 (R = 158), but it produced nearly as many flares as
cycle No 21 and considerably more than cycle No 22. It is surprising, too,
that cycle No 22, nearly as strong as cycle No 21 as to sunspots, generated
such a low number of flares in relation to its predecessor.
Solar-terrestrial connections like the Svensmark effect are much more
dependent on energetic eruptions than on sunspots. Sunspot maxima are not
predominant in this respect, but special phases in the small finger cycle,
as shown in Figure 17, are.



A wealth of publications points to a connection between geomagnetic storms
and weather [60, 103, 113, 118]. So it is informative that there is a close
correlation, too, between the velocity of the solar wind and the Kp index of
geomagnetic activity (r = 0.74) [46]. Geomagnetic storms, on the other hand,
are closely related to solar eruptions, as satellite observations show which
follow the causal chain from outbursts of energy on the sun's surface to
disturbances of the earth's magnetic field. Reference for many cases of
direct connections between solar eruptions and weather phenomena is given in
the literature. A typical example are the investigations by R. Scherhag [96]
and R. Reiter [92] which show that the quality of weather forecasts
deteriorates significantly at the time of solar eruptions. The described
effects are not negligible. M. Bossolasco et al. [6], for example, observed
an increase in thunderstorm activity by 60% after solar eruptions. Such
effects of solar eruptions, well known for decades, should be taken
seriously by the IPCC, particularly since the Svensmark effect alone has a
stronger weight than the anthropogenic greenhouse effect.



It has been mentioned already that Hoyt and Schatten included structural
changes in sunspots when they built their model which reflects the
connection between varying solar irradiance and global temperature on earth.
Large sunspots have a clearly distinguishable dark inner zone, the umbra,
and a less dark surrounding area, the penumbra. The ratio of the areas
occupied by umbra and penumbra varies continuously. The dynamical causes are
not yet known. D. V. Hoyt [38] connects these structural variations with the
strength of convection below the sun's surface. Sunspots are embedded in the
convective zone. The penumbra becomes less extended when the convection
increases and a more extended penumbra indicates a weaker convection. There
is a link to climate since stronger convection enhances the sun's
irradiance. Figure 19 after D. V. Hoyt [38] shows the ratio of the umbra
area to that of the whole spot (U/W) derived from Greenwich Observatory
data. Hoyt and Schatten [39] rightly emphasize that the U/W curve resembles
the global temperature curve shown in Figure 9.



The arrows in Figure 19 indicate initial phases of small finger cycles in
which the difference forces are balanced just for a moment before
gravitation begins to prevail. The sun's orbital motion about CM is governed
by difference forces as well as the planets' course around the sun. These
forces, gravitation and centrifugal force, are balanced overall. Yet in
single phases of the orbit one force or the other can prevail. This has an
effect on the sun's activity. I have shown that solar flares are subjected
to a directional effect which is independent of the sun's rotation on its
axis. When the sun moves away from CM after a strong impulse of the torque
in its orbital motion, two times as many flares are observed on the sun's
side pointing away from CM than on the opposite side. When the sun moves
towards CM, the number of flares on the side pointing to CM is significantly
greater than on the other side. Yet this effect occurs only if the strength
of the respective impulse of the torque in the SFS phase goes beyond a
precisely defined quantitative threshold [54, 57, 60]. The SFSs in Figure
19, indicated by arrows, coincide within the whole investigated interval of
a century with peaks in the U/W values. This points to a close relationship
between SFSs and the strength of solar convection. The respective SFSs
beyond the time frame of Figure 19 fall at 1983.1, 1998.3, and 2008.4.



Figure 20 shows how big and small fingers interact with regard to climate
data. The curve displays the smoothed 2-year running variance of yearly
rainfall totals covering the years 1851 to 1983 derived from 14 German
stations by F. Baur [5]. Open arrows mark epochs of SFSs correlated with
maxima in the variance, while open circles indicate epochs of SFTs that go
along with minima. Only at the secular sunspot minimum of 1895 is the
correlation weak, probably because of the lack of releasable magnetic energy
available only in large sunspot groups. In statistical tests the sceptical
null hypothesis was rejected at the level P = 3 x10-5 [60]. This result was
corroborated by rainfall data from England, Wales, U.S.A., and India as well
as by similar investigations into temperature [60]. The variance amplitudes
are modulated by starts (S) and tips (T) of big fingers, marked by flat
triangles. BFTs show a correlation with high amplitudes and BFSs with small
ones. They indicate maxima and minima that would emerge if the curve were
smoothed. The next maxima in the curve are to be expected in 1998 with an
amplitude in the medium range and in 2005 with an amplitude in the lower
range.



Figure 21 after J. T. Houghton et al. [36] shows the growth rate of CO2
concentrations since 1958 in ppmv/year at the Mauna Loa, Hawaii station. I
owe the result presented here to P. Dietze who drew my attention to the fact
that the CO2 data reflect the rhythm of small finger cycles in a similar way
as tropospheric temperatures measured by satellites (Figure 23). Filled
triangles in Figure 21 mark SFSs and open triangles the major 0.618 within
the SF cycles. If the length of the cycle goes beyond 8 years, the minor
0.382, too, gets involved. It is marked by diamonds. After BHS 1968 (fat
arrow and dashed vertical line) all Golden section phases (open triangles
and diamond) coincide with outstanding maxima in the CO2 data. SFSs (filled
triangles) indicate deep minimum ranges. Just in the middle between the
marked phases (little arrows) is the location of secondary minima. Before
BHS 1968, which released a phase jump, everything is reversed. Two CO2
maxima on the right, marked by filled circles, do not match the pattern.
They lie about six months past those SFSs that coincide with middle-range
maxima in global temperature shown in Figure 23. This is a confirmation of
the result, elaborated by C. Kuo et al. [48] and H. Metzner [75], that
warming of the atmosphere comes first and only five to seven months later
the CO2 concentration follows. Yet it can be seen in addition that the sun's
activity is involved. The next CO2 minimum is to be expected around 1998.3,
the imminent SFS, and the next maximum around 2002.9, the Golden section
phase 0.618 in the new small finger cycle. An intermittent maximum like that
at the end of 1990 could possibly develop around the end of 1998.



The connection presented in Figure 22 after J. T. Houghton et al. [35]
solves a seemingly intractable problem of climatology and meteorology: the
prediction of El Niño. This phenomenon represents a quasicyclic large scale
atmosphere-ocean interaction which has climatic effects throughout the
Pacific region and far beyond. It is the only true global-scale oscillation
that has been identified so far. It is also called an ENSO event because of
its links with the Southern Oscillation, a fluctuation of the intertropical
atmospheric oscillation. The curve plots the monthly sea surface and land
air anomalies 1961 to 1989 for the tropical zone extending from 20° N to 20°
S. The outstanding peaks indicate ENSO events. After BFS 1968, marked by a
big open arrow, all SFSs, indicated by open triangles, coincide with peaks
in the plot. The same is true for the major of the Golden section within
cycles formed by consecutive SFSs. These 0.618 phases are marked by filled
circles. In case of small finger cycles longer than 8 years, also the minor
0.382 goes along with peaks. It is indicated by filled diamonds. Troughs in
the time series are almost exactly linked to midpoints in between
consecutive crucial phases, marked by small arrows.



Before the initial phase 1968 of a big finger cycle higher up in the
hierarchy of the fractal of solar cycles, the pattern was reversed. SFSs as
well as majors and minors within small finger cycles coincided with troughs,
and the midpoints between these phases went along with peaks. A further El
Niño was to be expected in 1993. It appeared punctually. In my paper "The
Cosmic Function of the Golden Section" [64] I extrapolated this pattern and
predicted more El Niños for 1995 and 1998. Critics were sceptical about the
1995 event so close after the 1993 El Niño. Yet the forecast proved correct
[26]. A new El Niño began to build up in 1997. At the end of 1997 the
Australian Bureau of Meteorology thought that El Niño had faded away and La
Niña would reign in 1998. However, as the new year opened, El Niño charged
up again, contrary to the predictions of its early demise, and showed a
strong performance in the following months, stronger than in the months July
to December 1997.



Figure 23 shows yearly means of the global mean temperature in the lower
troposphere observed by satellites [108]. In contrast to time series of
"world temperature" constructed by IPCC scientists, these data are objective
and free from distortions by the urban heat island effect. Different from
the inhomogeneous and wide-meshed net of meteorological stations they cover
the whole globe homogeneously. As can be seen from Figure 23, the
temperatures in 1995 were not higher than in 1979 at the beginning of
satellite observations, though IPCC scientists claim an unprecedented rise
in global temperature in the eighties. The trend amounts to -0.06° C per
decade. The quality of the satellite data is confirmed by radiosonde
observations. For the same interval these balloon data yield nearly the same
trend of -0.07° C [27]. Both of the data series show exactly the same course
[76]. The cyclic variation in the data cannot be explained by general
circulation models in spite of the entailing great expense. There is not
even an attempt to model such complex climate details, as GCMs are too
coarse for such purposes. When K. Hasselmann (a leading greenhouse
protagonist) was asked why GCMs do not allow for the stratosphere's warming
by the sun's ultraviolet radation and its impact on the circulation in the
troposphere, he answered: "This aspect is too complex to incorporate it into
models" [8]. Since there are other solar-terrestrial relationships which are
"too complex" such as, for example, the dynamics of cloud coverage modulated
by the solar wind, it is no wonder that the predictions based on GCMs do not
conform to climate reality.



However, if the sun's dominant role in climate change is acknowledged, the
further development of the time series in Figure 23 can be predicted. The
filled arrows mark SFSs. Consecutive SFSs form cycles that can be subjected
to the Golden section. The 0.618 phases within the small finger cycles are
indicated by open arrows. All temperature maxima coincide with the phases
marked by triangles. The midpoints between the crucial phases, designated by
flat triangles, go along with minima in the temperature. On the basis of
this pattern I predicted a middle-range minimum in the global temperature as
measured by satellites for 1997.0 and a maximum for 1998.6 [66]. As to the
minimum, the forecast has proven correct. Record-breaking minus temperatures
were observed worldwide. The maximum prediction, too, has a good chance to
turn out to be right. El Niño will take care of it. The current ENSO event
and rising temperatures are interpreted by IPCC scientists as a case for the
human impact on climate. Yet if this were true, how could the El Niño and
the current warming be predicted by looking at cycles of solar activity?



In spite of the successful prediction of the middle-range temperature
minimum 1997.0 it is to be expected that there will be objections that the
relationship shown in Figure 23 covers only 18 years. Satellite data that
start earlier are not available. Yet it would be possible to make use of
time series of surface temperatures to check the correlation. They reach
considerably higher levels, but H. Gordon [27] has shown that satellite
temperatures and surface time series have nearly coincident phases. An even
better match are balloon-borne radiosonde data [76]. Figure 24 after J. P.
Peixoto and A. H. Oort [86] is based on such data and extends the
investigation back to 1958. The curve presents the monthly-mean atmospheric
temperature anomalies in °C averaged over the Northern (top) and Southern
(bottom) Hemispheric mass between the surface and about 25-km height for the
period May 1958 to April 1988. The range of observation includes 22
km-height that plays an important part in the quoted investigations by K.
Labitzke and H. van Loon. The anomalies are taken with respect to the 1963 -
1973 mean conditions. The smoothed curves show 15-month Gaussian-type
filtered values.



Data for the Southern Hemisphere are not available before 1963. The filled
triangles mark SFSs and the open triangles the Golden section phase 0.618
within cycles formed by consecutive SFSs. When the cycle length goes beyond
8 years, the minor phase 0.382 is indicated by filled diamonds. The
correlation between the temperature maxima and the designated phases of
small finger cycles is close. As far as there are deviations they only
amount to a few months. Northern and Southern Hemisphere also show a good
conformance. This corroboration, which extends the satellite data result to
four decades, indicates that the connection between middle-range temperature
extrema and active phases of small finger cycles is real, particularly since
it is part of a complex web of interrelations, the components of which
confirm each other.



If we bear in mind that the correct forecasts based on the semiquantitative
model of solar-terrestrial relations presented here are thinkable only if
the sun's varying activity is a dominant factor in climate change, it seems
difficult to resist the insight that once again an artificially constructed
homocentric position is beginning to rock. A general survey of the given
results indicates that climate variations are governed by the sun, not
mankind.



----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----

References



[1] Arnol'd, V. I.: Small denominators and problems of stability of motion
in classical and celestial mechanics. Russ. Math. Surv. 18 (1963), 85.



[2] Baliunas, S. & Soon, W.: Are variations in the length of the activity
cycle related to changes in brightness in solar-type stars? Astrophys. J.
450 (1995), 896.



[3] Baltuck, M., Dickey, J., Dixon, T. & Harrison, C. G. A.: New approaches
raise questions about future sea level change. EOS, 1. Oktober 1996, 385,
388.



[4] Barlow, A. K. & Latham, J.: A laboratory study of the scavenging of
submicro aerosol by charged raindrops. Quart. J. R. Met. Soc. 109 (1983),
763.



[5] Baur, F.: Abweichungen der Monatsmittel der Temperatur Mitteleuropas &
des Niederschlags in Deutschland. Beilage zur Berliner Wetterkarte des
Instituts für Meteorologie der Freien Universität Berlin vom 24. 6. 1975.



[6] Bossolasco, M., Dagnino, I., Elena, A. & Flocchini, G.: Thunderstorm
activity and interplanetary magnetic field. Riv. Italiana Geofis. 22 (1973),
293.



[7] Brückner, E.: Klimaschwankungen seit 1700. Geographische Abhandlungen 14
(1890), 325.



[8] Bührke, T.: Die Flecken der Sterne. Süddeutsche Zeitung vom 30. 10.
1997, 41.



[9] Burroughs, W. J.: Weather cycles - real or imaginary? Cambridge
University Press,1992, 38, 128, 149.



[10] Butler, C. J.: A two-century comparison of sunspot cycle length and
temperature change - the evidence from Northern Ireland. In: Emsley, J.,
Hsg.: The global warming debate. The report of the European Science and
Environment Forum (ESEF). London, ESEF, 1996, 215.



[11] Clough, H. W.: Synchronous variations in solar and terrestrial
phenomena. Astrophys. J. 22 (1905), 42.



[12] Clough, H. W.: The 11-year sunspot period, secular periods of solar
activity, and synchronous variations of terrestrial phenomena. Monthly
Weather Rev. 60 (1933), 99.



[13] Courtney, R. S.: Die Risiken des global warming. In: H. Metzner, Hsg.:
Treibhaus-Kontroverse & Ozon-Problem. Tübingen, Europäische Akademie für
Umweltfragen, 1996, 159.



[14] Dicke, R. H.: The sun's rotation and relativity. Nature 202 (1964),
432.



[15] Dickinson, R. E.: Solar variability and the lower atmosphere. Bull. Am.
Meteorol. Soc. 56 (1975), 1240.



[16] Eddy, J. A.: Historical evidence for the existence of the solar cycle.
In: White, O. R.: The solar output and its variation. Boulder, Colorado
Associated University Press, 1977, 67.



[17] Eddy, J. A.: A new sun. The solar results from skylab. Washington, D.
C., NASA, 1979, 12.



[18] EOS, Trans. Amer. Geophys. Union, 18. Oktober 1988, 1.



[19] Fichefet, T.: Solar radiation and global climate change: some
experiments with a two-dimensional climate model. In: B. Frenzel, Hsg.:
Solar output and climate during the Holocene. Stuttgart-Jena-New York,
Gustav Fischer Verlag, 1995, 169.



[20] Flohn, H.: Jüngste Klimaänderungen: Treibhauseffekt oder Beschleunigung
des Wasserkreislaufs. In: Metzner, H., Hsg.: Globale Erwärmung - Tatsache
oder Behauptung? Tübingen, Europäische Akademie für Umweltfragen, 1993, 91.



[21] Foukal, P. V.: The variable sun. Scient. American, Februar 1990, 39.



[22] Foukal, P. & Lean, J.: An empirical model of total solar irradiance
between 1874 and 1988. Science 247 (1990), 556- 558.



[23] Franke, H.: Lexikon der Physik. Stuttgart, Francksche Verlagshandlung,
1969, 845, 1603.



[24] Friis-Christensen, E. & Lassen, K.: Length of the solar cycle: an
indicator of solar activity closely associated with climate. Science 254
(1991), 698.



[25] Fröhlich, C.: Variations in total solar irradiance. In: B. Frenzel,
Hsg.: Solar output and climate during the Holocene. StuttgartJena-New York,
Gustav Fischer Verlag, 1995, 125, 126, 127.



[26] Fu, L.L, Koblinsky, C. J., Minster, J. F. & Picaut, J.: Reflecting on
the first three years of TOPEX/POSEIDON. EOS 77 (1996), Nr. 12, 19. März
1996, 109,111, 117.



[27] Gordon, A. H.: Bias in measured data. In: Bate, R., Hsg.: Global
Warming. The continuing debate. Cambridge, The European Science and
Environment Forum (ESEF), Cambridge, 1998, 55.



[28] Groveman, B. S. & Landsberg, H. E.: Simulated northern hemisphere
temperature departures 1579-1880. Geophysical Research Letters, 6 (1979),
767.



[29] Haigh, J.: On the impact of solar variability on climate. Science 272
(1996),981.



[30] Hansen, J. E. & Lebedeff, S.: Global surface air temperatures. Update
through 1987. Geophysical Research Letters 15 (1988), 323.



[31] Hansen, J., Lacis, A., Rind, D., Russell, G., Stone, P., Fung, I.,
Ruedy, R. & Lerner, J.: Climate sensitivity: analysis of feedback
mechanisms. In: J. E. Hansen & T. Takahashi, Hsg.: Climate processes and
climate sensitivity. Geophys. Series 29. Washington, D. C., Am. Geophys.
Union (AGU),1990, 130.



[32] Hansen, J. E., Lacis, A. A., & Ruedy, R. A.: Comparison of solar and
other influences on long-term climate. In: K. H. Schatten & A. Arking, Hsg.:
Climate impact of solar variability. Greenbelt, NASA, 1990, 142.



[33] Harvey, L. D. D.: On the role of high latitude ice, snow, and
vegetation feedbacks in the climatic response to external forcing changes.
Climatic Change 13 (1988), 191.



[34] Hood, L. L. & Jirikowic, J. L.: A mechanism involving solar ultraviolet
variations for modulating the interannual climatology of the middle
atmosphere. In: K. H. Schatten & A. Arking, Hsg.: Climate impact of solar
variability. Greenbelt, NASA, 1990, 165.



[35] Houghton, J. T., Jenkins, G. J. & Ephraums, J.J.: Climatic change. The
IPCC scientific assessment. Cambridge University Press, 1990.



[36] Houghton, J. T., Meira Filho, L. G., Callander, B. A., Harris, N.,
Kattenberg, A. & Maskell, K: Climate Change 1995. Cambridge, 1996, 81, 366,
381.



[37] Howard, R.: The rotation of the sun. Scient. American 232 (1975), 106.



[38] Hoyt, D. V.: Using the boundary conditions of sunspots as a technique
for monitoring solar luminosity variations. In: K. H. Schatten & A. Arking,
Hsg.: Climate impact of solar variability. Greenbelt, NASA, 1990, 44.



[39] Hoyt, D. V. & Schatten, K. H.: The role of the sun in climate change.
New York-Oxford, Oxford University Press, 1997, 61, 70, 86, 184,188,194,
214.



[40] Jones, P. D.: Hemispheric surface air temperature variations. Recent
trend and an update to 1987. J. Climate 1 (1988), 645.



[41] Jose, P. D.: Sun's motion and sunspots. Astron. J. 70 (1964), 195.



[42] Joselyn, J. A.: SESC methods for short-term geomagnetic predictions.
In: Simon, P. A., Heckman, G. & Shea, M. A.: Solar-terretrial predictions.
Proceedings of a workshop at Meudon, 18.-22. Juni 1984. Boulder, National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 1986, 404.



[43] Kahl, J. D., Charlevoix, D. J., Zaitseva, N. A., Schnell, R. C. &
Serreze, M. C.: Absence of evidence for greenhouse warming over the Arctic
Ocean in the past 40 years. Nature 361 (1993), 335.



[44] Kaku, M.: Quantum field theory. Oxford University Press, 1993, 14.



[45] Kapfraff, J.: Connections. The geometry bridge between art and science.
New York, McGraw Hill, 1991, 85, 89, 308, 313.



[46] Kertz, W.: Einführung in die Geophysik. Mannheim, Bibliographisches
Institut, 1971, 376-377.



[47] Kolmogorov, A. N.: Preservation of conditionally periodic movements
with small change in the Hamiltonian function. Lecture Notes in Physics 93
(1979), 51.



[48] Kuo, C., Lindberg, C. & Thomson, D. J.: Coherence established between
atmospheric carbon dioxide and global temperature. Nature 343 (1990), 709.



[49] Labitzke, K, & van Loon, H.: Sonnenflecken & Wetter. Gibt es doch einen
Zusammenhang? Die Geowissenschaften 8 (1990), 1.



[50] Labitzke, K. & van Loon, H: Some recent studies of probable connection
between solar and atmospheric variability. Ann. Geophysicae 11 (1993), 1084.



[51] Labitzke, K, & van Loon, H.: Associations between the 11-year sunspot
cycle, the quasi-biennial oscillation, and the atmosphere. Philosophical
Transactions of the Royal Society of London, A, 330 (1990), 577.



[52] Lamb, H. H.: Climate: Present, past, and future. Bd. 1. London,
Methuen,1972, 186, 456.



[53] Landsberg, H. E.: Man-made climatic changes. In: Proceedings of the
symposium on physical and dynamic climatology of the World Meteorological
Organization 347 (1974), 262.



[54] Landscheidt, T.: Beziehungen zwischen der Sonnenaktivität & dem
Massenzentrum des Sonnensystems. Nachrichten der Olbers-Gesellschaft 100
(1976), 12, 14-15.



[55] Landscheidt, T.: Solar oscillations, sunspot cycles, and climatic
change. In: McCormac, B. M., Hsg.: Weather and climate responses to solar
variations. Boulder, Associated University Press, 1983, 301, 302, 304.



[56] Landscheidt, T.: Cycles of solar flares and weather. In: Moerner, N.A.
& Karlén, W., Hsg.: Climatic changes on a yearly to millenial basis.
Dordrecht, D. Reidel, 1984, 475, 476.



[57] Landscheidt, T.: Long-range forecast of energetic x-ray bursts based on
cycles of flares. In: Simon, P. A., Heckman, G. & Shea, M. A.:
Solar-terretrial predictions. Proceedings of a workshop at Meudon, 18.-22.
Juni 1984. Boulder, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 1986,
85, 86, 87-88.



[58] Landscheidt, T.: Long-range forecast of sunspot cycles. In: Simon, P.
A., Heckman, G. & Shea, M. A.: Solar-terretrial predictions. Proceedings of
a workshop at Meudon, 18.-22. Juni 1984. Boulder, National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration, 1986, 53-55.



[59] Landscheidt, T.: Long-range forecasts of solar cycles and climate
change. In: Rampino, M. R., Sanders, J. E., Newman, W. S. & Königsson, L.
K.: Climate. History, Periodicity, and predictability. New York, van
Nostrand Reinhold, 1987, 433-438.



[60] Landscheidt, T.: Solar rotation, impulses of the torque in the sun's
motion, and climatic variation. Climatic Change 12 (1988), 267-268, 270,
277, 278-280, 283, 286-290.



[61] Landscheidt, T. & Wöhl, H.: Solares Aktivitätsminimum erst 1989/90?
Sterne & Weltraum, November 1986, 584.



[62] Landscheidt, T.: Relationship between rainfall in the northern
hemisphere and impulses of the torque in the sun's motion. In: K. H.
Schatten & A. Arking, Hsg.: Climate impact of solar variability. Greenbelt,
NASA, 1990, 260.



[63] Landscheidt, T.: Global warming or Little Ice Age? In: Finkl, C. W.,
Hsg.: Holocene cycles. A Jubilee volume in celebration of the 80th birthday
of Rhodes W. Fairbridge. Fort Lauderdale, The Coastal Education and Research
Foundation (CERF), 1995, 372, 373, 374-375.



[64] Landscheidt, T.: Die kosmische Funktion des Goldenen Schnitts. In: P.
H. Richter, Hsg.: Sterne, Mond & Kometen. Bremen & die Astronomie. Bremen,
Verlag H. M. Hauschild, 1995, 240-276.



[65] Landscheidt, T.: Klimavorhersage mit astronomischen Mitteln? Fusion 18
(1997), Nr. 1, 58.



[66] Landscheidt, T.: Forecast of global temperature, El Niño, and cloud
coverage by astronomical means. In:Bate, R., Hsg.: Global Warming. The
continuing debate. Cambridge, The European Science and Environment Forum
(ESEF), 1998, 172.



[67] Laskar, J.: A numerical experiment on the chaotic behaviour of the
solar system. Nature 338 (1989), 237.



[68] Lassen, K. & Friis-Christensen, E.: Variability of the solar cycle
length during the past five centuries and the apparent association with
terrestrial climate. Journ. of Atmos. Terr. Phys. 57 (1995), 835.



[69] Livingston, W. C.: Secular change in equivalent width of C 5380,
1978-1990. In: K. H. Schatten & A. Arking, Hsg.: Climate impact of solar
variability. Greenbelt, NASA, 1990, 336.



[70] van Loon, H. & Labitzke, K.: The 10-12-year atmospheric oscillation.
Meteorol. Zeitschrift 3 (1994), 259.



[71] Markson, R. & Muir, M.: Solar wind control of the earth's electric
field. Science 208 (1980), 979.



[72] Mason, B. I.: Towards the understanding and prediction of climatic
variations. Quart. J. Roy. Soc. 102 (1976), 478.



[73] McKinnon, J. A. : Sunspot numbers 1610-1985. Boulder, World Data Center
A for Solar Terrestrial Physics, 1987.



[74] Mecherikunnel, A. T. & Kyle, H. L: Solar constant data from Earth
Radiation Budget measurements. In: K. H. Schatten & A. Arking, Hsg.: Climate
impact of solar variability. Greenbelt, NASA, 1990, 316.



[75] Metzner, H.: Gibt es einen CO -induzierten Treibhaus-Effekt? In: H.
Metzner, Hsg.: Treibhaus-Kontroverse & Ozon- 2 Problem. Tübingen,
Europäische Akademie für Umweltfragen, 1996, 89.



[76] Michaels, P. J. & Knappenberger, P. C.: The United Nations
Intergovernmental Panel on Climatic Change and the scientific "consensus" on
global warming. In: Emsley, J., Hsg.: The global warming debate. The report
of the European Science and Environment Forum. London 1996, 166.



[77] Mitchell, J. M., Stockton, C. W. & Meko, D. M.: Evidence of a 22-year
rhythm of drought in the Western United States related to the Hale solar
cycle since the 17th century. In: B. M. McCormac & T. A. Seliga, Hsg.:
Solar- terrestrial influences on weather and climate. Dordrecht,Reidel,
1979, 125.



[78] Mogey, R.: The cycles in inflation. Cycles 44 (1993), 102.



[79] Moser, J.: Stable and random motions in dynamical systems. Princeton
University Press, 1973.



[80] Moss, F. & Wiesenfeld, K.: The benefits of background noise. Scient.
American, August 1995, 66.



[81] National Geophysical Data Center, Boulder: X-ray flares. SOLRAD
(1968-1974), GOES (1975-present).



[82] Neeman, B. U., Ohring, G. & Joseph, J. H.: The Milankocich theory and
climate sensitivity. Part I: Equilibrium climate model solution for the
present surface conditions. J. Geophys. Res. 93 (1988), 11153.



[83] Negendank, J. F. W., Brauer, A. & Zolitschka, B.: Die Eifelmaare als
erdgeschichtliche Fallen & Quellen zur Rekonstruktion des Paläoenvironments.
Mainzer geowiss. Mitt. 19 (1990), 235.



[84] Nesme-Ribes, E., Baliunas, S. L. & Sokoloff, D.: The stellar dynamo.
Scient. American August 1996, 51-52.



[85] Newton, I.: Mathematische Prinzipien der Naturlehre. Darmstadt,
Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 1963, 532.



[86] Peixoto, J. P. & Oort, A. H.: Physics of climate. New York, American
Institute of Physics, 1992, 466.



[87] Peng, L., Chou, M. D. & Arking, A.: Climate studies with a multi-layer
energy balance mode. Part I: Model description and sensitivity to the solar
constant. J. Atmosph. Sci. 39 (1987), 5505.



[88] Posmentier, E. S., Soon, W. H. & Baliunas, S. L.: Relative impacts of
solar irradiance variations and greenhouse changes on climate, 1880-1993.
In: Bate, R., Hsg.: Global Warming. The continuing debate. Cambridge, The
European Science and Environment Forum (ESEF), Cambridge, 1998, 159.



[89] Potter, G. L. & Cess, R. D.: Background tropospheric aerosols:
incorporation within a statistical dynamical climate model. J. Geophys. Res.
89 (1984), 9521.



[90] Priem, H. N. A.: CO and climate: a geologist's view. Space Science
Reviews 81 (1997), 193. 2



[91] Ramanathan, V., Barkstrom, B. R. & Harrison, E. F.: Climate and the
earth's radiation budget. Physics Today, Mai 1989, 22.



[92] Reiter, R.: Influences of solar activity on the electric potential
between the ionosphere and the earth. In: B. M. McCormac & T. A. Seliga,
Hsg.: Solar-terrestrial influences on weather and climate. Dordrecht,
Reidel, 1979, 251.



[93] Rind, D. & Overpeck, J. T.: Hypothesized causes of
decadal-to-century-scale climate variability - climate model results. Quat.
Sci. Rev. 12 (1993), 357.



[94] Robock, A: Solar, volcanic, and anthropogenic influences on climate for
the past 500 years. Klimakonferenz "Klimaveränderungen - Ursachen &
Auswirkungen", 10. -11. November in Bonn.



[95] Roederer, J. G.: Solar variability effects on climate. In: In: B.
Frenzel, Hsg.: Solar output and climate during the Holocene.
Stuttgart-Jena-New York, Gustav Fischer Verlag, 1995, 3, 17.



[96] Scherhag, R.: Die explosionsartigen Stratosphärenerwärmungen des
Spätwinters 1951/52. Berichte des Deutschen Wetterdienstes der US-Zone Nr.
38 (1952), 51.



[97] Schlesinger, B. M., Cebula, R. P., Heath, D.F., DeLand, M. T & Hudson,
R. D.: Ten years of solar change as monitored by SBUV and SBUV2. In: K. H.
Schatten & A. Arking, Hsg.: Climate impact of solar variability. Greenbelt,
NASA, 1990, 341.



[98] Schönwiese, C. D.: Northern hemisphere temperature statistics and
forcing. Part B: 1579-1980. Arch. Met. Geoph. Biocl., Ser. B 35, 164.



[99] Schönwiese, C. D.: Der Treibhauseffekt: Weltweit wird das Wasser
steigen. Bild der Wissenschaft, September 1987, 97, 98.



[100] Schönwiese, C. D.: Klima im Wandel. Hamburg, 1994, 99, 161.



[101] Schostakovitsch, W. B.: Bodenablagerungen der Seen & periodische
Schwankungen der Naturerscheinungen. Mémoires de l'Institut Hydrologique 13
(1934), 95.



[102] Schriever, K. H. & Schuh, F.: Enzyklopädie Naturwissenschaft &
Technik. Weinheim, Zweiburgen Verlag, 1980, 2227.



[103] Schuurmans, C. J. E.: Effects of solar flares on the atmospheric
circulation. In: B. M. McCormac & T. A. Seliga, Hsg.: Solar-terrestrial
influences on weather and climate. Dordrecht, Reidel, 1979, 105.



[104] Showstack, R.: Rivers of sunlight, EOS, 9. September 1997, 382.



[105] Singer F.: Globale Erwärmung. In: H. Metzner, Hsg.:
Treibhaus-Kontroverse & Ozon-Problem. Tübingen, Europäische Akademie für
Umweltfragen, 1996, 31.



[106] Solar Geophysical Data - comprehensive reports: Monthly counts of
grouped solar flares Jan 1965 - Mar 1997. Number 637, September 1997, 7.



[107] Soon, W. H., Posmentier, E. S. & Baliunas, S. L.: Inference of solar
irradiance variability from terrestrial temperature changes, 1880-1993. An
astrophysical application of the sun-climate connection. The Astrophys. J.
472 (1996), 891.



[108] Spencer, R. W., Christy, J. R. & Grody, N. C.: Global atmospheric
temperature monitoring with satellite microwave measurements: method and
results 1979-1984. J. Climate 3 (1990), 1111.



[109] Stuiver, M., Grootes, P. M. & Braziunas, T. F.: The GISP delta 18O
climate record of the past 16,500 years and the role of 18 the sun, ocean,
and volcanoes. Quat. Res. 44(1995), 341.



[110] Sussman, G. J. & Wisdom, J.: Chaotic evolution of the solar system.
Science 257 (1992), 56.



[111] Svensmark, H. & Friis-Christensen, E.: Variation of cosmic ray flux
and global cloud coverage - a missing link in solarclimate relationships. J.
Atm. Sol. Terr. Phys. 59 (1997), 1225.



[112] Svensmark, H.: Possible mechanisms of solar activity modulation of the
earth's climate. Klimakonferenz "Klimaveränderungen - Ursachen &
Auswirkungen", 10. -11. November in Bonn.



[113] Tinsley, B. A.: Do effects of global atmospheric electricity on clouds
cause climatic changes? EOS, 19. August 1997, 341, 344, 349.



[114] Weber, G.-R.: Smudged fingerprint: The elusive search for a human
impact on the climate system. In: Bate, R., Hsg.: Global Warming. The
continuing debate. Cambridge, The European Science and Environment Forum
(ESEF), Cambridge, 1998, 63.



[115] Wetherald, R. T. & Manabe, S.: The effects of changing the solar
constant on the climate of a general circulation model. J. Atmosph. Sci. 32
(1975), 2044.



[116] Wiesenfeld, K.: An introduction to stochastic resonance. In: J. R.
Buchler & H. E. Kandrup: Stochastic processes in astrophysics. New York, New
York Academy of Sciences, 1993, 13.



[117] Wiin-Christensen, C. & Wiin-Nielsen, A.: Limited predictability and
the estimated greenhouse effect. In: Bate, R., Hsg.: Global Warming. The
continuing debate. Cambridge, The European Science and Environment Forum
(ESEF), Cambridge, 1998, 41.



[118] Wilcox, J. M.: Solar activity and the weather. J. Atmosph. Terr. Phys.
37 (1975), 237.



[119] Wolff, C. L. & Hoegy, W. R.: Solar irradiance observed from PVO and
inferred solar rotation. In: K. H. Schatten & A. Arking, Hsg.: Climate
impact of solar variability. Greenbelt, NASA, 1990, 58.



[120] Yoshimura, H.: The 110-year periodic modulations of solar magnetic
cycle and solar total irradiance and luminosity. STEP GBRSC News, 5 (1995),
No.2, 7.


Regards

Bonzo

"...and I think future generations are not going to blame us for anything
except for being silly, for letting a few tenths of a degree panic us"
Dr. Richard Lindzen, Professor of Meteorology MIT and Member of the National
Academy of Sciences

"What most commentators-and many scientists-seem to miss is that the only
thing we can say with certainly about climate is that it changes" Dr.
Richard Lindzen, Professor of Meteorology MIT and Member of the National
Academy of Sciences

[most of the current alarm over climate change is based on] "inherently
untrustworthy climate models, similar to those that cannot accurately
forecast the weather a week from now." Dr. Richard Lindzen, Professor of
Meteorology MIT and Member of the National Academy of Sciences
Vendicar Decarian
2007-04-26 05:06:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bonzo
Schroeter Institute for Research in Cycles of Solar Activity
Nova Scotia, Canada
http://www.john-daly.com/solar/solar.htm
Wow a quack with a webpage who claims to be an institute.

Here is another...

http://www.ufo.tugraz.at/?lang=en

CLIMATE SCIENCE
Changes In Solar Brightness Too Weak To Explain Global Warming
by Staff Writers
Boulder CO (SPX) Sep 13, 2006

Changes in the Sun's brightness over the past millennium have had only a
small effect on Earth's climate, according to a review of existing results
and new calculations performed by researchers in the United States,
Switzerland, and Germany.

The review, led by Peter Foukal (Heliophysics, Inc.), appears in the
September 14 issue of Nature. Among the coauthors is Tom Wigley of the
National Center for Atmospheric Research. NCAR's primary sponsor is the
National Science Foundation.

"Our results imply that, over the past century, climate change due to
human influences must far outweigh the effects of changes in the Sun's
brightness," says Wigley.

Reconstructions of climate over the past millennium show a warming since
the 17th century, which has accelerated dramatically over the past 100
years. Many recent studies have attributed the bulk of 20th-century global
warming to an increase in greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere.
Natural internal variability of Earth's climate system may also have
played a role. However, the discussion is complicated by a third
possibility: that the Sun's brightness could have increased.

The new review in Nature examines the factors observed by astronomers that
relate to solar brightness. It then analyzes how those factors have
changed along with global temperature over the last 1,000 years.

Brightness variations are the result of changes in the amount of the Sun's
surface covered by dark sunspots and by bright points called faculae. The
sunspots act as thermal plugs, diverting heat from the solar surface,
while the faculae act as thermal leaks, allowing heat from subsurface
layers to escape more readily. During times of high solar activity, both
the sunspots and faculae increase, but the effect of the faculae
dominates, leading to an overall increase in brightness.

The new study looked at observations of solar brightness since 1978 and at
indirect measures before then, in order to assess how sunspots and faculae
affect the Sun's brightness. Data collected from radiometers on
U. S. and European spacecraft show that the Sun is about 0.07 percent
brighter in years of peak sunspot activity, such as around 2000, than when
spots are rare (as they are now, at the low end of the 11-year solar
cycle). Variations of this magnitude are too small to have contributed
appreciably to the accelerated global warming observed since the
mid-1970s, according to the study, and there is no sign of a net increase
in brightness over the period.

To assess the period before 1978, the authors used historical records of
sunspot activity and examined radioisotopes produced in Earth's atmosphere
and recorded in the Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets. During periods of
high solar activity, the enhanced solar wind shields Earth from cosmic
rays that produce the isotopes, thus giving scientists a record of the
activity.

The authors used a blend of seven recent reconstructions of Northern
Hemisphere temperature over the past millennium to test the effects of
long-term changes in brightness. They then assessed how much the changes
in solar brightness produced by sunspots and faculae (as measured by the
sunspot and radioisotope data) might have affected temperature. Even
though sunspots and faculae have increased over the last 400 years, these
phenomena explain only a small fraction of global warming over the period,
according to the authors.

Indirect evidence has suggested that there may be changes in solar
brightness, over periods of centuries, beyond changes associated with
sunspot numbers. However, the authors conclude on theoretical grounds that
these additional low-frequency changes are unlikely.

"There is no plausible physical cause for long-term changes in solar
brightness other than changes caused by sunspots and faculae," says
Wigley.

Apart from solar brightness, more subtle influences on climate from cosmic
rays or the Sun's ultraviolet radiation cannot be excluded, say the
authors. However, these influences cannot be confirmed, they add, because
physical models for such effects are still too poorly developed.
The University Corporation for Atmospheric Research manages the National
Center for Atmospheric Research under primary sponsorship by the National
Science Foundation. Opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations
expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and do not
necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.
Bonzo
2007-04-26 03:45:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by Vendicar Decarian
Post by Bonzo
Schroeter Institute for Research in Cycles of Solar Activity
Nova Scotia, Canada
http://www.john-daly.com/solar/solar.htm
Wow a quack with a webpage who claims to be an institute.
Here is another...
http://www.ufo.tugraz.at/?lang=en
CLIMATE SCIENCE
Changes In Solar Brightness Too Weak To Explain Global Warming
by Staff Writers
Boulder CO (SPX) Sep 13, 2006
Changes in the Sun's brightness over the past millennium have had only a
small effect on Earth's climate,
I'll try to make this as simple as possible, just for you.

Higher solar activity => less cosmic rays reach earth => reduced cloud cover
=> higher global temperatures

Lower solar activity => more cosmic rays reach earth => increased cloud
cover => lower global temperatures

This is a far more powerful influence on global temps than any fictitious
effect from CO2.

NOTHING TO DO WITH BRIGHTNESS.

Check out "Maunder Minimum" in Google for an explanation.

Cosmic Rays Blamed For Global Warming

By Richard Gray, Science Correspondent, Sunday Telegraph

Last Updated: 1:08am GMT 11/02/2007

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/02/11/warm11.xml

Man-made climate change may be happening at a far slower rate than has been
claimed, according to controversial new research.

Scientists say that cosmic rays from outer space play a far greater role in
changing the Earth's climate than global warming experts previously thought.

In a book, to be published this week, they claim that fluctuations in the
number of cosmic rays hitting the atmosphere directly alter the amount of
cloud covering the planet.

High levels of cloud cover blankets the Earth and reflects radiated heat
from the Sun back out into space, causing the planet to cool.

Henrik Svensmark, a weather scientist at the Danish National Space Centre
who led the team behind the research, believes that the planet is
experiencing a natural period of low cloud cover due to fewer cosmic rays
entering the atmosphere.

This, he says, is responsible for much of the global warming we are
experiencing.

He claims carbon dioxide emissions due to human activity are having a
smaller impact on climate change than scientists think. If he is correct, it
could mean that mankind has more time to reduce our effect on the climate.

The controversial theory comes one week after 2,500 scientists who make up
the United Nations International Panel on Climate Change published their
fourth report stating that human carbon dioxide emissions would cause
temperature rises of up to 4.5 C by the end of the century.

Mr Svensmark claims that the calculations used to make this prediction
largely overlooked the effect of cosmic rays on cloud cover and the
temperature rise due to human activity may be much smaller.

He said: "It was long thought that clouds were caused by climate change,
but now we see that climate change is driven by clouds.

"This has not been taken into account in the models used to work out the
effect carbon dioxide has had.

"We may see CO2 is responsible for much less warming than we thought and if
this is the case the predictions of warming due to human activity will need
to be adjusted."

Mr Svensmark last week published the first experimental evidence from five
years' research on the influence that cosmic rays have on cloud production
in the Proceedings of the Royal Society Journal A: Mathematical, Physical
and Engineering Sciences. This week he will also publish a fuller account of
his work in a book entitled The Chilling Stars: A New Theory of Climate
Change.

A team of more than 60 scientists from around the world are preparing to
conduct a large-scale experiment using a particle accelerator in Geneva,
Switzerland, to replicate the effect of cosmic rays hitting the atmosphere.

They hope this will prove whether this deep space radiation is responsible
for changing cloud cover. If so, it could force climate scientists to
re-evaluate their ideas about how global warming occurs.

Mr Svensmark's results show that the rays produce electrically charged
particles when they hit the atmosphere. He said: "These particles attract
water molecules from the air and cause them to clump together until they
condense into clouds."

Mr Svensmark claims that the number of cosmic rays hitting the Earth
changes with the magnetic activity around the Sun. During high periods of
activity, fewer cosmic rays hit the Earth and so there are less clouds
formed, resulting in warming.

Low activity causes more clouds and cools the Earth.

He said: "Evidence from ice cores show this happening long into the past.
We have the highest solar activity we have had in at least 1,000 years.

"Humans are having an effect on climate change, but by not including the
cosmic ray effect in models it means the results are inaccurate.The size of
man's impact may be much smaller and so the man-made change is happening
slower than predicted."

Some climate change experts have dismissed the claims as "tenuous".

Giles Harrison, a cloud specialist at Reading University said that he had
carried out research on cosmic rays and their effect on clouds, but believed
the impact on climate is much smaller than Mr Svensmark claims.

Mr Harrison said: "I have been looking at cloud data going back 50 years
over the UK and found there was a small relationship with cosmic rays. It
looks like it creates some additional variability in a natural climate
system but this is small."

But there is a growing number of scientists who believe that the effect may
be genuine.

Among them is Prof Bob Bingham, a clouds expert from the Central Laboratory
of the Research Councils in Rutherford.

He said: "It is a relatively new idea, but there is some evidence there for
this effect on clouds."


Regards

Bonzo

"...and I think future generations are not going to blame us for anything
except for being silly, for letting a few tenths of a degree panic us"
Dr. Richard Lindzen, Professor of Meteorology MIT and Member of the National
Academy of Sciences

"What most commentators-and many scientists-seem to miss is that the only
thing we can say with certainly about climate is that it changes" Dr.
Richard Lindzen, Professor of Meteorology MIT and Member of the National
Academy of Sciences

[most of the current alarm over climate change is based on] "inherently
untrustworthy climate models, similar to those that cannot accurately
forecast the weather a week from now." Dr. Richard Lindzen, Professor of
Meteorology MIT and Member of the National Academy of Sciences
Vendicar Decarian
2007-04-26 10:10:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bonzo
I'll try to make this as simple as possible, just for you.
Higher solar activity => less cosmic rays reach earth => reduced cloud cover
=> higher global temperatures
Lower solar activity => more cosmic rays reach earth => increased cloud
cover => lower global temperatures
This is a far more powerful influence on global temps than any fictitious
effect from CO2.
Sunday, March 18, 2007 6:46 PM


Don't let truth stand in the way of a red-hot debunking of climate
change

by George Monbiot


The science might be bunkum, the research discredited. But all that
counts for Channel 4 is generating controversy

Were it not for dissent, science, like politics, would have stayed in
the dark ages. All the great heroes of the discipline - Galileo,
Newton, Darwin, Einstein - took tremendous risks in confronting
mainstream opinion. Today's crank has often proved to be tomorrow's
visionary.

But the syllogism does not apply. Being a crank does not automatically
make you a visionary. There is little prospect, for example, that Dr
Mantombazana Tshabalala-Msimang, the South African health minister who
has claimed Aids can be treated with garlic, lemon and beetroot, will
be hailed as a genius. But the point is often confused. Professor
David Bellamy, for example, while making the incorrect claim that wind
farms do not have "any measurable effect" on total emissions of carbon
dioxide, has compared himself to Galileo.

The problem with The Great Global Warming Swindle, which caused a
sensation when it was broadcast on Channel 4 last week, is that to
make its case it relies not on future visionaries, but on people whose
findings have already been proved wrong. The implications could not be
graver. Just as the government launches its climate change bill and
Gordon Brown and David Cameron start jostling to establish their green
credentials, thousands have been misled into believing there is no
problem to address.

The film's main contention is that the current increase in global
temperatures is caused not by rising greenhouse gases, but by changes
in the activity of the sun. It is built around the discovery in 1991
by the Danish atmospheric physicist Dr Eigil Friis-Christensen that
recent temperature variations on Earth are in "strikingly good
agreement" with the length of the cycle of sunspots.

Unfortunately, he found nothing of the kind. A paper published in the
journal Eos in 2004 reveals that the "agreement" was the result of
"incorrect handling of the physical data". The real data for recent
years show the opposite: that the length of the sunspot cycle has
declined, while temperatures have risen. When this error was exposed,
Friis-Christensen and his co-author published a new paper, purporting
to produce similar results. But this too turned out to be an artefact
of mistakes - in this case in their arithmetic.

So Friis-Christensen and another author developed yet another means of
demonstrating that the sun is responsible, claiming to have discovered
a remarkable agreement between cosmic radiation influenced by the sun
and global cloud cover. This is the mechanism the film proposes for
global warming. But, yet again, the method was exposed as faulty. They
had been using satellite data which did not in fact measure global
cloud cover. A paper in the Journal of Atmospheric and Solar-
Terrestrial Physics shows that, when the right data are used, a
correlation is not found.

So the hypothesis changed again. Without acknowledging that his
previous paper was wrong, Friis-Christensen's co-author, Henrik
Svensmark, declared there was a correlation - not with total cloud
cover but with "low cloud cover". This, too, turned out to be
incorrect. Then, last year, Svensmark published a paper purporting to
show cosmic rays could form tiny particles in the atmosphere.
Accompanying the paper was a press release which went way beyond the
findings reported in the paper, claiming it showed that both past and
current climate events are the result of cosmic rays.

As Dr Gavin Schmidt of Nasa has shown on www.realclimate.org, five
missing steps would have to be taken to justify the wild claims in the
press release. "We've often criticised press releases that we felt
gave misleading impressions of the underlying work," Schmidt says,
"but this example is by far the most blatant extrapolation beyond
reasonableness that we have seen." None of this seems to have troubled
the programme makers, who report the cosmic ray theory as if it
trounces all competing explanations.

The film also maintains that manmade global warming is disproved by
conflicting temperature data. Professor John Christy speaks about the
discrepancy he discovered between temperatures at the Earth's surface
and temperatures in the troposphere (or lower atmosphere). But the
programme fails to mention that in 2005 his data were proved wrong, by
three papers in Science magazine.

Christy himself admitted last year that he was mistaken. He was one of
the authors of a paper which states the opposite of what he says in
the film. "Previously reported discrepancies between the amount of
warming near the surface and higher in the atmosphere have been used
to challenge the reliability of climate models and the reality of
human-induced global warming. Specifically, surface data showed
substantial global-average warming, while early versions of satellite
and radiosonde data showed little or no warming above the surface.
This significant discrepancy no longer exists because errors in the
satellite and radiosonde data have been identified and corrected."

Until recently, when found to be wrong, scientists went back to their
labs to start again. Now, emboldened by the denial industry, some of
them, like the film-makers, shriek "censorship!". This is the best
example of manufactured victimhood I have come across. If you
demonstrate someone is wrong, you are now deemed to be silencing him.

But there is one scientist in the film whose work has not been
debunked: the oceanographer Carl Wunsch. He appears to support the
idea that increasing carbon dioxide is not responsible for rising
global temperatures. Wunsch says he was "completely misrepresented" by
the programme, and "totally misled" by the people who made it.

This is a familiar story to those who have followed the career of the
director Martin Durkin. In 1998, the Independent Television Commission
found that, when making a similar series, he had "misled" his
interviewees about "the content and purpose of the programmes". Their
views had been "distorted through selective editing". Channel 4 had to
make a prime-time apology.

Cherry-pick your results, choose work which is already discredited,
and anything and everything becomes true. The twin towers were brought
down by controlled explosions; MMR injections cause autism; homeopathy
works; black people are less intelligent than white people; species
came about through intelligent design. You can find lines of evidence
which appear to support all these contentions, and, in most cases,
professors who will speak up in their favour. But this does not mean
that any of them are correct. You can sustain a belief in these
propositions only by ignoring the overwhelming body of contradictory
data. To form a balanced, scientific view, you have to consider all
the evidence, on both sides of the question.

But for the film's commissioners, all that counts is the sensation.
Channel 4 has always had a problem with science. No one in its science
unit appears to understand the difference between a peer-reviewed
paper and a clipping from the Daily Mail. It keeps commissioning
people whose claims have been discredited - such as Durkin. But its
failure to understand the scientific process just makes the job of
whipping up a storm that much easier. The less true a programme is,
the greater the controversy.
Bonzo
2007-04-26 07:34:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by Vendicar Decarian
Post by Bonzo
I'll try to make this as simple as possible, just for you.
Higher solar activity => less cosmic rays reach earth => reduced cloud cover
=> higher global temperatures
Lower solar activity => more cosmic rays reach earth => increased cloud
cover => lower global temperatures
This is a far more powerful influence on global temps than any fictitious
effect from CO2.
Sunday, March 18, 2007 6:46 PM
Don't let truth stand in the way of a red-hot debunking of climate
change
The Gods Must Be Laughing



Al Gore, Global warming, Inconvenient Truth

Al Gore's 'truth' has little to do with science, yet his influence continues
to grow - we need to more closely assess what he is actually saying



By Tom Harris, Natural Resources Stewardship Project



Tuesday, November 7, 2006



Albert Einstein once said, "Whoever undertakes to set himself up as a judge
of Truth and Knowledge is shipwrecked by the laughter of the gods."



While the gods must consider "An Inconvenient Truth" the ultimate comedy,
real climate scientists have been crying over Al Gore's global warming film,
now to be released on DVD November 21st. This is not just because the
ex-Vice President committed numerous basic science mistakes; they are also
concerned that, as a movie that has grossed over $20 million dollars (making
it the 4th highest grossing documentary ever), many in the media and public
have put great faith in the veracity of the film even though much of it
amounts to little more than science fiction.



Yet Gore's influence on the public debate continues to increase. Between
late September 2006 to January 2007, he, and some of the educators and
scientists who support him, plan to train "more than 1,000 individuals to
give a version of his presentation on the effects of - and solutions for -
global warming, to community groups throughout the U.S.", according to his
Web site, www.climatecrisis.org. All this has obviously impressed the
British government as Gore has just been appointed international adviser on
climate change to Gordon Brown, U.K. Chancellor of the Exchequer and most
likely the next Prime Minister.



Given Gore's increasing profile, it is worthwhile to more closely examine
the science of his film.



Gore's credibility is damaged early in the movie when he tells the audience
that, by simply looking at Antarctic ice cores with the naked eye, one can
see when the American Clean Air Act was passed. Dr. Ian Clark, Professor of
Earth Sciences at the University of Ottawa, Canada, responds, "This is pure
fantasy unless the reporter is able to detect parts per billion changes to
chemicals in ice." Air over the US doesn't even circulate to the Antarctic
before mixing with most of the northern, then the southern hemisphere air
and this process takes decades. Clark explains that even far more
significant events, such as the settling of dust arising from the scouring
of continental shelves at the end of ice ages, are undetectable in ice cores
by an untrained eye.



Gore repeatedly labels carbon dioxide (CO2) as "global warming pollution"
when, in reality, it is no more pollution than is oxygen. CO2 is plant
food, an ingredient essential for photosynthesis without which Earth would
be a lifeless, frozen ice ball. The hypothesis that human release of CO2 is
a major contributor to global warming is just that - an unproven hypothesis,
against which evidence is increasingly mounting.



In fact, the supposedly convincing cause and effect relationship between CO2
and temperature that Gore speaks about so confidently is simply non-existent
over all meaningful time scales. University of Ottawa climate researcher,
Professor Jan Veizer demonstrated that, over geologic time, the two are not
linked at all. Over the intermediate time scales Gore focuses on, the ice
cores show that CO2 increases don't precede, and therefore don't cause,
warming. Rather they follow temperature rise - by as much as 800 years.
Even in the past century, the correlation is poor - the planet actually
cooled between 1940 and 1980 when human emissions of CO2 were rising at the
fastest rate in our history.



Similarly, the fact that water vapour constitutes 95% of greenhouse gases by
volume is conveniently ignored by Gore. While humanity's 3 billions tonnes
(gigatonnes, or GT) per year net contribution to the atmosphere's CO2 load
appears large on a human scale, it is actually less than half of 1% of the
atmosphere's total CO2 content (750-830 GT). The CO2 emissions of our
civilization are also dwarfed by the 210 GT/year emissions of the gas from
Earth's oceans and land. Perhaps even more significant is the fact that the
uncertainty in the measurement of atmospheric CO2 content is 80 GT - making
3 GT seem hardly worth mentioning.



But Gore persists, labeling future CO2 rise as "deeply unethical" and
lectures the audience that "Each one of us is a cause of global warming."
Not satisfied with simply warning of human-induced killer heat waves -
events in Europe this past year were "like a nature hike through the Book of
Revelations", he says - he then uses high tech special effects to show how
human-caused climate changes are causing more hurricanes, tornadoes,
droughts, floods, infectious diseases, insect plagues, glacial retreats,
coral die-outs, and the flooding of small island nations due to sea level
rise caused by the melting of the polar caps. One is left wondering if Gore
thinks nature is responsible for anything.



Scientists who actually work in these fields flatly contradict Gore. Take
his allegations that extreme weather (EW) events will increase in frequency
and severity as the world warms and that this is already happening. Former
professor of climatology at the University of Winnipeg (Canada) and now
Chairman of the newly launched Natural Resources Stewardship Project, Dr.
Timothy Ball, notes, "The theories that Gore supports indicate the greatest
warming will be in Polar Regions. Therefore the temperature contrast with
warmer regions - the driver of extreme weather - will lessen and, with it,
storm potential will lessen."



This is exactly what Former Environment Canada research scientist and EW
specialist Dr. Madhav Khandekar found. His studies show that there has been
no increase in EW events in Canada in the last 25 years. Furthermore, he
sees no indication that such events will increase over the next 25 years.
"In fact some EW events such as winter blizzards have definitely declined",
say Khandekar. "Prairie droughts have been occurring for hundreds of years.
The 13th and 16th century saw some of the severest and longest droughts ever
on Canadian/American Prairies." Like many other researchers, Khandekar is
convinced that EW is not increasing globally either.



On hurricanes, Gore implies that new records are being set as a result of
human greenhouse gas emissions. Besides clumsy errors in the presentation
of the facts (Katrina did not get "stronger and stronger and stronger" as it
came over the Gulf of Mexico; rather, it was category 5 over the ocean and
was downgraded to category 3 when it made a landfall), Gore fails to note
that the only region to show an increase in hurricanes in recent years is
the North Atlantic. Hurricane specialist Dr. Tad Murty, former senior
research scientist, Canadian Department of Fisheries and Oceans, and now
adjunct professor of Earth Sciences at University of Ottawa, points out, "In
all other six ocean basins, where tropical cyclones occur, there is either a
flat or a downward trend." Murty lists 1900, 1926 and 1935 as the years in
which the most intense hurricanes were recorded in the US. In fact, Dr. Max
Mayfield, Director of the National Hurricane Center in Miami has stated that
global warming has nothing to do with the recent increase in hurricane
frequency in the North Atlantic. Murty concludes, "The feeling among many
meteorologists is that it has to do with the North Atlantic Oscillation,
which is now in the positive phase and will continue for another decade or
so."



In their open letter to the Canadian Prime Minister in April, 61 of the
world's leading experts modestly expressed their understanding of the
science: "The study of global climate change is an "emerging science," one
that is perhaps the most complex ever tackled. It may be many years yet
before we properly understand the Earth's climate system." It seems that
liberal arts graduate Al Gore, political champion of the Kyoto Protocol,
thinks he knows better.



Institut Pasteur (Paris) Professor Paul Reiter seemed to sum up the
sentiments of many experts when he labeled the film "pure, mind-bending
propaganda." Such reactions should certainly cause viewers to wonder if
Nobel Prize winning French novelist Andre Gide had a point when he advised,
"Believe those who are seeking the truth; doubt those who find it."




Regards

Bonzo

"...and I think future generations are not going to blame us for anything
except for being silly, for letting a few tenths of a degree panic us"
Dr. Richard Lindzen, Professor of Meteorology MIT and Member of the National
Academy of Sciences

"What most commentators-and many scientists-seem to miss is that the only
thing we can say with certainly about climate is that it changes" Dr.
Richard Lindzen, Professor of Meteorology MIT and Member of the National
Academy of Sciences

[most of the current alarm over climate change is based on] "inherently
untrustworthy climate models, similar to those that cannot accurately
forecast the weather a week from now." Dr. Richard Lindzen, Professor of
Meteorology MIT and Member of the National Academy of Sciences
Vendicar Decarian
2007-04-27 09:23:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bonzo
Al Gore, Global warming, Inconvenient Truth
By Tom Harris, Natural Resources Stewardship project
Discredited Friends of Science Re-emerge as the Natural Resources
Stewardship Project

12 Oct 06

NRSP exposed -- controlled by energy industry lobbyists

http://www.desmogblog.com/nrsp-controlled-by-energy-lobbyists

A breathless news release announced Thursday that Dr. Tim Ball is now the
chair of a new "environmental" group called the Natural Resources
Stewardship Project.

The snazzy new NRSP website announces a broad array of principles and
strategies, but their goal is simple:

NRSP's first campaign is focused on dispelling the notion that Canada needs
CO2 reduction plans.

Here we have yet another "grassroots" organization, emerging spontaneously
to fight the demonic international conspiracy to recognize the global threat
of climate change.

At this point, the DeSmogBlog has no information on who is funding this
high-tone endeavour, but it is impossible not to notice the overlap with the
much-discredited Friends of Science. Both feature a list of "scientific
advisors" including doctors Tim Ball, Tim Patterson, Tad Murty and Sallie
Baliunas, and the ever helpful Tom Harris is back carrying the public
relations file - you might call them the usual suspects.

The proprietors seem to be trying to clear up their messaging, though. For
example, the FOS site still insists that Dr. Ball was the first Canadian
Ph.D. in Climatology (even if he HAD a Ph.D. in climatology, this would not
be true) and that "for 32 years (he) was a Professor of Climatology at the
University of Winnipeg." But the NRSP site says only that "for 28 years
(Ball) was Professor of Climatology at the University of Winnipeg."

Of course, that's not true either. According to a Statement of Claim in a
libel suit that HE filed, Dr. Ball was only a professor at U of W for eight
years. And according to the university's own calendar, he was, during that
time, a professor of geography, not climatology.

It's remarkable that this group has found the funding to launch another such
expensive campaign, denying science that every academy in the developed
world has recognized and fighting any legislation that might inconvenience
the fossil fuel industry. But it is more remarkable that they would choose
as chair a man like Tim Ball.

If he can't even tell the truth on his own resume, why on earth would we
believe him - or any of his friends of science - on climate change?
Vendicar Decarian
2007-04-27 09:25:52 UTC
Permalink
"Bonzo" <***@optusnt.com.au> wrote Nothing of Consequence

meanwhile...

NRSP Controlled by Energy Lobbyists
18 Jan 07
Two of the three Directors on the board of the Natural Resources Stewardship
Project are senior executives of the High Park Advocacy Group, a
Toronto-based lobby firm that specializes in "energy, environment and
ethics."

Timothy Egan, is the president of the High Park Advocacy Group, and a
registered lobbyist for the Canadian Gas Association and the Canadian
Electricity Association. Julio Legos is the High Park Group's Director of
Regulatory Affairs, whose biography says, "Julio's practice at HPG is
focused on federal and provincial energy and environmental law and policy,
particularly as they affect Canadian industry."

The Executive Director of the NRSP, Tom Harris, is also a former High Park
consultant, and the NRSP mailing address is in the building where, until
recently, High Park maintained its Toronto offices.

It appears that High Park has taken a page from the APCO-Worldwide playbook.
APCO is the PR and lobbying firm that created a "grassroots" organization
called The Advancement of Sound Science Coalition (TASSC) on behalf of
tobacco giant Philip Morris in the 1990s. In that situation, Steve Milloy
"quit" APCO to set up a pro-tobacco website called www.JunkScience.com.
Milloy later took over as executive director of TASSC and continues, today,
to lobby against smoking restrictions. Documents, since made public, show
that APCO established TASSC specifically to create the appearance of an arm's
length organization supporting tobacco's cause.

In this instance, the creation of the NRSP as an "arm's length" "grassroots"
organization also enabled High Park and to avoid identifying who is paying
for the NRSP's public campaign against climate change regulations. The
federal government's own website makes this kind of "grassroots" lobbying
subject to the restrictions of the Lobbyists' Registration Act (subject to
an important loophole).

The Question and Answer section under the General Registration Requirements
of the act states:

"4. What is "grass-roots" lobbying?

"Grass-roots lobbying is a communications technique that encourages
individual members of the public or organizations to communicate directly
with public office holders in an attempt to influence the decisions of
government. Such efforts primarily rely on use of the media or advertising,
and result in mass letter writing and facsimile campaigns, telephone calls
to public office holders, and public demonstrations."

(Here, for the record, is a recent example of the NRSP's Tom Harris doing
just that.)

But setting up a separate organization allows High Park to claim an
exception, also to be found in the Q&A section of the General Registration
Requirements:

"5. I am involved in organizing and directing a grass-roots lobbying
campaign. Do I have to register?

"If you are a registered lobbyist, you must report grass-roots lobbying as
a communications technique. If you are not engaged in any registerable
lobbying activity, it is not necessary to register for the grass-roots
lobbying campaign."

Thus, by removing himself from the High Park employee list and taking an
office across the hall (the NRSP mailing address is #2-263 Roncesvalles
Avenue, in Toronto; High Park's address was, until very recently, #4-263
Roncesvalles Avenue) Tom Harris is able to carry out any direction Timothy
Egan may be giving in this "grassroots" campaign against energy industry
regulation without fulfilling what the Lobbyist act describes as the
"obligation to provide accurate information to public office holders and to
disclose the identity of the person or organization on whose behalf the
representation is made and the purpose of the representation."

The federal Lobbyists Registry was created specifically so that politicians
and members of the public can know who is paying to influence the political
decision-making process. To that end, the federal government's Lobbyist Code
of Conduct says:

"1. Identity and purpose

"Lobbyists shall, when making a representation to a public office holder,
disclose the identity of the person or organization on whose behalf the
representation is made, as well as the reasons for the approach."

But Tom Harris is not technically a lobbyist and Timothy Egan and Julio
Legos may well be "volunteering" their time as directors of the NRSP.

So, Egan is a registered lobbyist for the Canadian Gas Association, which is
part of an energy industry coalition that includes the Canadian Nuclear
Association, the Canadian Association of Oil Well Drilling Contractors, the
Canadian Energy Alliance, the Propane Gas Association of Canada, Inc., the
Petroleum Services Association of Canada, the Canadian Association of
Petroleum Producers (CAPP), the Canadian Petroleum Products Institute, the
Canadian Energy Pipeline Association and the Coal Association of Canada, (as
well as some conservation and alternative energy interests such as the
Canadian Energy Efficiency Alliance, the Canadian Wind Energy Association
and Hydrogen and Fuel Cells Canada). But while a paid apologist for this
fossil-fuel-dominated group directs NRSP operations, and while the NRSP's
stated purpose is to block government action on climate change - the
Canadian public has no right to ask who's paying the bills for the NRSP
campaign.

That may be legal, but it doesn't seem right
t***@ntlworld.com
2007-04-28 12:27:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bonzo
By Dr Theodor Landscheidt
Schroeter Institute for Research in Cycles of Solar Activity
Nova Scotia, Canada
http://www.john-daly.com/solar/solar.htm
It looks as though the way the Sun influences global climate is much
more complicated than I imagined .Although he demonstrates this
influence quite convincingly.
I suppose Roger Coppock will point out that was posted on a website
and not in a journal and so has not been refereed.
He could tell us that the author is telling lies and is in the pay of
Big
Oil.
But all the papers that the author has cited have been refereed as
far as I can see.
The fact that a journal would not accept such an article is just plain
CENSORSHIP.
Peter Muehlbauer
2007-04-28 16:59:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by t***@ntlworld.com
Post by Bonzo
By Dr Theodor Landscheidt
Schroeter Institute for Research in Cycles of Solar Activity
Nova Scotia, Canada
http://www.john-daly.com/solar/solar.htm
It looks as though the way the Sun influences global climate is much
more complicated than I imagined .Although he demonstrates this
influence quite convincingly.
I suppose Roger Coppock will point out that was posted on a website
and not in a journal and so has not been refereed.
He could tell us that the author is telling lies and is in the pay of
Big
Oil.
The autor died in 2004, but his predictions about ENSO, solar impacts
and future weather shortly before his death became 100% true.
Post by t***@ntlworld.com
But all the papers that the author has cited have been refereed as
far as I can see.
The fact that a journal would not accept such an article is just plain
CENSORSHIP.
Landscheidt was a very serious scientist of the old confession style.
He was living for true science, not for "consensus".
Bush Lost Iraq War
2007-04-28 20:29:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by Peter Muehlbauer
Post by t***@ntlworld.com
Post by Bonzo
By Dr Theodor Landscheidt
Schroeter Institute for Research in Cycles of Solar Activity
Nova Scotia, Canada
http://www.john-daly.com/solar/solar.htm
It looks as though the way the Sun influences global climate is much
more complicated than I imagined .Although he demonstrates this
influence quite convincingly.
I suppose Roger Coppock will point out that was posted on a website
and not in a journal and so has not been refereed.
He could tell us that the author is telling lies and is in the pay of
Big
Oil.
The autor died in 2004, but his predictions about ENSO, solar impacts
and future weather shortly before his death became 100% true.
Post by t***@ntlworld.com
But all the papers that the author has cited have been refereed as
far as I can see.
The fact that a journal would not accept such an article is just plain
CENSORSHIP.
Landscheidt was a very serious scientist of the old confession style.
He was living for true science, not for "consensus".
You can always find a sociopath to like astrologers more than
astronomers:

http://www.google.com/search?q=Landscheidt+astrology&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a
Results 1 - 100 of about 1,060 for Landscheidt astrology.
Vendicar Decarian
2007-04-29 06:50:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by Peter Muehlbauer
The autor died in 2004, but his predictions about ENSO, solar impacts
and future weather shortly before his death became 100% true.
Yup, the decline in solar ouput over the period that the earth is warming
proves beyone a shadow of a doubt that it's not the output of the sun that
is warming the earth.

It must be............ Sunspots, Crabgrass, StarQuakes, StarMan, Solar
Flares, Herpies Flareups, CME's and Floridation of the Nation's water
supply.

Quaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaakkkkkk
Peter Muehlbauer
2007-04-29 08:26:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by Vendicar Decarian
Post by Peter Muehlbauer
The autor died in 2004, but his predictions about ENSO, solar impacts
and future weather shortly before his death became 100% true.
Yup, the decline in solar ouput over the period that the earth is warming
proves beyone a shadow of a doubt that it's not the output of the sun that
is warming the earth.
It must be............ Sunspots, Crabgrass, StarQuakes, StarMan, Solar
Flares, Herpies Flareups, CME's and Floridation of the Nation's water
supply.
Quaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaakkkkkk
That shows me that you have never read this paper or dealed with it.
Instead of this you again show us your famous and typical
"VD out of arguments error"
Mass Killer COALition
2007-04-29 19:31:51 UTC
Permalink
Peter Muehlbauer is a Cho Seung-Hui of Usenet.

Peter Muehlbauer is Choosing You to be a victim of Mass Murder.

Like Cho Seung-Hui, Peter Muehlbauer is a sociopath utterly without
pity for his randomly chosen victims -- it's just a violent video game
for him, where he tries for the "most points" using weather of mass
destruction. 20,000 dead in France from Heat Wave, 3,000 wacked in New
Orleans, just points to keep score.

The longer you stay unaware that your death is his goal, the more his
words can infect you like poison to delay your self-defense plan.

Global Warming briefings were being given to tobacco company
executives two decades ago, while they were in the midst of carrying
out serial murders of 400,000 Americans per year with delay tactics of
hired science-falsifiers. They loaned part of their propaganda
apparatus to the OILY INC liars to delay actions on Global Warming, as
the court records show as early as 1988.

It wasn't until 1998 that the evidence came to light in courts of law,
but nine years later the same people are still doing the same frauds.

Since 1988 to 1998, 4 million Americans were killed by frauds that
said that the science on tobacco was unsettled. These are willful
deliberate premeditated murders, using people like Peter Muehlbauer to
spread their message.

Since 1998 another 3.6 million have been murdered by falsified science
"debate" keeping the settled science from being taken seriously by
thew victims of opportunity whom have been knowingly addicted by
corporate serial murderers, and their henchmen like Peter Muehlbauer.

The A.S.S. Coalition (TASSC) & Global Warming
http://TobaccoDocuments.org Court Records

http://tobaccodocuments.org/landman/158433.html
Abstract
To circumvent its lack of credibility with the public, policy makers
and the media, Philip Morris (PM) uses the strategy of creating front
groups. Forming an artificial third party and then assigning it an
"umbrella cause" (one which happens to mesh perfectly with the tobacco
industry's) gives PM and the industry the opportunity to create a
wholly separate, and far more credible, mouthpiece advance its
policies and political desires. In PM's front group "Associates for
Research in Substance Enjoyment," (ARISE) "scientists" lumped tobacco
use together with innocuous substances like tea and chocolate, put out
worldwide press releases saying substance use was good for you and
declared public health advocates to be puritanical, neo-prohibitionist
party poopers. After the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
declared secondhand smoke as a Class A Human Carcinogen, PM needed a
powerful group to rise up help discredit EPA's findings. Thus PM
formed "The Advancement of Sound Science Coalition," or TASSC.
Recognizing that the chemical, paper, metal, petroleum and other
environmentally-dubious industries would also be thrilled to have a
group of "committed experts" who would publicly say that scientific
warnings against their activities were not credible, PM invited these
industries to join TASSC. With the needs clear and a host of willing
help-mates waiting in the wings, PM created TASSC through a public
relations firm called APCO Associates, which helped PM distance itself
from the group. After a 2-month, $50,000 feasibility study done hand
in hand with PM's law firm of Covington and Burling, APCO began
forming TASSC. APCO did an admirable job of recruiting members for
TASSC, too. The "supporters list" (found in another document) includes
businesses from the "Family Loompya Seafood Market" and "Pinckneyville
Lighting" to sawmills, mining and chemical companies, including W.R.
Grace, Co., Amoco, and Dow Chemical. Today's document reveals the
goals of TASSC, and also APCO's enthusiasm for creating a similar
group in Europe based on its success in America and elsewhere. Title:
Thoughts on TASSC Europe Type of Document: Memo From: Tom Hockaday of
APCO Associates To: Matt Winokur, Director, Worldwide Regulatory
Affairs for Philip Morris Date: 19940324 Site: Philip Morris Tobacco
Company http://www.pmdocs.com/ Bates No. 2025492898/2905 Page Count: 8
URL: http://www.pmdocs.com/getallimg.asp?DOCID=2025492898/2905

03/28/94 15:25 '8`202 466 6004 APCO ASSOCIATES 0004 -3 - As a starting
point, we can identify key issues requiring sound scientific research
and scientists that may have an interest in them. Some issues our
European colleagues suggest include: . Global warming · Nuclear waste
disposal · Diseases and pests in agricultural products for
transborder trade · Biotechnology . Eco-labeling for EC products

===============
http://tobaccodocuments.org/pm/2024233595-3602.html
Thoughts on Tassc Europe
Date: 25 Mar 1994

-3- As a starting point, we can identify key issues requiring sound
scientific research and scientists that may have an interest in them.
Some issues our European colleagues suggest include: . Global
warming . Nuclear waste disposal . Diseases and pests in agricultural
products for transborder trade . Biotechnology . Eco-labeling for EC
products . Food processing and packaging

-5- decisions. The supporters of the Appeal are a loose-knit group.
The effort to expand the support of the Appeal is handled through Dr.
M. Saloman of the International Center for Scientific Ecology (Paris).

In discussions with a number of our scientific supporters and with Dr.
Fred Singer (a member of the Board of the International Center for
Scientific Ecology), there is belief that this initial support could
be organized into a more "formal movement" internationally. The
benefits of attempting to use this group as a basis of extending TASSC
include: Several of TASSC's scientists have signed the Appeal,
providing the opportunity to approach the supporters with a "peer to
peer" approach, i.e. , a "Dear Colleague" letter.

===============
http://tobaccodocuments.org/nysa_ti_m2/TI15842109.html
TUESDAY, DECEMBER 28, 1993 THE ORANGE COUNTY REGISTER A truth squad
for monitoring shaky science
Date: 28 Dec 1993

TASSC should work to make fiascos like the Alar scare as familiar to
students as rain forests or global warming.

===============
http://tobaccodocuments.org/mayo_clinic/82000099.html
TASSC The Advancement of Sound Science Coalition

"It is neither reasonable nor prudent for major political decisions to
be based on presumptions which, in the current state of knowledge, are
still only hypotheses, although they must certainly be examined and
even taken into account. The more or less apocalyptic scenarios evoked
in the preparatory, work for the Rio conference are not the kind of
certitudes which can be used as a basis for political decisions likely
to entail major upheavals and heavy expenditure on a global scale."
~Michael Salomon, Editorial Director, Projections Quarterly, Autumn-
Winter 1992

===============
http://tobaccodocuments.org/pm/2028363773-3791.html
Scientists for Sound Public Policy Assessment Project and Symposium
Date: 1994 (est.)
Length: 19 pages

EXPLANATIONS · The political decision-makers are vulnerable to
activists' emotional appeals and press campaigns · The opinion climate
tends to favour overly simplified solutions The precautionary
principle is now the accepted guideline. Even if a hypothesis is not
100 per cent scientifically proven, action should be taken, e.g.
global warming Europe's industry is often on the defensive. Action is
typically taken when it is too late. And industrial resistence is
perceived as protection of commercial self-interests.

Burson-Marsteller

===============
http://tobaccodocuments.org/pm/2025493202-3207.html
Date: 26 Apr 1994 (est.)
Length: 6 pages

Many industries trying to establish groups to "communicate science"
and "to lobby" EUFIC (food industry) SAGB (biotechnology) Heidelberg
Appeal (global warming)

===============
http://tobaccodocuments.org/pm/2024102283-2287.html
Date: 1992 (est.)
Length: 5 pages

SEITZ SYMPOSIUM
*Late lst quarter/early 2nd quarter
*Procedural Options for Addressing the Scientific Issue Highlighted in
Global Warming and Ozone Hole Controversies, Dr. Frederick Seitz of
the George C. Marshall Institute
*40-60 regulators--Ensure credible science
*TASSC

===============
http://tobaccodocuments.org/pm/2046451070-1139.html
Science, Economics, and Environmental Policy: A Critical Examination
Date: 11 Aug 1994
Length: 70 pages

===============
http://tobaccodocuments.org/pm/2025802450-2451.html
Scientific Integrity in the Public Policy Process Semi-Final Program
930524 - 930525 the Madison Hotel 15th and M Streets, Nw Washington,
D.C.
Date: 19930525/D
Length: 2 pages

CONFERENCE OVERVIEW: From global warming and ozone depletion to
biotechnology and food additives

Dr.. S. Fred Singer (Moderator) University of Virginia; president, The
Science & Environmental Policy Project

Dr. S. Fred Singer, president The Science & Environmental Policy
Project. 9:15

===============
Environmental Tobacco Smoke
Date: 09 Dec 1996
Length: 13 pages
http://tobaccodocuments.org/batco/800298146-8158.html

Press Release of The Science & Environmental Policy Project "TOP FIVE
ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY 'MYTHS' OF 1995 TO BE RELEASED BY SCIENCE AND
ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY PROJECT: List Challenges Costly Policies Not
Supported By Sound Scientific Data," January 10, 1996

===============
Philip Morris
Date: 31 Mar 1993
Length: 1 page
2025802449
Jump To Images
http://tobaccodocuments.org/pm/2025802449.html

===============
http://tobaccodocuments.org/pm/2021178213-8216.html
Philip Morris
Possible Individuals to Be Approached for Opinion Editorials
Date: 02 Mar 1993
Length: 4 pages

Candace Crandall -- Executive Vice President of the Science and
Environmental Policy Project (SEPP).

She has published extensively on junk science issues in the past.
Crandall' was the Director of Communications for the Center for
Strategic and International' Studies before joining, SEPP. The primary
focus of SEPP is too document the use of scientific data in the
development of federal environmental policy. SEPP is an independent,
non-profi research group that relies on private funding.

It will co-sponsor a conference with George Mason University in May on
scientific integrity in the political process, Crandall has arranged
for a number of prominent scientists to be participants, including Dr.
Bernard Davis of Harvard University and1 Sir William Mitchell of'
Oxford University.

Crandall is Dr: Fred Singer's wife.

===============
Issue Report Alexis Whither Environmental Regulation
Date: 01 Jul 1993
Length: 6 pages
http://tobaccodocuments.org/nysa_ti_s2/TI31741185.html

Dr. S. Fred Singer is Professor of Environmental Sciences at the
University of Virginia and directs the Washington- based Science &
Environmental Policy Project. He is currently working on a study on
environmental regulation for the Alexis de Tocqueville Institution.

===============
Philip Morris
Anthology of 950000's Environmental Myths
Date: 11 Feb 1996
Length: 3 pages
http://tobaccodocuments.org/pm/2048280356-0358.html

Copyright 1996 News World Communications, Inc. The Washington Times
February 11, 1996, Sunday, Final Edition SECTION: Part B; COMMENTARY;
Pg. B3 LENGTH: 1377 words HEADLINE: Anthology of 1995's environmental
myths BYLINE: S. Fred Singer

BODY: The primary mission of the Science & Environmental Policy
Project has been to study and analyze how science is used - or
missused - in the setting of federal environmental policies, and then
expose the most egregious examples of environmental malfeasance. There
are so many: Superfund, asbestos, Alar, acid rain, to mention just a
few - all of them costing mega-billions and backed by insubstantial
science. When we decided to list the greatest environmental myths of
1995, our board _ of experts finally settled on the following five
topics that demonstrate distortion or misuse of science in shaping
policies. We present them here to educate policy-makers and the public
in the hope that the publicity will lead to more cost-effective
policies and a healthier environment. (1) Global warming and the
Climate Treaty: During 1995, scare stories about a future catastrophic
greenhouse warming gained much momentum, while at the same time the
evidence for such warming became weaker and weaker. At the first
"Conference of the Parties" to the Global Climate Treaty in Berlin in
April, the science was ignored while the assembled "statesmen" went
ahead to establish a permanent secretariat and plan further mega-
meetings. In September, at the initiative of Al Gore, a Washington
conference promoted a new fear tied to global warming: a spread of
tropical diseases putting 3 billion people at risk. Finally, in
November (in Madrid) and December (in Rome), the U.N.-sponsored
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the scientific arm
of the Treaty, managed to approve two pre-drafted summary reports.
These can charitably be described as being "economical with the
truth."...

===============
Philip Morris
Is the Concept of Linear Relationship Between Dose and Effect Still A
Valid Model for Assessing Risk Related to Low Doses of Carcinogens? A
Restricted International Scientific Seminar 930510 - Paris (France)
Date: 10 May 1993
Length: 5 pages
http://tobaccodocuments.org/pm/2028385383-5387.html

International Center for a Scientific Ecology Is the concept of linear
relationship between dose and effoct still a valid model for assessing
risk related to low doses of ets? A restricted international
scienfific Seminar May 10, 1993 - Paris (France)

The seminar is organised by the International Centre for a Scientific
Ecology (see Introduction to the Centre in the appendix). The
scientific work is organised by Dr Michel Salomon, the coordinator of
the Heidelberg Appeal.

Prof. S. Fred Singer, Doctor of Physical Science; President of the
Science & Environmental Policy Project; former Director, US Weather
Satellite Program; Dean of the School of Environmental Sciences,
University of Miami; Deputy Assistant Administrator of US
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA); American. nationality;

Dr. Michel Salomon, coordinator of the Heidelberg Appeal; former
science journalist; magazine editor; French nationality.

===============
Philip Morris
Dr. S. Fred Singer, Director the Science and Environmental Policy
Project
Date: 08 Mar 1993 (est.)
Length: 1 page
http://tobaccodocuments.org/pm/2021178209.html

===============
Brown & Williamson
Public Affairs Strategies.
Date: 1900
Length: 4 pages
http://tobaccodocuments.org/bw/1059809.html

(#8) SCIENCE & ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY PROJECT From a strategic
standpoint, we believed the most effective way to publicize the report
would be through a credibl]e highly respected "third party".

So we brought the report to the attention of the 'Science &
Environmental Policy Project", SEPP, as it is known, is a Fairfax,
Va., think-tank that studies and analyzes how science is used in
federal policy-making and encourages the use of sound science. After
reading the CRS report, SEPP was equally concerned the EPA's
conclusions and agreed more visibility was in ***@er.

{#9) SEPP NEWS RELEASE With B&W's assistance, SEEP launched a media
relations campaign in January calling attention to the "Top Five
Environmental Myths of 1995." While such issues as "global warming"
and radon were on the list, the focus was on ETS.

(#10) WASHINGTON TIMES "OP ED" In addition to news releases, SEPP
wrote "Op ed" pieces and conducted interviews on radio and television.
SEPP is continuing the "environmental myths" campaign, extending
discussion of the subject to speeches by Dr. Fred Singer, SEPP's
executive director. It's one strategy to help balance the debate.

===============
Mayo Clinic
Length: 37 pages
http://tobaccodocuments.org/mayo_clinic/85002238.html

THE INTERNATIONAL CENTER FOR A SCIENTIFIC ECOLOGY The Center has been
created at the beginning of 1993 under the French law for nomprolit
organizations.

The Board of the Center includes in particular:
- Mr Pierre Joly. President of the Association Francaise pour la
Recherche Therapeutique : former President of the International
Federation of Pharmaceutical Manufacturers Association ;

- Mr Constant Burg. honorary member of the State Council ; honorary
managing director of INSERM : President of the lnstitut Curie:

- Mr Gilbert Rutman. chief mining engineer: President of the Conseil
Natioflal des Ingenieurs et des Scientifiques de France:

- Prof. S. Fred Singer. Doctor of Physical Science : President of the
Science & Environmental Policy Project : former Director US Weather
Satellite Program : Dean of the School of Environmental Sciences.
University of Miami : Deputy Assistant Administrator of US
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) :

- Mr Gary Nash. Secretary General of the International Council on
Metals and the Environment (ICME) : former Director General in the
Canada Department of Energy. Mines und Resources :

- Dr. Michel Salomon, coordinator of the Heidelberg Appeal ; former
science journalist : magazine editor.

===============
Philip Morris
Top Five Environmental Policy "Myths" of 950000 to Be Released by
Science and Environmental Policy Project
Date: 1995 (est.)
Length: 1 page
http://tobaccodocuments.org/pm/2065122118.html

===============
Philip Morris
the Delaney Clause - Linchpin of the Environmental Policy Edifice
Date: 10 May 1993
Length: 4 pages
http://tobaccodocuments.org/pm/2501171259-1262.html

The Delaney Clause-Linchpin of the Environmental Policy Edifice Prof.
S. Fred Singer

S. Fred Singer Director, Science & Environmental Policy Project
Arlington, Virginia

===============
Philip Morris
Junk Science at the Epa
Date: 08 Mar 1993 (est.)
Length: 3 pages
http://tobaccodocuments.org/pm/2021178206-8208.html

S. Fred Singer Visiting fellovv at the Hoover Institution at Stanford
University and President of the Washington. D C.-baed Science &
Environrnental Policy Project

===============
http://tobaccodocuments.org/pm/2065122122.html
Philip Morris
Sepp - Environmental Myths of 950000 - Smt Participant Broadcast
Details
Date: 1995 (est.)
Length: 1 page

===============
http://tobaccodocuments.org/pm/2065122119-2121.html
Philip Morris
Top Five Environmental Policy "Myths" of 950000 to Be Released by
Science and Environmental Policy Project
Date: 10 Jan 1996
Length: 3 pages

===============
Philip Morris
Seminar of 930510 on the Linear Relationship
Date: 31 Mar 1993
Length: 3 pages
http://tobaccodocuments.org/pm/2028443741-3743.html

Opening speech by Chairman of the Seminar, Prof. Bruce N. Ames
(Biologist'4 Dir., Nat. Inst. of EnvironmentallHealth Sciences Center,
Berkeley, U.S.A.). 9/9.20 a.m. · How biofogically based modeis may
help extrapolating cancer risk to low doses.

· The Delaney amendment and its consequences on the American
regufation. Prof. S. Fred Singer (Physicist, former Dir., US Weather
Satellite Program; President, Science & Environmental Policy Project,
U'.S.A.). 10.20/10.30 a.m.

Noon · Case studies: Predictions and reality. - The Arsenic case.
Prof. Gerhard Stohrer (former chief, Dept!. of chemical risk, Research
Inst. Sloan-Kettering~ U.S.A.).

The DDT case. Dr. William Hazeltine (Ph.D., entomo!bgist, former
Manager of mosquito abatement in California, U.S:A.).

===============
Philip Morris
Update 930419
Date: 19 Apr 1993
Length: 7 pages
http://tobaccodocuments.org/pm/2025475593-5599.html

CONFERENCE/MEETING: Scientific Integrity in the Public Process
SPONSOR: International Institute of George Mason University and the
Science and Environmental Policy Project DATE: May 24-25, 1993
LOCATION: The Madison Hotel, Washington, DC TELEPHONE NUMBER:
703-993-8200

===============
BATCo
[Note from Heather Cooke to Tom Fitzgerald regarding report issued by
The Science & Environmental Policy Project SEPP]
Date: 27 Feb 1996
Length: 1 page
http://tobaccodocuments.org/batco/700520244.html

BRITISH-AMERICAN TOBACCO COMPANY LIMITED To: FACSIMILE MR TOM
FITZGERALD I From: HEATHER COOKE Company: Brown & Williamson Phone
01784 448045 'Tobacco Corp Number: Fax No: Fax No: 0"784 448654 Date:
27/02/96 Pages To Follow: 3 Comments: I am trying to get hold of a
report issued by The Science & Environmental Policy Project (SEPP)
which relates to the attached press release. Do you have a copy that
you can fax to me or know where I might be able to get hold of a copy?
Many thanks Heather Cooke Administrator, Smoking Issues

===============
Philip Morris
Toxic Policy at Dead End: the Case of Arsenic
Date: 10 May 1993 (est.)
Length: 6 pages
http://tobaccodocuments.org/pm/2502146148-6153.html

International Center for a Scientific Ecology Seminar on linear risk
assessment May 10, 1993 Toxic Policy at Dead End: The Case of Arsenic
Gerhard Strohrer Science and Environmental Policy Project 2101 Wilson
Boulevard, Suite 1003 Arlington, Virginia 22201

===============
Philip Morris
Give Industry A Bigger Science Rol
Date: 19921229/P
Length: 1 page
http://tobaccodocuments.org/pm/2074144040.html

Patrick J. Michaels is associate professor of environmental sciences
at the University Virginia and is affiliated with the Washington-based
Science & Environment Policy Project. The Science & Environmental
Policy Project, 2101 Wilson Blvd., #1003, Arlington, VA 22201 .(703)
527-0130

===============

Vendicar Decarian
2007-04-29 06:46:41 UTC
Permalink
Post by t***@ntlworld.com
Post by Bonzo
http://www.john-daly.com/solar/solar.htm
It looks as though the way the Sun influences global climate is much
more complicated than I imagined .Although he demonstrates this
influence quite convincingly.
What do you find convincing? Be specific, and if you are honest, you will
be rapidly unconvinced.
Vendicar Decarian
2007-04-29 06:52:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bonzo
http://www.john-daly.com/solar/solar.htm
Landscheidt received the Marc Edmund Jones Award which is considered one of
the most prestigious awards in astrology
Bush Lost Iraq War
2007-04-28 20:26:09 UTC
Permalink
Bonzo is a Cho Seung-Hui of Usenet.

Bonzo is Choosing You to be a victim of Mass Murder.

Like Cho Seung-Hui, Bonzo is a sociopath utterly without pity for his
randomly chosen victims -- it's just a violent video game for him,
where he tries for the "most points" using weather of mass
destruction. 20,000 dead in France from Heat Wave, 3,000 wacked in New
Orleans, just points to keep score.

The longer you stay unaware that your death is his goal, the more his
words can infect you like poison to delay your self-defense plan.

Global Warming briefings were being given to tobacco company
executives two decades ago, while they were in the midst of carrying
out serial murders of 400,000 Americans per year with delay tactics of
hired science-falsifiers. They loaned part of their propaganda
apparatus to the OILY INC liars to delay actions on Global Warming, as
the court records show as early as 1988.

It wasn't until 1998 that the evidence came to light in courts of law,
but nine years later the same people are still doing the same frauds.

Since 1988 to 1998, 4 million Americans were killed by frauds that
said that the science on tobacco was unsettled. These are willful
deliberate premeditated murders, using people like Bonzo to spread
their message.

Since 1998 another 3.6 million have been murdered by falsified science
"debate" keeping the settled science from being taken seriously by
thew victims of opportunity whom have been knowingly addicted by
corporate serial murderers, and their henchmen like Bonzo.

The A.S.S. Coalition (TASSC) & Global Warming
http://TobaccoDocuments.org Court Records

http://tobaccodocuments.org/landman/158433.html
Abstract
To circumvent its lack of credibility with the public, policy makers
and the media, Philip Morris (PM) uses the strategy of creating front
groups. Forming an artificial third party and then assigning it an
"umbrella cause" (one which happens to mesh perfectly with the tobacco
industry's) gives PM and the industry the opportunity to create a
wholly separate, and far more credible, mouthpiece advance its
policies and political desires. In PM's front group "Associates for
Research in Substance Enjoyment," (ARISE) "scientists" lumped tobacco
use together with innocuous substances like tea and chocolate, put out
worldwide press releases saying substance use was good for you and
declared public health advocates to be puritanical, neo-prohibitionist
party poopers. After the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
declared secondhand smoke as a Class A Human Carcinogen, PM needed a
powerful group to rise up help discredit EPA's findings. Thus PM
formed "The Advancement of Sound Science Coalition," or TASSC.
Recognizing that the chemical, paper, metal, petroleum and other
environmentally-dubious industries would also be thrilled to have a
group of "committed experts" who would publicly say that scientific
warnings against their activities were not credible, PM invited these
industries to join TASSC. With the needs clear and a host of willing
help-mates waiting in the wings, PM created TASSC through a public
relations firm called APCO Associates, which helped PM distance itself
from the group. After a 2-month, $50,000 feasibility study done hand
in hand with PM's law firm of Covington and Burling, APCO began
forming TASSC. APCO did an admirable job of recruiting members for
TASSC, too. The "supporters list" (found in another document) includes
businesses from the "Family Loompya Seafood Market" and "Pinckneyville
Lighting" to sawmills, mining and chemical companies, including W.R.
Grace, Co., Amoco, and Dow Chemical. Today's document reveals the
goals of TASSC, and also APCO's enthusiasm for creating a similar
group in Europe based on its success in America and elsewhere. Title:
Thoughts on TASSC Europe Type of Document: Memo From: Tom Hockaday of
APCO Associates To: Matt Winokur, Director, Worldwide Regulatory
Affairs for Philip Morris Date: 19940324 Site: Philip Morris Tobacco
Company http://www.pmdocs.com/ Bates No. 2025492898/2905 Page Count: 8
URL: http://www.pmdocs.com/getallimg.asp?DOCID=2025492898/2905

03/28/94 15:25 '8`202 466 6004 APCO ASSOCIATES 0004 -3 - As a starting
point, we can identify key issues requiring sound scientific research
and scientists that may have an interest in them. Some issues our
European colleagues suggest include: . Global warming · Nuclear waste
disposal · Diseases and pests in agricultural products for
transborder trade · Biotechnology . Eco-labeling for EC products

===============
http://tobaccodocuments.org/pm/2024233595-3602.html
Thoughts on Tassc Europe
Date: 25 Mar 1994

-3- As a starting point, we can identify key issues requiring sound
scientific research and scientists that may have an interest in them.
Some issues our European colleagues suggest include: . Global
warming . Nuclear waste disposal . Diseases and pests in agricultural
products for transborder trade . Biotechnology . Eco-labeling for EC
products . Food processing and packaging

-5- decisions. The supporters of the Appeal are a loose-knit group.
The effort to expand the support of the Appeal is handled through Dr.
M. Saloman of the International Center for Scientific Ecology (Paris).

In discussions with a number of our scientific supporters and with Dr.
Fred Singer (a member of the Board of the International Center for
Scientific Ecology), there is belief that this initial support could
be organized into a more "formal movement" internationally. The
benefits of attempting to use this group as a basis of extending TASSC
include: Several of TASSC's scientists have signed the Appeal,
providing the opportunity to approach the supporters with a "peer to
peer" approach, i.e. , a "Dear Colleague" letter.

===============
http://tobaccodocuments.org/nysa_ti_m2/TI15842109.html
TUESDAY, DECEMBER 28, 1993 THE ORANGE COUNTY REGISTER A truth squad
for monitoring shaky science
Date: 28 Dec 1993

TASSC should work to make fiascos like the Alar scare as familiar to
students as rain forests or global warming.

===============
http://tobaccodocuments.org/mayo_clinic/82000099.html
TASSC The Advancement of Sound Science Coalition

"It is neither reasonable nor prudent for major political decisions to
be based on presumptions which, in the current state of knowledge, are
still only hypotheses, although they must certainly be examined and
even taken into account. The more or less apocalyptic scenarios evoked
in the preparatory, work for the Rio conference are not the kind of
certitudes which can be used as a basis for political decisions likely
to entail major upheavals and heavy expenditure on a global scale."
~Michael Salomon, Editorial Director, Projections Quarterly, Autumn-
Winter 1992

===============
http://tobaccodocuments.org/pm/2028363773-3791.html
Scientists for Sound Public Policy Assessment Project and Symposium
Date: 1994 (est.)
Length: 19 pages

EXPLANATIONS · The political decision-makers are vulnerable to
activists' emotional appeals and press campaigns · The opinion climate
tends to favour overly simplified solutions The precautionary
principle is now the accepted guideline. Even if a hypothesis is not
100 per cent scientifically proven, action should be taken, e.g.
global warming Europe's industry is often on the defensive. Action is
typically taken when it is too late. And industrial resistence is
perceived as protection of commercial self-interests.

Burson-Marsteller

===============
http://tobaccodocuments.org/pm/2025493202-3207.html
Date: 26 Apr 1994 (est.)
Length: 6 pages

Many industries trying to establish groups to "communicate science"
and "to lobby" EUFIC (food industry) SAGB (biotechnology) Heidelberg
Appeal (global warming)

===============
http://tobaccodocuments.org/pm/2024102283-2287.html
Date: 1992 (est.)
Length: 5 pages

SEITZ SYMPOSIUM
*Late lst quarter/early 2nd quarter
*Procedural Options for Addressing the Scientific Issue Highlighted in
Global Warming and Ozone Hole Controversies, Dr. Frederick Seitz of
the George C. Marshall Institute
*40-60 regulators--Ensure credible science
*TASSC

===============
http://tobaccodocuments.org/pm/2046451070-1139.html
Science, Economics, and Environmental Policy: A Critical Examination
Date: 11 Aug 1994
Length: 70 pages

===============
http://tobaccodocuments.org/pm/2025802450-2451.html
Scientific Integrity in the Public Policy Process Semi-Final Program
930524 - 930525 the Madison Hotel 15th and M Streets, Nw Washington,
D.C.
Date: 19930525/D
Length: 2 pages

CONFERENCE OVERVIEW: From global warming and ozone depletion to
biotechnology and food additives

Dr.. S. Fred Singer (Moderator) University of Virginia; president, The
Science & Environmental Policy Project

Dr. S. Fred Singer, president The Science & Environmental Policy
Project. 9:15

===============
Environmental Tobacco Smoke
Date: 09 Dec 1996
Length: 13 pages
http://tobaccodocuments.org/batco/800298146-8158.html

Press Release of The Science & Environmental Policy Project "TOP FIVE
ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY 'MYTHS' OF 1995 TO BE RELEASED BY SCIENCE AND
ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY PROJECT: List Challenges Costly Policies Not
Supported By Sound Scientific Data," January 10, 1996

===============
Philip Morris
Date: 31 Mar 1993
Length: 1 page
2025802449
Jump To Images
http://tobaccodocuments.org/pm/2025802449.html

===============
http://tobaccodocuments.org/pm/2021178213-8216.html
Philip Morris
Possible Individuals to Be Approached for Opinion Editorials
Date: 02 Mar 1993
Length: 4 pages

Candace Crandall -- Executive Vice President of the Science and
Environmental Policy Project (SEPP).

She has published extensively on junk science issues in the past.
Crandall' was the Director of Communications for the Center for
Strategic and International' Studies before joining, SEPP. The primary
focus of SEPP is too document the use of scientific data in the
development of federal environmental policy. SEPP is an independent,
non-profi research group that relies on private funding.

It will co-sponsor a conference with George Mason University in May on
scientific integrity in the political process, Crandall has arranged
for a number of prominent scientists to be participants, including Dr.
Bernard Davis of Harvard University and1 Sir William Mitchell of'
Oxford University.

Crandall is Dr: Fred Singer's wife.

===============
Issue Report Alexis Whither Environmental Regulation
Date: 01 Jul 1993
Length: 6 pages
http://tobaccodocuments.org/nysa_ti_s2/TI31741185.html

Dr. S. Fred Singer is Professor of Environmental Sciences at the
University of Virginia and directs the Washington- based Science &
Environmental Policy Project. He is currently working on a study on
environmental regulation for the Alexis de Tocqueville Institution.

===============
Philip Morris
Anthology of 950000's Environmental Myths
Date: 11 Feb 1996
Length: 3 pages
http://tobaccodocuments.org/pm/2048280356-0358.html

Copyright 1996 News World Communications, Inc. The Washington Times
February 11, 1996, Sunday, Final Edition SECTION: Part B; COMMENTARY;
Pg. B3 LENGTH: 1377 words HEADLINE: Anthology of 1995's environmental
myths BYLINE: S. Fred Singer

BODY: The primary mission of the Science & Environmental Policy
Project has been to study and analyze how science is used - or
missused - in the setting of federal environmental policies, and then
expose the most egregious examples of environmental malfeasance. There
are so many: Superfund, asbestos, Alar, acid rain, to mention just a
few - all of them costing mega-billions and backed by insubstantial
science. When we decided to list the greatest environmental myths of
1995, our board _ of experts finally settled on the following five
topics that demonstrate distortion or misuse of science in shaping
policies. We present them here to educate policy-makers and the public
in the hope that the publicity will lead to more cost-effective
policies and a healthier environment. (1) Global warming and the
Climate Treaty: During 1995, scare stories about a future catastrophic
greenhouse warming gained much momentum, while at the same time the
evidence for such warming became weaker and weaker. At the first
"Conference of the Parties" to the Global Climate Treaty in Berlin in
April, the science was ignored while the assembled "statesmen" went
ahead to establish a permanent secretariat and plan further mega-
meetings. In September, at the initiative of Al Gore, a Washington
conference promoted a new fear tied to global warming: a spread of
tropical diseases putting 3 billion people at risk. Finally, in
November (in Madrid) and December (in Rome), the U.N.-sponsored
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the scientific arm
of the Treaty, managed to approve two pre-drafted summary reports.
These can charitably be described as being "economical with the
truth."...

===============
Philip Morris
Is the Concept of Linear Relationship Between Dose and Effect Still A
Valid Model for Assessing Risk Related to Low Doses of Carcinogens? A
Restricted International Scientific Seminar 930510 - Paris (France)
Date: 10 May 1993
Length: 5 pages
http://tobaccodocuments.org/pm/2028385383-5387.html

International Center for a Scientific Ecology Is the concept of linear
relationship between dose and effoct still a valid model for assessing
risk related to low doses of ets? A restricted international
scienfific Seminar May 10, 1993 - Paris (France)

The seminar is organised by the International Centre for a Scientific
Ecology (see Introduction to the Centre in the appendix). The
scientific work is organised by Dr Michel Salomon, the coordinator of
the Heidelberg Appeal.

Prof. S. Fred Singer, Doctor of Physical Science; President of the
Science & Environmental Policy Project; former Director, US Weather
Satellite Program; Dean of the School of Environmental Sciences,
University of Miami; Deputy Assistant Administrator of US
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA); American. nationality;

Dr. Michel Salomon, coordinator of the Heidelberg Appeal; former
science journalist; magazine editor; French nationality.

===============
Philip Morris
Dr. S. Fred Singer, Director the Science and Environmental Policy
Project
Date: 08 Mar 1993 (est.)
Length: 1 page
http://tobaccodocuments.org/pm/2021178209.html

===============
Brown & Williamson
Public Affairs Strategies.
Date: 1900
Length: 4 pages
http://tobaccodocuments.org/bw/1059809.html

(#8) SCIENCE & ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY PROJECT From a strategic
standpoint, we believed the most effective way to publicize the report
would be through a credibl]e highly respected "third party".

So we brought the report to the attention of the 'Science &
Environmental Policy Project", SEPP, as it is known, is a Fairfax,
Va., think-tank that studies and analyzes how science is used in
federal policy-making and encourages the use of sound science. After
reading the CRS report, SEPP was equally concerned the EPA's
conclusions and agreed more visibility was in ***@er.

{#9) SEPP NEWS RELEASE With B&W's assistance, SEEP launched a media
relations campaign in January calling attention to the "Top Five
Environmental Myths of 1995." While such issues as "global warming"
and radon were on the list, the focus was on ETS.

(#10) WASHINGTON TIMES "OP ED" In addition to news releases, SEPP
wrote "Op ed" pieces and conducted interviews on radio and television.
SEPP is continuing the "environmental myths" campaign, extending
discussion of the subject to speeches by Dr. Fred Singer, SEPP's
executive director. It's one strategy to help balance the debate.

===============
Mayo Clinic
Length: 37 pages
http://tobaccodocuments.org/mayo_clinic/85002238.html

THE INTERNATIONAL CENTER FOR A SCIENTIFIC ECOLOGY The Center has been
created at the beginning of 1993 under the French law for nomprolit
organizations.

The Board of the Center includes in particular:
- Mr Pierre Joly. President of the Association Francaise pour la
Recherche Therapeutique : former President of the International
Federation of Pharmaceutical Manufacturers Association ;

- Mr Constant Burg. honorary member of the State Council ; honorary
managing director of INSERM : President of the lnstitut Curie:

- Mr Gilbert Rutman. chief mining engineer: President of the Conseil
Natioflal des Ingenieurs et des Scientifiques de France:

- Prof. S. Fred Singer. Doctor of Physical Science : President of the
Science & Environmental Policy Project : former Director US Weather
Satellite Program : Dean of the School of Environmental Sciences.
University of Miami : Deputy Assistant Administrator of US
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) :

- Mr Gary Nash. Secretary General of the International Council on
Metals and the Environment (ICME) : former Director General in the
Canada Department of Energy. Mines und Resources :

- Dr. Michel Salomon, coordinator of the Heidelberg Appeal ; former
science journalist : magazine editor.

===============
Philip Morris
Top Five Environmental Policy "Myths" of 950000 to Be Released by
Science and Environmental Policy Project
Date: 1995 (est.)
Length: 1 page
http://tobaccodocuments.org/pm/2065122118.html

===============
Philip Morris
the Delaney Clause - Linchpin of the Environmental Policy Edifice
Date: 10 May 1993
Length: 4 pages
http://tobaccodocuments.org/pm/2501171259-1262.html

The Delaney Clause-Linchpin of the Environmental Policy Edifice Prof.
S. Fred Singer

S. Fred Singer Director, Science & Environmental Policy Project
Arlington, Virginia

===============
Philip Morris
Junk Science at the Epa
Date: 08 Mar 1993 (est.)
Length: 3 pages
http://tobaccodocuments.org/pm/2021178206-8208.html

S. Fred Singer Visiting fellovv at the Hoover Institution at Stanford
University and President of the Washington. D C.-baed Science &
Environrnental Policy Project

===============
http://tobaccodocuments.org/pm/2065122122.html
Philip Morris
Sepp - Environmental Myths of 950000 - Smt Participant Broadcast
Details
Date: 1995 (est.)
Length: 1 page

===============
http://tobaccodocuments.org/pm/2065122119-2121.html
Philip Morris
Top Five Environmental Policy "Myths" of 950000 to Be Released by
Science and Environmental Policy Project
Date: 10 Jan 1996
Length: 3 pages

===============
Philip Morris
Seminar of 930510 on the Linear Relationship
Date: 31 Mar 1993
Length: 3 pages
http://tobaccodocuments.org/pm/2028443741-3743.html

Opening speech by Chairman of the Seminar, Prof. Bruce N. Ames
(Biologist'4 Dir., Nat. Inst. of EnvironmentallHealth Sciences Center,
Berkeley, U.S.A.). 9/9.20 a.m. · How biofogically based modeis may
help extrapolating cancer risk to low doses.

· The Delaney amendment and its consequences on the American
regufation. Prof. S. Fred Singer (Physicist, former Dir., US Weather
Satellite Program; President, Science & Environmental Policy Project,
U'.S.A.). 10.20/10.30 a.m.

Noon · Case studies: Predictions and reality. - The Arsenic case.
Prof. Gerhard Stohrer (former chief, Dept!. of chemical risk, Research
Inst. Sloan-Kettering~ U.S.A.).

The DDT case. Dr. William Hazeltine (Ph.D., entomo!bgist, former
Manager of mosquito abatement in California, U.S:A.).

===============
Philip Morris
Update 930419
Date: 19 Apr 1993
Length: 7 pages
http://tobaccodocuments.org/pm/2025475593-5599.html

CONFERENCE/MEETING: Scientific Integrity in the Public Process
SPONSOR: International Institute of George Mason University and the
Science and Environmental Policy Project DATE: May 24-25, 1993
LOCATION: The Madison Hotel, Washington, DC TELEPHONE NUMBER:
703-993-8200

===============
BATCo
[Note from Heather Cooke to Tom Fitzgerald regarding report issued by
The Science & Environmental Policy Project SEPP]
Date: 27 Feb 1996
Length: 1 page
http://tobaccodocuments.org/batco/700520244.html

BRITISH-AMERICAN TOBACCO COMPANY LIMITED To: FACSIMILE MR TOM
FITZGERALD I From: HEATHER COOKE Company: Brown & Williamson Phone
01784 448045 'Tobacco Corp Number: Fax No: Fax No: 0"784 448654 Date:
27/02/96 Pages To Follow: 3 Comments: I am trying to get hold of a
report issued by The Science & Environmental Policy Project (SEPP)
which relates to the attached press release. Do you have a copy that
you can fax to me or know where I might be able to get hold of a copy?
Many thanks Heather Cooke Administrator, Smoking Issues

===============
Philip Morris
Toxic Policy at Dead End: the Case of Arsenic
Date: 10 May 1993 (est.)
Length: 6 pages
http://tobaccodocuments.org/pm/2502146148-6153.html

International Center for a Scientific Ecology Seminar on linear risk
assessment May 10, 1993 Toxic Policy at Dead End: The Case of Arsenic
Gerhard Strohrer Science and Environmental Policy Project 2101 Wilson
Boulevard, Suite 1003 Arlington, Virginia 22201

===============
Philip Morris
Give Industry A Bigger Science Rol
Date: 19921229/P
Length: 1 page
http://tobaccodocuments.org/pm/2074144040.html

Patrick J. Michaels is associate professor of environmental sciences
at the University Virginia and is affiliated with the Washington-based
Science & Environment Policy Project. The Science & Environmental
Policy Project, 2101 Wilson Blvd., #1003, Arlington, VA 22201 .(703)
527-0130

===============
Continue reading on narkive:
Loading...