Vol. 22, No. 7 - Access to Energy Newsletter

The recipe for a lie usually includes at least a small pinch of truth. This includes even those small lies we tell ourselves to help cope with our own personal set of faults.

Mark Twain said that he was not addicted to cigars. He could give them up whenever he wished. He knew this, he said, because he had done it a thousand times.

At law, this is known as the "colorable argument'' - the lie that contains just enough truth that it can be told with a straight face, little risk of being accused of outright perjury, and a chance of success if the opposition is not quick enough in rebuttal.

The lies that are most dangerous to science, technology, and freedom in 1995 are also disguised by their own dashes of truth.

Consider, for example, the pseudoenvironmentalist enviro bums and agitators whose lies we discussed under the heading "envy'' in AtE 22-6. (This, we have told ourselves, represented great rhetorical restraint on our part. We could have resorted to vituperation.) Is careful preservation and enhancement of the natural environment a good thing? Obviously it is. Most farmers, loggers, and other individuals who make their livings close to nature are active environmentalists. They are continually taking actions to enhance and preserve the environment. Our region of the Northwest, for example, has been intensively utilized by farmers, loggers, miners, and a wide variety of other people for about 150 years. Most of these people have worked harder and earned less than their counterparts in urban areas. They have stayed here largely because they love this environment.

Now welfare-supported enviro agitators in collusion with national pseudoenvironmentalist groups are trying to eject these people from the Northwest because (they say) people may harm the pristine environment here. It is admirably pristine because those same people and their ancestors (whom the enviros vilify) have kept it that way.

Are there occasional people who irresponsibly harm the environment? Of course there are. These people provide the dash of truth in the enviro recipe for depopulation of the American rural Northwest.

We write frequently about the "global warming fraud'' in which carbon dioxide is being "falsely demonized.'' Is it not true, however, that carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas? Yes, that is true. The earth is warmed in part by the energy trapped by atmospheric carbon dioxide. It is also true that there has been an increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide in recent decades. These are the pinches of truth in the "global warming'' recipe. It is not true, however, that the earth is slipping quickly toward global environmental disaster as a result of these truths. In fact, the only detectable environmental changes observed so far as a result of this rise in carbon dioxide have been uniformly favorable to the natural environment of the earth.

The ozone hoax also has its own truthful ingredients. It is true that chlorine compounds have been shown in the laboratory to dissociate and participate, under atmospheric conditions, in reactions that consume ozone. It is also true that CFCs such as freon decompose and participate in these reactions and undoubtedly do so also when they are released into the atmosphere. The extent of this participation is still unknown. We do know, however, that world atmospheric ozone levels are within the range of ordinary fluctuations. Most importantly, we know that there has been no significant increase in UV light levels at the earth's surface during recent decades. The few credible measurements show, in fact, a slight decrease.

These bits of correct atmospheric chemistry have been parlayed, however, into the lie that CFCs are leading to a global UV light disaster and mass cancer deaths - which can only be stopped by destroying chlorine chemistry-based technology.

Is it true that we would be slightly better off if our food contained no traces whatever of pesticides, herbicides, and preservatives? This is probably true in a very limited sense. In the broader sense, however, which includes the fact that elimination of these substances will markedly reduce the availability of fresh fruits and vegetables and will likely even increase our intake of dangerous substances from naturally resistant plants, this small truth supports a very large and dangerous lie. This lie may cause millions of early deaths.

Were the traces of DDT in the world food chain a hazard to human and animal health? Colorable arguments to this effect were made and an exhaustive search would probably have discovered concrete examples of ill effects - if one overlooked (in probably the most genocidal lie of omission in human history) the fact that DDT saved more than 500 million human lives before it was banned and failed to save hundreds of millions more thereafter.

Is recycling a sensible activity? Well, the free market thinks so. Aluminum, steel, silver, and many other items were being recycled long before the enviro industry became established. Does this small truth mean, however, that coercive laws should require that everything be recycled? Does it mean that paper must be collected, transported, deinked, and recycled? American forests are increasing so fast that our wood and paper industry could not possibly stay even with them. Burning waste paper (thereby fertilizing the trees) and manufacturing low-cost high-quality virgin paper is actually the most energy and resource-efficient procedure. The big recycling lie (based on the small recycling truth) serves as justification for coercive recycling - the interactive propaganda of the enviro industry.

There is no substitute for the truth - when it is the whole truth. The stock in trade of the liar is the small truth with which the large lie or falsehood of omission is disguised. The dash of truth is often like a spice that covers up the taste of poison in the whole brew.

We now have sufficient science and technology to eliminate early deaths and give almost everyone an opportunity for 80 to 100 years of vibrant good health; to explore our solar system and give all of the members of our civilization an opportunity for at least vicarious enjoyment of this spectacular and unprecedented new frontier; to provide such an abundance of low-cost energy and industry that even the least wealthy live more richly that the most wealthy of previous generations; and to banish hunger and other forms of human suffering as completely as we have banished smallpox.

We can do these things if we retain our freedom and our commitment to truth. If, however, we allow the large lies that oppose us to hide behind small truths, we may forfeit these great opportunities.

It is always prudent to examine all of the essential premises of one's opponents - and of one's allies. Adopting and promulgating the errors of one's allies can sometimes be more debilitating than ignoring an opponent's error, since credibility is an essential yet very perishable

commodity in public debate. The opponents of shutting down human progress in order to combat the phantoms of carbon dioxide "global warming'' (and opponents of the political empowerment of those who have hitched their personal ambitions to these phantoms) are now using arguments that can be summarized as follows:

1. Atmospheric carbon dioxide is not increasing.

2. Atmospheric carbon dioxide is increasing, but the increase is not being caused by human activities.

3. Atmospheric carbon dioxide is being increased by human activities (primarily the burning of coal, oil, and natural gas), but this increase is not causing a significant increase in global temperature.

4. The increase of atmospheric carbon dioxide is actually beneficial because it causes an increase in the amount of plants and animals. Even if global temperature does rise, plants, animals, and humans will benefit from better nutrition and a warmer, more hospitable climate.

This is reminiscent of the Texas trial lawyer's shifting defense which asserted: "My client's dog did not bite your client; my client's dog doesn't bite; my client's dog wasn't there; and, moreover, my client doesn't have a dog.'' Our friends look a little confused for two reasons. First, they are participating in a debate concerning a subject for which the essential scientific knowledge is not yet available. This is not the fault of science. Global carbon balance and its atmospheric and environmental interactions is a difficult, as yet poorly understood subject.

Why not just add "5. Neither we nor anyone else knows enough about atmospheric composition and global environments to reliably comment on their interactions or to suggest political action or inaction?'' This truth is, unfortunately, rhetorically weak. You say you don't know; your opponent says he does know; you look foolish; and everyone listens to him (and gives him a big tax-financed grant).

Second, some of the science in this field has been poorly conducted. This is not surprising. "Global atmospheric environmentalism'' is being politically driven by self-interested groups. Some politicians and bureaucrats see "global problems'' as an opportunity to greatly expand their power. Some scientists see "global problems'' as an opportunity to greatly expand their funding from politicians and bureaucrats. Therefore, in addition to those scientists who are doing excellent work in these fields, there is a contingent of others who sacrifice integrity and quality in order to obtain tax money and notoriety.

With reference, then, to the arguments above:

1. Why do some people think that atmospheric carbon dioxide is not increasing? The reason is that the carbon dioxide content of arctic and antarctic ice cores has been cited in support of the popular graphs of atmospheric carbon dioxide vs. time (see Access to Energy, 21-3, p. 3 and Figure 2a below).

Drilling cores from ice far under the earth's surface (some more than a mile deep) initially seemed to be a good way in which to obtain historical information about the atmosphere. Atmospheric components are deposited in falling snow which is eventually frozen in the ice record, and bubbles of air also become entrained in the ice.

Unfortunately, the engineering problems involved in obtaining ice samples lead to such severe contamination that data from this source is of little value, especially for a volatile, water soluble gas like carbon dioxide. The history and details of these efforts are carefully reviewed in "Do glaciers tell a true atmospheric CO 2 story?'' by Jaworowski, Z., Segalstad, T. V., and Ono, N., The Science of the Total Environment, 114 , pp. 227-284 (1992), which is the source of Figures 1 and 2.

In one typical drilling operation, temperatures as high as 100°C were maintained around the outside of the ice core (of diameter about 4 inches) by the dissipation of as much as 600 kW of power in the bore hole, and the drilling fluid around the hole and core included 28 metric tons of an antifreeze composed of numerous hydrocarbon constituents and hundreds of contaminants. Moreover, various components of the drilling apparatus itself were slightly soluble in this antifreeze. When a core is drilled and thereby released from the pressure of the overlying ice, it fractures, and drilling fluid is admitted into the interior.

In addition, carbon dioxide is soluble in the water layer on the surface of ice and also forms inclusion clathrates within the ice under some circumstances. These and other difficulties make carbon dioxide measurements of ice cores almost valueless. Reported measurements of carbon dioxide tend to correlate with drilling parameters as is shown in Figure 1. Notice the similarities between CO 2, ice crystal size, and pressure and expansion of the cores. Accordingly, reported ice core CO2 values have varied over a range of about 10-fold with 2 to 3-fold typical of the narrower ranges - until 1985.

In 1985, in an effort to make their measurements consistent with the actual atmospheric record that began in the 1950s and "relevant'' to the increasingly popular global warming debate, investigators began simply discarding measurements that were outside of the popular range. Worse, when the newly cleansed data did not match the curvature of actual measurements, a fortuitous hypothesis was introduced: the air in the ice was assumed to be younger than the ice - just enough

younger to shift the values into register. (See Figure 2b which shows the actual "cleansed'' data and 2a which shows the newly fabricated data after the "young air shift''.) This dishonesty has led some to reject the CO2 increase shown by these indirect measurements.

Shenanigans cannot, however, alter truth nor be used as an excuse to ignore truth. Direct measurements of atmospheric carbon dioxide were made about 100 years ago. For example, the Encyclopedia Americana for 1908 gives an atmospheric CO2 value of 290 ppm. The carbon dioxide section of the International Critical Tables of 1926 was written by W. J. Humphreys, who cites his own work published in 1921 and gives a value (which we calculate from his total atmospheric mass values) of 280 ppm. Almost 40 years ago, direct and continuous measurements began and have now been extended to numerous sites.

Figures 3 and 4 are from "Trends '93: A Compendium of Data on Global Change'' available from Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, TN 37831 as Publication No. ORNL/CDIAC-65, which contains complete literature citations. These values from Hawaii and the South Pole are consistent with other world-wide stations. CO 2 has definitely risen substantially during the past century.

2. There is serious doubt, however, about the source and effects of this rise. Since the atmospheric increase during the 1980s has been about 3 Gt C (gigatons carbon) per year and the estimated human release is about 5 Gt C per year, most people have assumed that the increase is of human origin. For these values and Figure 5 see "Terrestrial ecosystems and the carbon cycle'' by D. S. Schimel, Global Change Biology 1, in press (1995). F. Seitz, however, (see Access to Energy 22-1, p 3) has suggested that this assumption is not consistent with atmospheric turnover rates of ¹⁴CO2 from atomic testing.

It is entirely possible that atmospheric CO2 ordinarily fluctuates and that the past 50 to 100 years have been an upward period on that curve. During this time, atmospheric temperature has risen about 0.5°C (apparently from solar variation and not from CO2 effects - see Access to Energy 22-1, p3). The solubility of CO2 in sea water (see International Critical Tables) diminishes about 2.5% per °C increase in temperature. Therefore, making the imperfect assumption for purposes of estimation that equilibrium is maintained, a total ocean warming of 0.3°C per century would lead to ocean outgassing of 3 Gt C per year - the observed atmospheric increase. (We calculate (40,000)(0.3)(.025)/(100) = 3 Gt C using the ocean value of 40,000 from Figure 5.) Interestingly, the observed increase in atmospheric CO2 does lag behind the increase in temperature as expected from this hypothesis.

Where then could the 5 Gt C from human activity have gone? Well, United States forests have increased 23% since 1958 (see Access to Energy 21-3, p 2) or 0.6% per year. We may reasonably estimate world tree growth at (400)(0.006) = 2.4 Gt C and the rest of the biosphere might absorb the other 2.6 Gt C (or it may really be in the atmosphere).

It is claimed that laboratory results on CO2 fertilization do not apply to the real world because global plants are stressed by shortages of water and other nutrients, pollution, high temperature, and shading. The literature on this has been carefully reviewed by K. E. Idso and S. B. Idso, Agricultural and Forest Meteorology 69, pp. 153-203 (1994) and summarized in Figure 6 (from their paper) which demonstrates that stress actually increases the percentage effect of CO2 fertilization.

The real point is that no one knows. Figure 5 gives the 1994 Intergovernmental Panel Assessment on Climate Change estimated global carbon values. These are so uncertain that no conclusion can be reliably drawn as to the fate of CO2 from human activity. A 3% change in the ocean flux estimate, for example, turns the ocean into a CO2 source rather than a sink, and this estimate has a much greater than 3% uncertainty. Human activity is a 5 Gt C per year flux out of the total earth flux of 300 Gt C per year and total reservoir of 43,000 Gt C.

3. So, what do we know? We know that atmospheric CO2 has risen 70 to 90 ppm during the past century. This increase has been accompanied by (and, research indicates, has caused) substantial increases in world plants and animals. The increase in CO2 so far has not caused any detectable increase in atmospheric temperature (since the only rise in temperature occurred before the CO2 increase - see Access to Energy 22-1, p 3). CO2 is a greenhouse gas, but the net greenhouse effect on the earth has not measurably changed during recent decades. The increase in atmospheric CO2 may have been caused by human activity, especially the burning of coal, oil, and natural gas, or it may be an ordinary fluctuation associated with solar activity or other causes.

4. Whatever the cause of the recent rise in atmospheric CO 2, the effects so far have been beneficial. There are more plants growing on earth as a result of CO2 fertilization, and these plants are supporting a concomitant increase in animal life. We should be pleased by our good fortune and should not permit pseudoscientific scare mongering in the name of "global warming'' by self-interested politicians, bureaucrats, and tax money-seeking scientists to turn this good event into a negative for our technology, our freedom, and our civilization.

Socialized educators extol the virtues of teaching foreign languages to grade school children. In this, they disregard the fact that most children are insufficiently familiar with their own language and with the language of science and technology - mathematics. Without good abilities in their native language and in mathematics, children are retarded in their ability to think. Citizens who cannot or will not think may provide a continuing supply of humor for "Stark Raving Mad,'' but they constitute a dangerous flaw in our technological civilization. The first College Board exam, the PSAT, is usually given at the age of 16. By then, a child's ability in mathematics is largely determined. More techniques can be taught, but little improvement in fundamental ability is possible. At 16, however, verbal skills are still rapidly developing - especially active vocabulary.

Now, the continuing experiment in self-education in our home school here has a second set of PSAT values. The students are currently 18, 16, 15, 13, 13, and 7 and are entirely self-taught. They use the Saxon math series of books followed, after they complete calculus, by university level physics and chemistry books, also entirely self-taught. We teach no grammar, no spelling, and no punctuation except in the correction of their written essays. Their verbal skills are almost entirely developed by speaking and extensive reading.

Zachary at age 16 scored 750 in math and 730 in verbal for a total of 1480 on the PSAT. He missed two math questions. Noah, who is now 16, scored 770 in math and 630 in verbal for a total of 1400. He missed one math question. The difference in verbal score is entirely due to extent of reading. Noah engages in much less spontaneous reading than does Zachary, so his rate of vocabulary development is slower. If the test were given again at age 25, I would expect the two to score approximately the same because, by then, they should both have an active vocabulary that includes most of the words on the tests.

On April 1, 1995, the new factors for converting raw tests scores to the 200 to 800 scale go into effect (see Access to Energy, 21-7 & 22-3). This is being done to diminish politically incorrect differences between students of differing sex and race and to raise scores so that they will not reflect the disastrous results of American socialized education.

Using the new conversion table effective after April 1, Zachary's scores will be 760 in math and 800 in verbal for a total of 1560, and Noah's will be 800 in math and 700 in verbal for a total of 1500.

I am certain that this performance is far higher than it would have been had they been enslaved in the socialized public schools during their formative years. I am also certain that it is higher than it would have been had I taught them with the usual teacher-student methods rather than letting them learn by themselves from good books.

One of the finest gifts that any parent can give his children is to provide each child with a large desk in a quiet place; a set of Saxon math books available from Saxon Publishers, Inc., 1320 West Lindsey, Norman, OK 73069; a large and diverse source of light reading, good literature, history, economics, and other books; orders to work alone and uninterruptedly with these materials during his best 5 or 6 hours early each day, six days per week; a home with no TV set; a diet with no added sugar; and instructions never to attend a socialized school.

Note: We know that many talented and dedicated teachers exist in America. All of them should be working where their talents will be appreciated and best utilized - in free-enterprise, private schools.

An EM Science, OSHA acceptable material safety data sheet warns "Provide adequate general ventilation. Protect eyes and skin with safety goggles and gloves. Do not take internally. Wash thoroughly after handling.'' In case of ingestion: "Get medical assistance.'' These warnings are for sucrose (ordinary table sugar).

More dangerous still, "Material should be handled or transferred in an approved fume hood or with adequate ventilation. Protective gloves should be worn to prevent skin contact. Safety glasses with side shields should be worn at all times.'' This is advised for soluble starch.
The Compuserve Executive News Service for 1/18/95 reports that two indicted men in Florida face 20 years in prison and fines of more than $2.2 million for smuggling freon into the United States in violation of the Clean Air Act. Their crime was claiming the freon would be shipped to Mexico when, in fact, it remained in the U.S. without consumption allowances issued by the Environmental Protection Agency. Apparently CFCs are O.K. if released in Mexico.

Meanwhile, Civil Defense Perspectives 11, No. 2, p 2 (1995), available from Physicians for Civil Defense, 1601 N. Tucson Blvd., Ste 9, Tucson, AZ 85716, reports that the Arizona legislature House Environment Committee has approved a bill that would allow the possession, use, manufacture, transportation, or sale of CFCs in Arizona. Perhaps federalism can stop the CFC ban mania.

Coleman has stopped making radioactive mantles for camper lanterns because of the "dangerous'' radiation that they emit. (Product warnings on the old mantles resemble those for sucrose and starch above.) Cresson Kearny reports (letter to AtE) that he measured gamma radiation of 0.25 mr/hr with an older mantle pressed against the open 1.3 cm² window of a Wallac RD-8 meter and 0.05 mr/hr with the window closed. Background (Montrose, CO) measured 0.02 mr/hr. A camper worried about this risk had best restrict his activities to the seashore, since background radiation in mountainous areas is comparable to that from the mantles. Hormesis fans, however, will want to grab some old mantles and head for the mountains to lower their cancer risk.

"Test of the Linear-No Threshold Theory of Radiation Carcino-genesis for Inhaled Radon Decay Products'' by B. L. Cohen, Health Physics 68, No. 2, pp 157-174 (1995). This is a detailed research paper showing that lung cancer mortality decreases as inhaled radon increases for the exposure levels found in most American homes.

The linear-no threshold hypothesis is dead - along with many lung cancer victims that were unfortunate enough to live in localities with low background radiation. Also dead are very large numbers of marginalized Americans for whom the loss (Cohen estimates) of over $250 billion in unnecessary radiation protection expenditures - not to mention the enormous cost from reduced development of nuclear power -has been fatal. This radiation myth has had grisly consequences.
"Eugene Wigner (1902-1995)'' by F. Seitz, Nature 373, p 288 (1995). Eugene Wigner's work helped initiate the nuclear age and helped to preserve American freedom through both development of nuclear technology and protective civil defense technology.
"It's the Battery Stupid'' by S. F. Brown, Popular Science, pp 62-78, February (1995). This gives a review of limitations on current technology for the production of electric cars.
"Poking Holes in NASA's Latest Ozone Scare'' by K. M. Towe, Citizen Outlook 10, No. 1, p3 (1995) from Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow, P. O. Box 65722, Washington, DC 20035 and "A Case Study in Shaky Science'' by S. F. Singer, Insight, p 37, January 30 (1995) report credibility depletion in the ozone mania industry.
Washington Legal Foundation Legal Studies Division 1995 Publications Catalog available from WLF, 2009 Massachusetts Avenue, N.W., Washington, DC 20036. There is a wealth of information and ammunition for pro-technologists in WLF publications.
"Liberty's Champion'' by L. H. Rockwell, The New American 11, No. 3 , p. 42 (1995) in memorial to Murray N. Rothbard whose death is a substantial loss to the cause of economic freedom. Liberty needs theoreticians, and Murray Rothbard was one of the best.