]]]]]]]]]]]   THE HANDICAP OF A MISGUIDED CONSCIENCE      [[[[[[[[[[[
                    By T.A. Dorman. M.D.                    (12/8/89)

       Earth's atmosphere consists of 79% nitrogen and 21% oxygen and 
fractional amounts of other gases, the least rare of the residue being 
carbon dioxide at 0.003% (350ppm). It is a curious thing that our 
lives hang on that bagatelle. A sane person might be reassured, 
therefore, to hear that in the last seventy years, the duration over 
which accurate records of the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere 
have been kept, this slender life-line has become a little less 
tenuous. You will be glad to know that the concentration has risen 
from 280ppm (parts per million) to 350ppm. Not much, but movement is 
in the right direction. What does CO2 do for us? At school we were 
taught that it is a waste product of respiration, true of course, but 
in fact CO2 is the source material for all living matter. Plants take 
in CO2 from the atmosphere. Through the process of photosynthesis it 
is converted P mineral to organic matter P and initiates the food 
chain. Although it is true that we excrete CO2 as a waste product of 
respiration, indirectly and very much more importantly, we live on it. 
One might think that the intelligentsia of the race would be slightly 
pleased to learn that this essential substance, present in such a low 
concentration in our environment, is becoming a little less sparse, 
for what-ever reason. Let us remember that we now know that planet 
earth is 4.5 billion years old. The accurate record of the 
concentration of CO2 over seventy years is less than a blink
comparatively. However, by a convoluted, complex (and hence seemingly 
scientific) argument, we are being frightened collectively by the 
"greenhouse effect". This newsletter doesn't give me room to recount 
the multitude of studies and thousands of references in support of 
this position, let alone refute the avalanche of hysterical guilt 
cries from press through television. The greenhouse effect has become 
the latest national guilt-mania. Suffice it to say that over the same 
observed period (70 yrs) there is no evidence that earth has warmed 
up. (The slight warming which has occurred in cities, 1oC, is due to 
heating our homes and factories.) As for melting the ice caps and and 
shifting California's climate to Washington, there is also no evidence 
for this. It is ironic that media godzillas who are now on the guilt 
train (gravy train?) of hothouse warming have just recently got off 
the guilt buggy of an oncoming ice age. It doesn't matter (to them) 
what the scare is, as long as ordinary people can be confounded by 
complicated arguments which imply scientific accuracy and unchallenged 
wisdom. The usual tool for this stun tactic is:- "a simulated computer 
model has shown..." By the way, simulated computer models can be 
programmed to show anything desired. 
What good is CO2?
       A slightly sophisticated way of saying it is: "Between 0% and 
1% concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere serves as the limiting 
substrate for photosynthesis." In non-arcane language it means that 
CO2 is a fertilizer for everything that grows.
A deal.
       Suppose I was to offer you, whatever your trade or business, a 
30% increase in your productivity? In contrast to Faust's flirtation 
with Mephistopheles, you do not need to sell your soul. Adam and his 
progeny were sent to work for all eternity for taking the apple. You 
are working, but your workload is not increased by taking this deal. 
As for payment P there is none. When you gain this bounty, so will 
every other person and all their descendents amongst all the races all 
over the globe. There is more. Not only will our species benefit, 
every living creature in the animal kingdom and even in the plant 
kingdom, more so in fact, will gain from this bounty. Will you take 
it? All that is required is that you do nothing! This offer is a 
reflection of what the increased fertilization from CO2 is doing. 

Malthus, two hundred years later.
       In 1798 Malthus argued that infinite hopes for human happiness 
must be vain, for population will always tend to outrun the growth of 
production. Geometrical increase versus arithmetical increase. The 
natural lot of humanity is misery and vice. Two hundred years have 
proven the English pessimist wrong. Perhaps CO2 has something to do 
with it?

The evidence from crops.
       Several studies have indicated an increase in the biosphere 
from the rising level of CO2 in the atmosphere. These include wheat 
yields from Australia, Soya yield in the US and the size of tree rings 
in the Mid-West.

No one wants to spoil the environment. 
       Converts to new religions are known for "I am holier than 
thou." Those amongst our intellectuals who cloak themselves in the 
puritan robes of environmentalism have a problem with a virus. I have
called this infection the virus of collective guilt. Let us look at 
the track record of these environmentalists. (It is an interesting 
aside that with this newspeak they hijack the moral high ground).

Ozone.
       It is estimated that chlorofluorocarbons damage the ozone 
layer which protects us from some forms of radiation. This claim is 
tenuous. What is certain is that $135 billion worth of industrial 
equipment in the USA alone is dependent on this industry and the 
industrial contribution to the supposed loss of ozone is even more 
speculative than the problem itself.

Acid Rain.
       There is uncertainty if it is responsible for any harm at all. 
For what it is worth, volcanoes release most of the acid. Last year 12 
million tons of hydrochloric acid were released from them and that 
does not take into account bad years like the one when mount St Helens 
blew its top. 600,000 metric tons of formic acid were released by ants 
last year, equal to the combined effect of automobiles, refuse 
combustion and vegetation.
       Nuclear power gains by serendipity. We read in our papers that 
making electricity from uranium is less bad than from coal because 
coal discharges CO2 into the atmosphere. This roller coaster of gain 
and loss for the wrong reasons is dangerous. Nuclear power is safe and 
does not pollute, at least in comparison with coal. The problems with 
coal are the release of sulphur, particulate matter and radioactivity. 
It is likely that the starving millions in Asia and Africa have been 
fed by this so called hazardous material.

So what of the future?
       Earth is a stable planet. The biosphere in which we live has a 
track record of 3.5 billion years and there is sedimentary record, and 
I use the word in a broad sense, of several major disruptions or 
catastrophic events, the nature of which we do not understand and it 
is a planetary play we could have no influence on. There is also 
evidence that the concentration of CO2  in mother atmosphere has been 
higher for long periods of primeval earth. It is likely that the most 
lush periods of our biosphere were fed by a high concentration of this 
universal nutrient.

The heating earth scenario.
       What about the 4oC temperature rise we are told about? As I 
have mentioned, first of all there is no evidence of a change in that 
direction. The factors which influence that trapping of reflected heat 
in the atmosphere P the greenhouse by analogy P are multiple; they 
include water vapor, suspended particulate matter, other trace gases 
and CO2. There is substantial evidence that the most important factor 
is the albedo or water vapor and that has an effect of reflecting 
cosmic radiation, which exceeds the trapping. As I mentioned earlier, 
computer modelling lends itself to the inexorable feedback of the 
information supplied, which you and I have reduced to "garbage in P 
garbage out". In fact, so marked is this phenomenon that here is:

Dorman's Law No 5. When you are sold something on the basis of 
computer modelling P anticipate a snow job. The first of these was the 
Club of Rome in 1970 telling us the end is nigh (three years at that
time) and we would run out of all sorts of resources,.
The puritan's challenge.
       If gaining something for nothing is wicked, surely in the 
overall order of things, there cannot be good behind everyone gaining 
something for nothing. This virus idea of collectivist conscience is 
behind the one sided presentation of the news about the environment in 
general and about the supposed hazard of CO2 in particular. The 
specialists in the field are dumbfounded by the torrent of 
disinformation. Being experts in subjects, such as micro-climatology 
and being part of another contemporary syndrome, that of 
specialization, they are diffident before the media and scurry around 
publishing learned referenced articles in obscure journals. In the 
meantime the legislatures of states and countries P mark my words and 
watch the media P international agreements and world governments will 
protect us P read regulate us P from these computer model hazards.

Conclusion.
A misguided conscience can be a handicap.

Here are some of the references:
Carbon dioxide and global change: Earth in transition. Idso S B. 
Institute of Biospheric Research, 631 E. Laguna Dr. Tempe, Az. 85282.
The limits to growth, A report for the Club of Rome's project on the 
predicament of mankind. Meadows D H. et al. Signet books N Y. 1972.
Mankind at the turning point. Mesarovic M, Pestel E. The second report 
of the Club of Rome. Hutchison London  1975.

                          *       *      *

Return to the ground floor of this tower
Return to the Main Courtyard
Return to Fort Freedom's home page