CERN CLOUDs the Future for Global Warming Alarmists

by James A. Wanliss, Ph.D., Associate Professor of Physics, Presbyterian College; Senior Fellow, Cornwall Alliance; author, Resisting the Green Dragon: Dominion, Not Death

The European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN), established in Geneva in 1954, is a leading laboratory for physics research, involving over 2,400 employees and nearly 8,000 physicists and engineers from universities around the world. In July the head of CERN issued an interesting gag order, prohibiting scientists from drawing conclusions from a major experiment. The director is not speaking about leaking results, since scientists often do, in fact, just that by making conference presentations prior to publication. What worried the director was discussion of the whether the results might be counter to the politically popular paradigm that human CO2 emissions will end life as we know it. What should have worried the director is the possibility that scientists would quash exciting results because of politics. In an interview with a German newspaper, he said the following:

I have asked the colleagues to present the results clearly, but not to interpret them. That would go immediately into the highly political arena of the climate change debate. One has to make clear that cosmic radiation is only one of many parameters.

This is an odd way of interfering with science. Was it because the results were suspect, the scientists incompetent or corrupt, or that public discussion might compromise future experiments as competing laboratories used new results to leapfrog over the CERN team? Were it any one of these things which prompted the director to issue his gag order, one might at least have some sympathy for his position. The first results of the experiment, published [last] week, suggest another possibility.

CLOUD

The CLOUD (“Cosmics Leaving Outdoor Droplets”) experiment examines the role that energetic particles from deep space play in cloud formation. CLOUD is designed to study the effects of cosmic rays on aerosols, cloud droplets and ice particles, under precisely controlled laboratory conditions.

Had the CLOUD results falsified the hypothesis that cosmic rays seed clouds, thus influencing climate, would the director have issued a gag order? It seems odd that merely stating ‘No,’ the hypothesis is falsified would be worthy of a gag. And if the hypothesis was not falsified, if it appears that cosmic rays do seed clouds, why would that positive result, indeed a very exciting scientific result, be worthy of a gag order?

Was the director concerned that the results would undermine the already extremely weak arguments that global warming from roughly the middle of the 1970s to near the end of the 1990s (there has been none since) was almost entirely the result of human-caused processes? The CLOUD experiment could then turn into an embarrassment for the many governments funding CERN, each of which had committed enormous political and economic capital to ameliorating the alleged effects of human economic activity on the climate of our planet. …

The CLOUD experiment

CLOUD’s genesis is in the mid-1990s, when space physicist Hendrik Svensmark hypothesized that cosmic rays as mediated by solar effects, play a very large role on the physics of climate, and could explain the warming and cooling trends. Svensmark’s research, performed at the Danish Space Research Institute, was met by immediate outrage. Hardly a moment thereafter, the chairman of the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) denounced Svensmark, and presumably also his theory, saying, “I find the move from this pair scientifically extremely naïve and irresponsible.”

The only possible reason for saying this, is the recognition that the whole issue of global warming, as it was then called, was politically charged and carefully calculated to have specific political ramifications. Svensmark was presumably ‘irresponsible’ because the data which he marshaled was not favorable to the hypothesis being marketed by the IPCC, and therefore could derail the whole political process which had theretofore been so carefully orchestrated. Svensmark was the child pointing out that the Emperor appeared naked as a jay bird. … [Read the rest.]

Why Do Your Homework? Being Scientifically Well-Informed

Dr. Steve Hayward reminds all of us to be personally involved in studying the issue of environmental science. Those who do not learn for themselves risk losing their liberty and prosperity.

Recent Significant Developments

Science & Ecology

Global Cooling Forecast (Larry Vardiman; Institute for Creation Research)
Solar Cycle 25, anticipated to be quiet, might bring global cooling.

New Report on Global Warming Contradicts U.N.’s IPCC (Various Authors; Heartland Institute)
CO2Science.org has released an updated version of Climate Change Reconsidered: A Report of the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change for 2011. The full book is expected out in 2013. The report states, “the net effect of continued warming and rising carbon dioxide concentrations in the atmosphere is most likely to be beneficial to humans, plants, and wildlife" and “natural causes are very likely to be [the] dominant (factor in climate change).”

Economics & Energy

Germans Face Blackout Risk [By Abandoning Nuclear Power] (Beate Preuschoff & Jan Hromadko; The Wall Street Journal)
Germany's rapid exit from nuclear power following the crisis of Japan’s Fukushima nuclear plant raises risk of winter blackouts. Approximately one-quarter of German power is nuclear, but the government hopes to eliminate the nation’s seventeen nuclear power facilities by 2022.

'Green Jobs' vs. Real Energy Jobs (Stephen Moore; Wall Street Journal)
“President Obama is expected to seek another $250 billion or so in new stimulus funds next week, with plenty of money for clean energy and the creation of so-called green jobs. Never mind that no one can seem to find many Americans who got green jobs as a result of the original stimulus spending …. we now have a national energy policy directing our resources away from cheap, efficient and increasingly abundant fuels like coal, oil and natural gas while we channel billions of tax dollars to 500-year-old energy technologies like wind power that can't possibly scale up to power a modern-day industrial economy. That's a shame.” (Read the rest.)

Religion & Ethics

Religions’ Reactions to Financial Realities (John Baden; FREE)
When some people on the religious Left formed a “Circle of Protection” to protect government programs for the poor from budget cuts, others responded by forming “Christians for a Sustainable Economy,” writing an open letter to the President and Congress explaining that protecting programs isn’t the same as protecting the poor. Often, indeed, protecting programs means harming the poor. Here Dr. John Baden of the Foundation for Research on Economics and the Environment ably discusses the difference and assesses the two groups.

Obama's Enron (Rich Lowry; National Review)
“Plenty of venture capitalists made foolish bets on Solyndra, but the federal government was the most reckless. The Obama administration wanted to throw money at the likes of Solyndra without due diligence, or much diligence at all. In 2008, the Government Accountability Office warned that the Energy Department loan program—created in a 2005 energy bill—had inadequate safeguards. Nonetheless, within 60 days of becoming energy secretary, Steven Chu put Uncle Sam on the hook for Solyndra. According to the Wall Street Journal, $527 million of the $535 million federal loan has been drawn down, with a bankruptcy court set to determine how much the feds will recover. Chu is fortunate that taxpayers can’t bring shareholder lawsuits against the federal government. President Bush was flayed for the Enron bankruptcy, based on his tenuous ties to the firm. If the same media rules applied, Solyndra would be Obama’s Enron, given his active promotion of the company and his lavish funding of it. A prodigious Obama-Biden fundraiser is a major backer of the failed concern.” Related: “The loan guarantees were controversial from the outset. The chief investor in Solyndra was George Kaiser, a major Obama fund-raiser.”—Linda Chavez, in Chicago Sun-Times

Can the World Still Feed Itself? (Brian M. Carney; Wall Street Journal)
Yes, says Nestle’s chairman, but not if we burn food for fuel, fear genetic advances, and fail to charge for water. “…five decades ago, when the global population was half what it is today, catastrophists like Paul Ehrlich were warning that the world faced mass starvation on a biblical scale. Today, with nearly seven billion mouths to feed, we produce so much food that we think nothing of burning tons of it for fuel. Or at least we think nothing of it in the West. … But if the price of corn or flour doubles or triples in the Third World, where … people ‘are spending 80% of [their] disposable income on food,’ hundreds of millions of people go hungry.” Readers of this newsletter will recall that Indur Goklany estimates that U.S. biofuel mandates and subsidies cause nearly 200,000 premature deaths annually in developing countries.

Law, Regulation, & Litigation

Paper and Plastic: When Political Ideology Trumps Sound Science (Jon Entine; The American)
No good science supports fears of harm from bisphenol A (aka BPA), but activists demand it be banned, and politicians cave.

Three Principles of Environmental Regulation & Litigation
Economist Dr. Timothy Terrell, a Contributing Writer for the Cornwall Alliance, lectured on property rights and environmental regulation recently at the Ludwig von Mises Institute’s “Mises University.” He set forth three principles for environmental regulation and litigation: (1) The burden of proof lies with the plaintiff. (2) The plaintiff must demonstrate causality of harm. (3) Market devaluation of property cannot be the basis for a lawsuit; actual physical invasion or damage of property must be proved. All three principles contrast with common assumptions of the environmental movement, as illustrated, e.g., in The International Programme on the State of the Ocean's 2011 Summary Workshop Report, Annex 2 (p. 13).

Politics & Debate

41% Say Global Warming Causes Extreme Weather, 43% Disagree (Rasmussen Reports)
Rasmussen poll shows “73% of Democrats say global warming leads to severe weather conditions,” but “66% of Republicans and 53% of adults not affiliated with either political party disagree.” Who’s right? Not the Democrats, as Roger Pielke Jr. demonstrates in an article containing the following three graphs showing no positive correlation between global warming and frequency or intensity of severe weather events (click to enlarge).

Mental Illness Rise Linked to Climate Change (Christopher Cook; Western Free Press)
Recent report predicting rise in mental illness because of global warming withers under scrutiny.

Meet the Critics: Joanne Nova

National Religious Broadcasters' NRB Network Airs Resisting the Green Dragon
Selections from the Cornwall Alliance’s groundbreaking Resisting the Green Dragon video series are airing on Tuesdays at 8 p.m. ET on the NRB Network, viewable over DirecTV’s Channel 378, Sky Angel’s Channel 126, and streaming live at http://www.nrbnetwork.tv/watchonline.

Order Resisting the Green Dragon for Church, School, or Small Group

More and more churches and other groups are using Cornwall Alliance’s groundbreaking 13-part video series around the country. With its printable discussion guide, it provides full curriculum for a Sunday school quarter. The accompanying book helps teachers and others dig deeper.

Join Cornwall Alliance Facebook Group Page

To keep up with relevant developments on a daily basis, join Cornwall Alliance’s Facebook Group page, where we and group members will post and discuss items daily.

Landmark Documents from the Cornwall Alliance

E. Calvin Beisner, Ph.D., Founder and National Spokesman
Cornwall Alliance for the Stewardship of Creation

Information in this newsletter is for scholarly and educational use only and may not be copied or reproduced for any other purposes without prior permission of the copyright holders.