Global Warming Again!

["Fritz A. Seiler" <faseiler@NMIA.COM>]

Hi All,



        Here we go again!  The "Global Warming Craze" breaks out again.

And, a few days ago, we got into EM fields again!  What is it with this

time of year?  I get a definite feeling of more than just "deja vu", I

get a feeling of "Alle Jahre wieder!" (Every year again).

        Now, I have been told last year that I am not a climate expert,

nor do I have real expertise in low EM fields.  True enough.  But I have

something else that I share with most of you: I am a scientist.  Also I

am a strict believer in the Scientific Method.  And that gives me a

yardstick to go by when I am not really knowledgeable in the field of

discussion.

        That yardstick makes easy pickings of EM field effects: So many

expert panels have found that there is nothing to it, that I don't have

to spend time with it.  But, if you cannot measure it, then there is

nothing to say except for one basic thing:  If the excess risk due to EM

field exposures is zero, you will find results that are both positive

and negative, but are compatible with zero within the errors.  AND THIS

IS EXACTLY WHAT WE FIND!!  So lets finally bury that dead horse!

        Now to Global Warming.  Something like a billion dollars a year

and in the last Clinton-Gore year  $2.3 billion have been spent.

BILLIONS OF DOLLARS!!  So, the question should be allowed: What has come

out of it?

        As I see it, a lot of science has been done, and I am sure that

some of it was good science.  That much money, however, makes it equally

safe to say that there is also a lot of shoddy science that has been

done, done to please Gore, the man with the money bag.  (A few of my

friends were told by their respective bosses to shut up and not to say

or even less write something that would displease him!  The institute's

funding depends on it, you know!).

        Not being an expert, let me apply the Scientific Method to it:

Has anything been accomplished in all these years that advances science

along the lines of the Scientific Method?

        NOTHING THAT I HAVE HEARD OF!!  Nothing has come out of  that

gargantuan effort that can be characterized by something like the

statement: "The prediction of Model XYZ has been shown to be in

agreement with the latest measurements." Well, maybe there is something

that could have been presented that way.  But there wasn't!  How many

$billions is that per non-existing scientifically supportable result?

        So, all I am left with is that I know: Ever since the middle of

the Little Ice Age near 1600 AD, the climate has warmed up by about 1K

and it is obviously continuing to do so.

        For the first two centuries, even almost three centuries, man

certainly has had nothing to do with it.  A very likely culprit has been

found in the increasing magnetic activity of the sun.  So what we need

are predictions and corresponding measurements, else most of the rest is

pseudo-science at best.



Best regards



Fritz



--



 " The American Republic will endure until the day Congress

 discovers that it can bribe the Public with the Public's money."

                                       Alexis de Tocqueville

                                       Democracy in America



***************************



Fritz A. Seiler, Ph.D.

Sigma Five Consulting

P.O. Box 1709

Los Lunas, NM 87031, USA

Tel.    505-866-5193

Fax.    505-866-5197

e-mail: faseiler@nmia.com



***************************





************************************************************************

You are currently subscribed to the Radsafe mailing list. To unsubscribe,

send an e-mail to Majordomo@list.vanderbilt.edu  Put the text "unsubscribe

radsafe" (no quote marks) in the body of the e-mail, with no subject line.