Jennifer Marohasy

a forum for the discussion of issues concerning the natural environment

Archives for March 30, 2006

What About the Sun & Max Planck & Nature?

By

David posted the following comment this morning at this blog:

“We know that the globe is warming very rapidly (~0.2C/decade), and that this warming has occured in the absence of any natural forcing process and is occuring about 10 times faster than the sustained warming at the end of the last ice age.”

And it reminded me of this press release from the Max Planck Institute which is only a couple of years old now.

Titled ‘The Sun is More Active Now than Over the Last 8000 Years’ it includes comment that:

“An international team of scientists has reconstructed the Sun’s activity over the last 11 millennia and forecasts decreased activity within a few decades

The activity of the Sun over the last 11,400 years, i.e., back to the end of the last ice age on Earth, has now for the first time been reconstructed quantitatively by an international group of researchers led by Sami K. Solanki from the Max Planck Institute for Solar System Research (Katlenburg-Lindau, Germany). The scientists have analyzed the radioactive isotopes in trees that lived thousands of years ago. As the scientists from Germany, Finland, and Switzerland report in the current issue of the science journal Nature from October 28, one needs to go back over 8,000 years in order to find a time when the Sun was, on average, as active as in the last 60 years. Based on a statistical study of earlier periods of increased solar activity, the researchers predict that the current level of high solar activity will probably continue only for a few more decades.

I was also reminded of this Max Planck media release when I read page 3 of The Australian on 27th March and a piece titled ‘Beachgoers back latest theory on brighter sun’. This story quotes a Martin Wild of the Institute of Atmospheric and Climate Science in Zurich, Switzerland.

The High Cost of Pseudo-Environmentalism

By

The results of following the policy prescriptions of pseudo-environmentalists like Rachel Carson and Paul Ehrlich is not a cleaner environment but inefficient use of scarce resources, according to a new video featuring Walter Williams, professor of economics at George Mason University, and Dr. Fred Singer from the Science and Environmental Policy Project.

I have not seen the video, but provide this information on behalf of a reader of this blog. The issue is certainly one often discussed here, but the language used by Williams and Singer is perhaps new?

Titled ‘The high cost of pseudo-environmentalism’ the converation between Williams and Singer apparently focuses on the issue of whether or not the United States is taking the right approach to the environment.

The promo for the CD/DVD which costs US$25 includes:

“The discussants agree that much of what passes for environmentalism today is based on parochial interests rather than creditable science and the common good.

Williams and Singer criticize Rachel Carson and Paul Ehrlich for their Malthusian predictions that have proven to be grossly inaccurate.

The opportunity cost of pseudo-environmentalism is the good that could have been done in other areas of public policy. Specific examples of imprudent policies, like the banning of DDT, are discussed. Dr. Singer questions the scientific validity of much environmentalism. He agrees with Walter Williams that environmentalism has been used to advocate government control of people’s lives much like the discredited ideologies of socialism and communism. Both discussants believe that providing the media with accurate information about the environment would help educate the public about the dangers of pseudo-environmentalism.”