Just what motivates the United Nations International Panel on Climate Control to selectively cherry pick their data to support the contention that we must stop the industrial age and return to the horse and buggy era? What is most alarming is that the findings of the IPCC have been seized upon by the environmental protection community especially environmental outfits such as the Friends of the Earth (FOE) to advance their personal agendas.
However and unfortunately, for the FOE and their environmental brethren, the IPCC’s findings and the Kyoto Treaty has been exposed as a sad indictment against the intellectual integrity and credibility of the environmental protection community, based as they were, on scientific fraud and data manipulation!
For instance, the historical records of CO2 concentrations used by the IPCC as proof of a direct correlation of rising CO2 to human industrial activity and as justification for its call for the reduction of greenhouse gasses has been exposed as a fraud!
Research by a Freiburg, Germany professor, Ernst-Georg Beck of the Merian-Schule, shows that the IPCC construed and concocted the pre-1957 CO 2 record from measurements on recently drilled ice cores, ignoring more than 90,000 direct measurements by chemical methods from 1857 to 1957.(i)
By contrast, the measurements hoked up from ice cores, show a rather steady increase in CO2 levels, conveniently corresponding to the preconceived idea that increasing industrial activity has produced a steady CO2 increase. As Beck's collaborator, Dr. Zbigniew Jaworowski, former senior advisor to the Polish radiation monitoring service and a veteran mountaineer who has excavated ice from 17 glaciers on six continents, has shown, the gaseous inclusions in ice cores have no validity as historical proxies for atmospheric concentrations. The continual freezing, refreezing, and pressurization of ice columns drastically alters the original atmospheric concentrations of the gas bubbles. (ii)
In a thorough review of 175 scientific papers, Professor Beck found that the founders of modern greenhouse theory, Guy Stewart Callendar and Charles David Keeling (a special idol of Al Gore's), had completely ignored careful and systematic measurements by some of the most famous names of physical chemistry, among them several Nobel prizewinners.
Measurements by these chemists showed that today's atmospheric CO2 concentration of about 380 parts per million (ppm) has been exceeded in the past, including a period from 1936 to 1944, when the CO2 levels varied from 393.0 to 454.7 ppm. There were also measurements, accurate to within 3%, of 375.00 ppm in 1885 (Hempel in Dresden), 390.0 in 1866 (Gorup, Erlangen), and 416.0 in 1857 and 1858 (von Gilm, Innsbruck). Ironically, although the 1940s increase correlated with a period of average atmospheric warming, Beck and others have shown that the warming preceded the increase in CO2 concentrations.
The data reviewed by Beck came mainly from the Northern Hemisphere, geographically spread from Alaska over Europe to Poona, India, nearly all taken from rural areas or the periphery of towns without contamination by industry, at a measuring height of approximately 2 meters above ground. Evaluation of chemical methods revealed a maximum error of 3% down to 1% in the best cases.
According to the greenhouse warming theory, the increase of atmospheric CO2 concentration caused by human activity, such as burning of fossil fuels, acts like the glass in a greenhouse to prevent the re-radiation of solar heat from near the Earth's surface. Although such an effect exists, carbon dioxide is low on the list of greenhouse gases, accounting for at most 2 or 3 percent of the greenhouse effect. By far, the most important greenhouse gas is water vapor. However, water in the form of clouds can reflect back solar radiation, causing temperature reduction. There are so many interrelated effects that correlating global temperature to CO2 concentration is like attempting to predict the value of a hedge fund by the phases of the Moon!
None of the foregoing should concern the Palm Oil Truth Foundation, except that dubious environmental outfits such as the FOE have been using the issue of global warming to launch spurious anti-palm oil campaigns. In a “report” called “Malaysian Palm Oil: Green Gold or Greenwash?” the FOE makes the tenuous and false claim that palm oil is causing massive deforestation and consequently, global warming. Just why the FOE should single out palm oil for these outrageously dishonest attacks is intriguing and baffling, to say the least.
For one, palm oil is clearly one of the most productive oilseeds around, yielding more than 4.5 metric tons of edible oil per hectare planted. This incredible yield does not sound remarkable until it is juxtaposed against the typical yield of its competitors, such as soy, sunflower and canola, which typically yields less than 0.5 metric tons per hectare. Logic dictates that such high productivity should mean that palm oil requires far less acreage to produce the same unit of edible oil as its competitors.
This probably explains why Malaysia, despite being the world’s largest producer of palm oil for more than a century can still boast forest cover of more than 65%. Read that gain – one hundred years of palm oil cultivation by the world’s largest producer still leaves 65% forest cover. This might not sound like much, until we compare it against the typical 20% forest cover in the countries of the industrial west from which the “paragons of environmental virtue” such as the FOE hails!
Further, if CO2 sequestration is an issue, palm oil has built in advantageous as the palm oil tree, being a tree should be far superior in CO2 sequestration than any of its competitors.
Yet again, as a “perennial” crop with a productive lifespan of up to 30 years, palm oil is harvested annually and does not require re-planting until several decades later. This compares favorably with its competitors, all of which universally require annual replanting with the attendant tilling, soil preparation and consequent massive use of chemical fertilizers that such replanting entails and typically mandates.
Any environmental organization worth its salt should therefore be encouraging the production of palm oil in view of its obvious environmental edge over its competitors. That palm oil should be subjected to these spurious and desperate attacks by environmental outfits such as the FOE is, indeed, irrational and illogical.
At the risk of sounding facetious, the Palm Oil Truth Foundation is moved to ask whether it is precisely this very high productivity and csonsequently high price competitiveness of the commodity by and of itself, that is attracting these attacks from environmental organizations
such as the FOE? Could this be the real reason for the incessant attacks by the FOE?
To put it bluntly, could FOE be a “hired gun”, paid to stop the growth of palm oil? THE END.
References:
(i) "180 years accurate CO2 air gas analysis by chemical methods (short version),"an
unofficial extract, Dipl. Biol. Ernst-Georg Beck, Merian-Schule Freiburg, 8/2006 www.warwickhughes.com/agri/BeckCO2 short.pdf, and private communication.
(ii) See "Ice Core Data Show No Carbon Dioxide Increase" by Zbigniew Jaworowski and other
references at http://www.21stcenturysciencetech.com under the topic "Global Warming."
Article Directory : http://www.articlecube.com
