James DeMeo's OBRL-News Blog

OBRL Quarterly Newsletter #19

August 2008

Announcing the infrequent, Quarterly Newsletter from the

Orgone Biophysical Research Lab (OBRL) in Ashland, Oregon, USA.

Henceforth, we will post our Quarterlies in a special

"Newsletter" section of our orgonelab.org website.

Click Here for the August Newsletter:

Please responsibly distribute this Announcement to other interested persons, groups and websites.

James DeMeo, Ph.D., Director of OBRL

Contents of the August Newsletter:

TOPICS

1.  In Memoriam: Dr. Eva Reich has died.
2.  30th Year Anniversary for OBRL.

3.  Mark Your Calendar!  Summer 2009 Conference on New Research in Orgonomy

4.  Summer 2008 Research at OBRL: Director's Report
5.  Visiting Scientists at OBRL
6.  New Construction at OBRL

7.  Seeking Volunteer Translators for French, Arabic, Farsi, and other World Languages for the Saharasia Summary Article.

8.  Saharasia on an Interactive Internet History Website?
9.  Visit to the Wilhelm Reich Archives, Harvard Univ.

10.  New DVD Production Available - John Ott: Exploring the Spectrum: The Effects of Natural and Artificial Light on Living Organisms

11.  Once More, About the OBRL On-Line Bookstore.
12.  Please Review our Fundraising Letter

13. Due to the high costs of printing and mailing, internet and email are today our primary communications methods.

Click Here for the August Newsletter:

        http://www.orgonelab.org/OBRLNewsletter/OBRLAugust2008.pdf

Please responsibly distribute this Announcement to other interested persons, groups and websites.

If you received this Newsletter announcement in error, and do not want it, a simple return email requesting to be removed is all that is necessary.  Our email address is a real one, and all requests are read by a living human being, and will be promptly honored and attended to.

Thanks very much for your attention and support.

James DeMeo, Ph.D.

Orgone Biophysical Research Lab

Ashland, Oregon, USA

www.orgonelab.org

www.saharasia.org

Be prepared for this coming winter... go to the various items below for the full reports.

The Sun still has not shown much activity over months. Completely spot-free, which, if it persists, is exactly what happened in past times of increasingly cold-snowy-glacial conditions. See here: http://www.spaceweather.com/

J.D.

+++++

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/section/1/story.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10527882
Turoa claims largest snow base ever

Skifield operators at Turoa on Mt Ruapehu are welcoming this season's record dumps of snow. Mt Ruapehu is claiming the biggest snow base ever recorded for a New Zealand skifield with over 4.5m of snow on the ground.
Ruapehu Alpine Lifts, operator of Mt Ruapehu ski area, was celebrating what it called a major milestone today.
The snow measuring stake at Turoa previously only stood at 380cm so had to be extended to measure today's 455cm snow base.
The Whakapapa side of the mountain also had 350cm of snow, the biggest since 1995.
... *snip*


http://news.mainetoday.com/updates/031815.html
Brrr! Farmers' Almanac says cold winter ahead
Households worried about the high cost of keeping warm this winter will draw little comfort from the Farmers' Almanac, which predicts below-average temperatures for most of the U.S.
"Numb's the word," says the 192-year-old publication, which claims an accuracy rate of 80 to 85 percent for its forecasts that are prepared two years in advance.
The almanac's 2009 edition, which goes on sale Tuesday, says at least two-thirds of the country can expect colder than average temperatures, with only the Far West and Southeast in line for near-normal readings.
... *snip*


http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2008/04/080430-global-cooling.html
Cooler Climate May Hit N. America, Europe Next Decade
Brian Handwerk
for National Geographic News
Shifting ocean currents could throw some cold water on global warming over the next decade, a new study suggests.
Europe and North America may soon experience chillier temperatures, thanks to natural North Atlantic variations that could temporarily mask the effects of human-driven, or anthropogenic, climate change.
"We believe that ocean currents and systems could, in the short term, change global warming patterns and even mean temperatures," said Noel Keenlyside of the Leibniz Institute of Marine Sciences in Kiel, Germany.
Keenlyside explained that since record keeping began in the 19th century, the North Atlantic climate has changed in natural cycles that last a decade or more.
These shifts are likely associated, at least in part, with natural variations in ocean currents. (Related: "Ocean 'Thermostat' May Be Secret Weapon Against Warming [February 8, 2008].)
... *snip*


http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=64734
HEAT OF THE MOMENT
31,000 scientists reject 'global warming' agenda
'Mr. Gore's movie has claims no informed expert endorses'
More than 31,000 scientists across the U.S. - including more than 9,000 Ph.D.s in fields such as atmospheric science, climatology, Earth science, environment and dozens of other specialties - have signed a petition rejecting "global warming," the assumption that the human production of greenhouse gases is damaging Earth's climate.
"There is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane, or other greenhouse gases is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth's atmosphere and disruption of the Earth's climate," the petition states. "Moreover, there is substantial scientific evidence that increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide produce many beneficial effects upon the natural plant and animal environments of the Earth."
The Petition Project actually was launched nearly 10 years ago, when the first few thousand signatures were assembled. Then, between 1999 and 2007, the list of signatures grew gradually without any special effort or campaign.
... *snip*

ANOTHER BRIGHT IDEA

1 broken bulb pushes contamination to 300 times EPA limits

Poisonous vapor so bad, researchers recommend families no longer use CFLs

Compact fluorescent light bulbs have long been known to contain poisonous liquid mercury, but a study released earlier this year shows the level of mercury vapor released from broken bulbs skyrockets past accepted safety levels.

Following a story reported by WND last year about a Maine woman quoted $2,000 for cleaning up a broken fluorescent bulb, or CFL, in her home, the Maine Department of Environmental Protection studied the dangers of broken CFLs and the adequacy of recommended cleanup procedures.

The results were stunning: Breaking a single compact fluorescent bulb on the floor can spike mercury vapor levels in a room - particularly at a child's height - to over 300 times the EPA's standard accepted safety level.

Furthermore, for days after a CFL has been broken, vacuuming or simply crawling across a carpeted floor where the bulb was broken can cause mercury vapor levels to shoot back upwards of 100 times the accepted level of safety.

....

No smoking hot spot

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24036736-7583,00.html

David Evans | July 18, 2008

I DEVOTED six years to carbon accounting, building models for the Australian Greenhouse Office. I am the rocket scientist who wrote the carbon accounting model (FullCAM) that measures Australia's compliance with the Kyoto Protocol, in the land use change and forestry sector.

FullCAM models carbon flows in plants, mulch, debris, soils and agricultural products, using inputs such as climate data, plant physiology and satellite data. I've been following the global warming debate closely for years.

When I started that job in 1999 the evidence that carbon emissions caused global warming seemed pretty good: CO2 is a greenhouse gas, the old ice core data, no other suspects.

The evidence was not conclusive, but why wait until we were certain when it appeared we needed to act quickly? Soon government and the scientific community were working together and lots of science research jobs were created. We scientists had political support, the ear of government, big budgets, and we felt fairly important and useful (well, I did anyway). It was great. We were working to save the planet.

But since 1999 new evidence has seriously weakened the case that carbon emissions are the main cause of global warming, and by 2007 the evidence was pretty conclusive that carbon played only a minor role and was not the main cause of the recent global warming. As Lord Keynes famously said, "When the facts change, I change my mind. What do you do, sir?"

There has not been a public debate about the causes of global warming and most of the public and our decision makers are not aware of the most basic salient facts:

1. The greenhouse signature is missing. We have been looking and measuring for years, and cannot find it.

Each possible cause of global warming has a different pattern of where in the planet the warming occurs first and the most. The signature of an increased greenhouse effect is a hot spot about 10km up in the atmosphere over the tropics. We have been measuring the atmosphere for decades using radiosondes: weather balloons with thermometers that radio back the temperature as the balloon ascends through the atmosphere. They show no hot spot. Whatsoever.

If there is no hot spot then an increased greenhouse effect is not the cause of global warming. So we know for sure that carbon emissions are not a significant cause of the global warming. If we had found the greenhouse signature then I would be an alarmist again.

When the signature was found to be missing in 2007 (after the latest IPCC report), alarmists objected that maybe the readings of the radiosonde thermometers might not be accurate and maybe the hot spot was there but had gone undetected. Yet hundreds of radiosondes have given the same answer, so statistically it is not possible that they missed the hot spot.

Recently the alarmists have suggested we ignore the radiosonde thermometers, but instead take the radiosonde wind measurements, apply a theory about wind shear, and run the results through their computers to estimate the temperatures. They then say that the results show that we cannot rule out the presence of a hot spot. If you believe that you'd believe anything.

2. There is no evidence to support the idea that carbon emissions cause significant global warming. None. There is plenty of evidence that global warming has occurred, and theory suggests that carbon emissions should raise temperatures (though by how much is hotly disputed) but there are no observations by anyone that implicate carbon emissions as a significant cause of the recent global warming.

3. The satellites that measure the world's temperature all say that the warming trend ended in 2001, and that the temperature has dropped about 0.6C in the past year (to the temperature of 1980). Land-based temperature readings are corrupted by the "urban heat island" effect: urban areas encroaching on thermometer stations warm the micro-climate around the thermometer, due to vegetation changes, concrete, cars, houses. Satellite data is the only temperature data we can trust, but it only goes back to 1979. NASA reports only land-based data, and reports a modest warming trend and recent cooling. The other three global temperature records use a mix of satellite and land measurements, or satellite only, and they all show no warming since 2001 and a recent cooling.

4. The new ice cores show that in the past six global warmings over the past half a million years, the temperature rises occurred on average 800 years before the accompanying rise in atmospheric carbon. Which says something important about which was cause and which was effect.

None of these points are controversial. The alarmist scientists agree with them, though they would dispute their relevance.

The last point was known and past dispute by 2003, yet Al Gore made his movie in 2005 and presented the ice cores as the sole reason for believing that carbon emissions cause global warming. In any other political context our cynical and experienced press corps would surely have called this dishonest and widely questioned the politician's assertion.

Until now the global warming debate has merely been an academic matter of little interest. Now that it matters, we should debate the causes of global warming.

So far that debate has just consisted of a simple sleight of hand: show evidence of global warming, and while the audience is stunned at the implications, simply assert that it is due to carbon emissions.

In the minds of the audience, the evidence that global warming has occurred becomes conflated with the alleged cause, and the audience hasn't noticed that the cause was merely asserted, not proved.

If there really was any evidence that carbon emissions caused global warming, don't you think we would have heard all about it ad nauseam by now?

The world has spent $50 billion on global warming since 1990, and we have not found any actual evidence that carbon emissions cause global warming. Evidence consists of observations made by someone at some time that supports the idea that carbon emissions cause global warming. Computer models and theoretical calculations are not evidence, they are just theory.

What is going to happen over the next decade as global temperatures continue not to rise? The Labor Government is about to deliberately wreck the economy in order to reduce carbon emissions. If the reasons later turn out to be bogus, the electorate is not going to re-elect a Labor government for a long time. When it comes to light that the carbon scare was known to be bogus in 2008, the ALP is going to be regarded as criminally negligent or ideologically stupid for not having seen through it. And if the Liberals support the general thrust of their actions, they will be seen likewise.

The onus should be on those who want to change things to provide evidence for why the changes are necessary. The Australian public is eventually going to have to be told the evidence anyway, so it might as well be told before wrecking the economy.

Dr David Evans was a consultant to the Australian Greenhouse Office from 1999 to 2005.

I would like people to donate if they wish in Eva's memory to the wonderful local woman and children's public health nonprofit. She started the birth control clinic part out of a closet office, her medical bag, and a small travel trailer equipped with an exam table bag, (before it was an organized nonprofit).

They struggle to provide crucial services such a fee in home parenting visitors to pregnant couples and young mothers, dental care for poor children and their families, maternal child nurses, birth control, sex education, and other services to one of the poorest areas in the country.

I serve on the board and feel that they do what Eva always thought most necessary- what needs to be done in a concrete way, here and now. 

So, if you like, you could let people know of her death and my wish is that donations be sent in her memory to:

Downeast Health Services

52 Christian Ridge Road

Ellsworth, Maine 04640

http://www.downeasthealth.org 

Renata Moise