by Don Wittig
“You can picture a conveyor belt going around its axis. The belt falls off its edge. As it falls downward, the rest of the conveyor belt is pulled behind.
“Salinity is also increased by surface winds. These winds are especially high at the polar regions. The high winds cause evaporation. The water becomes more saline. You have the same cause and effect. The more dense, more saline, heavier water then descends. They pull the currents and the cycle continues.
“You also have upwelling, downwelling, and overturning of these currents. But we don’t need to go there, do we Mr. Mack?”
“Not at this time, Dr. Waters. Tell us the effect of thermohaline circulation, say for instance, on the European continent?”
“In my opinion, Europe receives fifteen to twenty-five percent of its warming energy from the north Atlantic draft. This north Atlantic current is the result of the ocean conveyor. Some others refer to the north Atlantic drift, but I digress.”
“What about the oceans as heat or cold absorbers?”
“Mr. Mack, you must realize that water is seven hundred and seventy-three times more dense than the atmosphere. The oceans can store over one hundred times more heat than the atmosphere. Naturally, the oceans absorb tremendous amounts of solar energy. They also absorb a lot of carbon dioxide. Therefore, because of the dense capacity of the ocean and seas to absorb and transfer heat, ocean conveyors have a dramatic impact on climate, climate change, global warming, and global cooling. The Gulf Stream alone has over one thousand times the generating capacity of the United States.
“The Atlantic and Pacific Oceans also export water vapor through the atmosphere. In other words, seawater evaporates from the Atlantic and is deposited into the Pacific. The salinity of the Atlantic would increase and vice versa unless there were cross circulation. As the salt builds up, a strong conveyor also builds up. These fluctuations are not scientifically predictable. I do believe that historically we have a one thousand four hundred and seventy to fifteen hundred year oscillation of the ocean conveyor. Other scientists have determined this period of oscillation and I agree.”
“Dr. Waters, can you give us some examples of the effects of the ocean conveyor?”
“Yes, of course. Most recently we came out of what is called the Little Ice Age in about 1870. This small ice age is variously thought to have lasted from about 1343 to 1870 AD. In 1355, Earth had her worst winter in five hundred years. Before that we had a Medieval Warm Period, say from about 800 or 900 AD to 1250 to 1300. During this Medieval Warm Period, temperatures were actually greater than they are today, some estimate one degree Celsius warmer. Then by the height, or should I say depth, of the Little Ice Age, temperatures dropped. Sea ice increased and solar radiation was reduced by at least one percent. During the subsequent warming trend, air temperatures have been up about point seven degrees Celsius.
“My main point is that throughout the Holocene period, that is the last eleven thousand years, we have periods of cooling or glaciation and periods of warming, called inter-glaciation. For the last one hundred thousand years, we have even greater cycles of warming and cooling.”
“Dr. Waters, can you give an example of what you mean?”
“One example of inter-glaciation is the Vikings’ colonization of Greenland. During the Medieval warming period, the Vikings settled in both southern and eastern parts of Greenland. During the Little Ice Age, surface temperatures plunged as much as ten to twenty degrees Celsius, forcing the Vikings first to leave the more northern parts of Greenland and then eventually southern Greenland. Evidence also suggests sudden climatic changes. Some paleontologists suggest the Vikings were forced to eat their own dogs in an attempt to survive the suddenly bitter winters. Ice packs clogged their normal navigational routes. The Vikings abandoned Greenland. And we think it happened in a hurry.
“We believe something similar happened during the Younger Dryas about twelve thousand years ago. Temperatures then were about five degrees Celsius colder than they are now. Over the centuries, Greenland and Antarctica have been alternating hot and cold, back and forth.”
“So no one should be upset today if Greenland is warming and losing ice?”
“No. It’s a normal historical cycle.”
“Dr. Waters, going back to the density of water, what are some of the other properties of seawater?”
“Well, seawater has the highest heat capacity of all solids and liquids except ammonia. This prevents extreme ranges in temperature. Without the density and stabilizing qualities of the oceans, we would have much more dramatic temperature ranges. Seawater has the highest rate of evaporation of all substances. This is extremely important in heat and water transfer of the atmosphere. The surface tension of seawater is the highest of all liquids. It dissolves more substance in larger amounts than any other liquid. And seawater’s conduction of heat is the highest of all liquids.”
“What is the density of seawater compared to the atmospheric content of carbon dioxide?”
“We have already discussed the fact that water is seven hundred and seventy-three times more dense than the atmosphere. CO2 presently makes up about point zero three seven percent of the atmosphere. Another way to say that is CO2 makes up about three hundred and seventy parts per million of the atmosphere. It’s called a trace component of air. So if I understood your question, the atmospheric content of CO2 compared to density of water would be point zero zero zero zero four seven eight percent. Numerically that is 0.0000478%. That’s not really the scientific way to compare such matters, as you probably know.”
“Aside from solar radiation, what other ways does the ocean absorb heat?”
“We know of the many active volcanoes on the continents. There are also undersea volcanoes that spew megatons of lava into the oceans. We can really see this north of the Galapagos Islands. There is a large area of hydrothermal vents along the crest of a ridge northeast of the islands. It was only discovered in 1977. But there are hundreds of underwater volcanoes and vents pouring out lava, steam, CO2, methane, and other chemicals that heat the oceans.
“Hawaii, for example, is an actual volcano that is over three thousand feet taller than Mount Everest. That is if you measure from the sea floor. Science is just beginning to study the vast unknown of the ocean’s depths.”
“Dr. Waters, as a result of your many years of climatological studies, do you have an opinion whether the Army Corps of Engineers was negligent for not expecting and preparing for a warmer climate and its effects on New Orleans?”
O’Reilly jumped to his feet. “Objection. No foundation. Invading the province of the jury.”
Judge Martin promptly ruled. “Your objection to no foundation is overruled. Mr. Mack, rephrase your question regarding negligence.”
“Yes, your honor.” Mack respectfully deferred to Judge Martin. “Let me put it this way. Dr. Waters, based upon your expertise and many years of climatological studies, do you have an opinion whether or not the Corps should have anticipated global warming as a result of man-made carbon dioxide?”
O’Reilly wished he had not objected. Every time either of the titan attorneys objected, their adversary parried with a potent counterpunch. He quickly decided to forego another objection.
Waters replied, “There is no way the Corps or any other policymaking group, including the president, Congress, or especially the United Nations, can or should expect global warming. First of all, I and many at our institute believe we are currently in a cooling cycle. As I explained before, we enjoy or suffer from many climatological cycles. These cycles include the ocean’s currents, solar radiation, atmospheric changes, earth core phenomena, and many other variables. Remember that CO2 is a tiny trace element in the atmosphere. To blame global warming, or cooling, on humankind’s uses of fossil fuel is unscientific and pure political propaganda.”
“Dr. Waters, why would scientists and politicians want to promote their theories of global warming or climate change?”
“In a word, Mr. Mack, control.�
�
“Thank you, Dr. Waters. Pass the witness.”
29 On the Other Hand
“D R. WATERS, MY NAME IS Richard O’Reilly. I have visited your institute in Panama. Not even all of your colleagues at the institute agree with you, do they?”
“No. I encourage diversity of viewpoints at the lab. Scientific inquiry should never close its mind to new ideas, new studies, and particularly critical review.”
“I see. But you have come around to accept the concept of global warming and the human influence on warming by the use of fossil fuels?”
“There can be no doubt that Earth has seen many cycles of warming and cooling. Until recently, we seem to have been in a warming period since about 1870 when we left the Little Ice Age behind. While the use of fossil fuels may have added about a hundred pm of CO2, that represents less than four one-hundredths of a single percentage point of the atmosphere. And I am not convinced that mankind has caused even that slight level of the past increase in our atmospheric temperatures. For example, in the 1930s there was warming typical of natural climate variation. We have seen this warming again in the 1990s. The last few years we’ve seen more cooling again.
“Some scientists have noted previous periods of much higher levels of carbon dioxide. Again, for example in the Eocene times, between thirty-five million and fifty million years ago, alligators lived near the Arctic Circle. There are fossils of palm trees in
KATRINA: THE JURY ANSWERS Wyoming. During the Eocene, carbon dioxide levels were as much as five times higher than today. I don’t have to tell you, humans were not pushing much CO2 into the atmosphere when alligators roamed the poles. There are a lot of politics in global warming, and I prefer to stay clear of those influences. What’s worse, some socalled scientists like to cook the numbers. For example, they’ll use a twelve-year span to show warming when actually there was cooling for ten of those years.”
Waters continued, “When I wrote the paper you refer to about warming and fossil fuels, I did not have the most recent data about the latest cooling period that I now believe we have entered.”
“But Doctor, you have written that we must seriously look at the warming issue. And you suggest that carbon dioxide could be part of the problem. Not so?”
“Quite so. But I was speaking more in terms of climate change. It is politically incorrect to work for a foundation or institute that depends on donations and simultaneously be opposed to the idea of global warming or in favor of destruction of the planet by humans.”
“So you disavow your writings about global warming?” “No, I simply give you context for much of the debate on this issue. It’s like being against a living wage or being in favor of terrorism. Few who wish to survive in the public arena of ideas can freely take those types of public positions.”
“I see. Should we infer that you really don’t believe the burning of fossil fuel causes global warming?”
“I may imply, Mr. O’Reilly, but you infer.” Several jurors frowned at Waters’ weak attempt at humor. “We must continue our studies to better understand the interplay of solar radiation, ocean conveyors, reductions of sulfur and ozone, volcanos on land and sea, meteor showers, comets, naturally occurring climate cycles, water vapors, movement of the tectonic plates, and yes, the increased use of fossil fuels. I do not believe the short-term increase or decrease of carbon dioxide is a standalone causal indicator for anthropomorphic or man-made global warming or cooling.”
“You also know that the oceans store vast amounts of CO2, do you not?”
“Yes, the oceans, plants, forests, glaciers, earth, all act to contain CO2.”
“Some scientists say that during Eocene, volcanoes, continental drifts, and even the melting of glaciers contributed a lot of CO2 to the atmosphere, which in turn multiplied or amplified the warming trends back when the Earth was much warmer. Do you disagree?”
“Not necessarily. Just a hundred years ago, scientists knew little about plate tectonics. They argued that the continents did not drift. Now almost all argue the opposite. So almost in our lifetime, the so-called science went from denying tectonic plate movement to embracing it. Times change and the science changes. Volcanoes are much more complex. They can plunge the Earth’s temperature almost overnight. A supper volcano or mega volcano like Yellowstone could wipe out this continent or even plunge the world into a deep freeze. Then, in the natural cycle of things, you could experience a vast warming trend. Does nature-produced CO2 contribute to that warming? Perhaps it is one of many factors, including thermohaline circulation and movement of the tectonic plates. Climate change is not a simple matter of too many SUVs, Mr. O’Reilly.”
“Then Doctor, what do you argue is the cause of glacial melting at the poles?”
“There is disagreement about whether the total mass of ice in Greenland is deteriorating. Our past winter may have actually seen an increase of ice in Greenland. But assuming de-glaciation, then the oceans would be infused with freshwater. Freshwater would reduce salinity, as I explained. This would in turn reduce the ocean conveyor over time. The ultimate effect, all other things being equal, would be to actually cool parts of the Northern Hemisphere. Some global warming scientists warn that a large melt of ice could cause a catastrophic collapse of temperatures. The additional freshwater could actually stop the conveyor and cause rapid global cooling. London could become like the ice sheets in Canada. The ocean conveyors are the great mediators of our climate system. They can warm and they can cool. In the meantime, some observe that the ice sheets and ice mass in Antarctica are actually increasing.
“I do agree with you that since the Little Ice Age the glaciers of the Swiss Alps have retreated over ninety meters. I can’t agree with you that atmospheric warming is necessarily the cause. You must at least take into consideration patterns of moisture and rainfall as well as what ocean currents were doing in the relevant time parameters. Other studies have shown similar glacial retreats twenty-four hundred years ago and fifteen hundred years ago. We may have had similar de-glaciation forty-three hundred, sixty-six hundred, and eighty-seven hundred years ago. If we were to graph this warming and cooling, we would have a picture of adjacent W’s. May I draw on the board? Like this: WWWW.”
Waters stretched his spindly legs and glanced at the jury. They seemed impressed, except for two women sitting next to each other in the back row. They seemed to be whispering about something.
“Doctor, other scientists hold that past temperatures were warmer than today but that some two hundred years ago temperatures cooled slightly. Do you think that is consistent with your findings?”
“Actually, it’s quite consistent. Two hundred years ago would put us before the end of the Little Ice Age.”
“Finally, Dr. Waters, how do you explain findings that suggest that during the Medieval Warm Period temperatures in Antarctica were three degrees Celsius cooler at the same time?”
“Quite simply, this could be a direct result of the ocean conveyors. These conveyors may have produced a reverse oscillation so that one pole is warming while the other is cooling. It demonstrates the tremendous effects of ocean water, which is much more powerful as a climatological determinate than mere atmosphere.”
“So according to your theory, the Earth is getting colder and warmer at the same time?”
“Would that it were so simple. But yes, ocean currents warm and cool. The oscillation dramatically affects the climate much more so than the troposphere or stratosphere. Even if the global warming theories are correct, the increase of freshwater into the ocean conveyors could cause a shutdown of the circulation. In turn, that would cause either a gradual or sudden new ice age.”
“Thank you Doctor, nothing further at this time.” O’Reilly was very disappointed in his cross-examination. Waters was a very experienced testifier and blocked O’Reilly at almost every turn. It was a game of chess by a student against the teacher. O’Reilly tried to stay around the edges, not to get too deep with Waters. But Waters drew him in and w
as able to exploit his superior expertise. I never should have played his game, O’Reilly mused. At least Julia and Tiashi were not impressed. Don’t think Waters is their type. He doesn’t measure up to Deerman. O’Reilly glanced over to Melinda. She was not amused.
2 O’Reilly pulled his team together to debrief the day’s evidence. “I don’t like it,” O’Reilly began. “Waters hurt us with any skeptical or half-asleep juror. We better find us one more star to pin up after Mack finishes covering the jury with his volcanic ash. He sure knows how to blow smoke. Any ideas?” The plaintiffs’ team worked late into the evening hours, poring over potential rebuttal witnesses. O’Reilly usually had more of his way with the opposition’s witnesses, but something wasn’t clicking. Waters was an excellent counterpuncher and too easily turned O’Reilly’s questions into opportunities for the defense. O’Reilly was glad he was gone. Tomorrow had to be a better day.
Melinda looked like she was shell-shocked. Two lawyers had played with her personal life like a game of chess and chicken. Deerman had covered his tracks, and the team probably had picked up two jurors for the duration. But was that enough? As for Melinda, she had long since reached the glacial period after the very brief Deerman/Lewis middle-age warming.
30 Back to the Core Concern
O’R EILLY SMILED AS LIEUTENANT GENERAL Walker took the stand. The patronizing choice by Mack was so obvious that O’Reilly hoped for a backlash from the four remaining African-American jurors.
Mack had successfully rid the jury panel of a majority of black folks because they lived in the affected areas like the Ninth Ward or had expressed strong negative opinions about the Corps, FEMA, or the federal government’s handling of Katrina. Mack had pushed Judge Martin as far as he could, but he was still stuck with Tiashi and three confederates.
Now his false hope of at least a neutral Tiashi was dashed, and he began to be concerned, however slightly, for the first time. Hopefully, General Walker could help with the native New Orleanians. Mack’s ploy in countering with Walker was common for trial lawyers, who like to use any affinity or possible connection in order to persuade or dissuade.