|
Ivan W.
Parkins |
|
To order Dr. Parkins book, Perspectives For
American Society Contact |
|
©Ivan W. Parkins 2009, All articles, text, web pages property of
Ivan W. Parkins. Use of any material
requires permission of the author and can be obtained by contacting,
info@americanpoliticalcommentary.com |
|
About Ivan W. Parkins: Dr. Parkins is a retired professor of
Political Science from Central Michigan University. He received his PhD from the University of
Chicago and is a graduate of the United States Naval Academy. Dr. Parkins served as a naval officer
during WWII aboard the battleship Alabama.
He is a recent widower with three daughters, 3 grand children and 2
great grand children. Dr. Parkins has
written extensively, having authored 3 books and a newspaper opinion column
for many years. |
|
Front Page |
|
ATMOSPHERIC CHANGES: POLITICS AND SCIENCE By Ivan W. Parkins Understanding our problems regarding
atmospheric changes is greatly complicated by the vigorous participation of
political action groups. That seems
especially unfortunate when one notes that similar political participation
produced the hasty and extreme measure of banning DDT. And that led to what may be the most
horrendous and unnecessary sacrifice of human lives in the history of mankind. The evidence regarding atmospheric
dangers is greater, and the dangers more widely shared by all of us. Fortunately, Asians seeking economic growth
are less willing to accept remedies advocated by “more sophisticated”
Westerners than Africans were to accept the DDT ban. Furthermore, the evidence regarding
atmospheric problems is vastly more convoluted than that regarding DDT. Even allowing for its many currents and
eddies, it is simplistic to think of one atmosphere serving the world. Yes, some poisoning of it should be a
concern to all of us. But, many of the
most intense problems are largely man-made, and local in effects. When it comes to broader problems of
temperature and CO2, we all share in them even when we breathe. But, there are many reasons to question how
significant man’s share is as compared to variations in the Sun’s emissions,
variations in the orbit of the Earth, and emissions from the Earth’s
interior. Most of the evidence offered by
scientists regarding atmospheric warming and cooling is true. Our problem is
that it is also fragmentary and contradictory. There are actually dozens of factors
contributing to cooling/warming of the Earth and their comparative importance
is often unclear. For instance, how
significant are the mostly unexplored seepages and eruptions from Earth’s
core that occur deep within the oceans?
The numerous geological and biological evidences of time cycles in
atmospheric conditions are significant, but overlapping and not very precise
as guides to our future. We need to study environmental
conditions. We need, also, to minimize
the special interest politics of our conclusions and responses. Let’s at least keep the costs of
atmospheric politics below that of major wars, the thing that those who
obtained the ban on DDT failed to do. I.W. Parkins
070809 |
|
The Politics of Science Global Warming, DDT and Other Issues |
|
SCIENCE, SCIENTISTS, AND THE PUBLIC; MY VIEW By Ivan W. Parkins The tiny high school that I attended did
not offer basic physics; I got that by driving, walking, or hitch-hiking to a
neighboring town. Major state and, at
the Naval Academy, national testing placed me high in comprehension of basic
science. Prior to military service, I
believed that I would seek employment in the sciences. And I did continue to
read a little and to attend occasional public lectures. A couple of the latter were by Enrico Fermi
on nuclear physics. He, incidentally, was an exceptionally lucid lecturer. Some years later, as the ranking
professor in a former community college being transformed into a four year
state school (1963-4), I attempted to promote an earth sciences program, not
in my department or jurisdiction.
Earth sciences were becoming more important; both state and national
governments had major facilities relating to that in our vicinity; the local
geography was especially interesting.
That proposal was vetoed by our college president on grounds that such
a program might overshadow the humanities, his openly avowed personal
favorite. I offer those things as evidence that I
am a better than average informed-layman; I am not a scientist. But, I do not apologize for supposing that much of the American
public is so lacking in scientific knowledge that it allows itself to be
”taken to the cleaners” by people claiming to rely upon science. Some additional experiences during my
teaching career support my skepticism.
One new colleague with whom I had only a speaking acquaintance
claimed, falsely, a doctorate in physics.
It was discovered and he was fired.
Another, a charming man, who occupied the only endowed chair in our
small institution, left quietly after three years, when the expert committee
brought in to evaluate his cancer research declared it to be worthless. While teaching a course in government
and law as they relate to business, I used a text by Murray Weidenbaum. He had been Nixon’s Assistant Secretary of
the Treasury and became a member of Reagan’s first Council of Economic
Advisors. Perhaps his foremost effort was to promote careful cost/benefit
analysis of regulations. In the text
that I used he cited the example of a university bio-chemist who informed the
Consumer Products Safety Commission that he had discovered a link between a
spray adhesive widely used by hobbyists with birth defects. Two major chemical manufacturers were
notified and further investigations began.
Outside experts were unable to reproduce the dangerous evidence, or
even to see the evidence that the original scientist claimed to see on his
few slides. Meanwhile, about $100,000,000 of
business was curtailed, thousands of hobbyists were inconvenienced, several
of them cited fears of birth defects as reasons for abortions, and an unknown
number of workers lost their jobs. In
about a year the manufacture of those products resumed. I.W. Parkins 070809 |
|
THE MAN-MADE QUESTION By Ivan W. Parkins One source on global warming that I am
happy to recommend is UNSTOPPABLE GLOBAL WARMING:
EVERY 1500 YEARS, by Fred S. Singer and Dennis T. Avery. They offer a summary of extensive evidence
that the earth has undergone numerous cycles of temperature change, and that
one of them is warming about every 1500 years. Chapter 6, Fraud and Deceit in Selling
Man-Made Global Warming, begins with David Deming, author of a study in
SCIENCE, testifying before the Senate Committee on Public Works, December 6,
2006. He relates two instances of
hostility that he encountered from persons who wanted him to endorse a more
man-made approach. Regarding the “Green movement” the
authors conclude: “It really isn’t about ‘global warming’ or about protecting
Nature. It’s about shutting down the world’s leading economies . . .”. |
|
Other Notes: QUESTION: What President signed into law?: -The Environmental
Quality Policy Act -The Water Quality
Improvement Act -The National Air
Quality Standards Act -The Resource Recovery
Act -The Consumer Product
Safety Act Hint: He won reelection by
the largest poplar plurality, and by the third largest majority of the total
vote, in our history. Giveaway: He was also the
only President forced to resign the office.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Recently (June 26) THE
WALL STREET JOURNAL cited California, New York, and New Jersey as “antigrowth
models.” That is, as states that have
high taxes and are suffering large losses of citizens, especially the most
affluent citizens. Another item that the Journal might have
mentioned is that two-thirds of President Obama’s popular plurality in the
2008 election came from those same three states. |
|
We know what happened
to President Nixon, but how much do we know about why? Nixon resigned rather than risk a bitter
and nationally divisive impeachment fight, which it appeared that he would
lose. Chief among the charges pending
against him was abuse of power. And,
one of the most substantial items in that charge was that he had impounded
i.e. refused to spend, about half of the funds which Congress had
appropriated for Senator Muskie’s Clean Water Act. Even the Supreme Court held against the
President in that matter. Years later, it occurred to me that
there should be new evidence re that charge.
I checked THE STATISTICAL ABSTRACT for what we actually did spend. With Nixon out of the way, we spent just
about what he had recommended. I.W.Parkins 020809 |
|
GREAT
AWAKENING? By Ivan W. Parkins This is a reprint from February of
this year Is environmentalism a third
manifestation of the Great Awakening phenomenon that American historians have
identified? The first, in the
eighteenth century, was mainly religious and educationally focused, a wave of
enthusiasm that contributed to America’s sense of identity and desire for
independence. The second, in the
nineteenth century, was religious and academic, and it contributed to the
anti-slavery movement. Now, Iain
Murray contends,” . . environmentalism [has] begun to replace liberal
Christianity as the Left’s motivating religious force.” He further asserts
that environmentalism, in the fashion of Martin Luther, values “faith” more
than good works. Murray’s book, THE REALLY INCONVIENT TRUTHS, carries the subtitle
“Seven Environmental Catastrophes Liberals Don’t Want You To Know
About—Because They Helped Cause Them.”
The first and most gross catastrophe is the ban on DDT, with its huge,
and continuing, toll of human lives, especially among Earth’s poorest people. I had not remembered that a DDT ban was
enacted in Michigan the year that I moved here. That preceded the international ban by five
years. And, Dutch elm disease is a
continuing problem. Murray refers to research that shows
sexually mutilated and declining fish populations suffer far more from the
traces of birth-control chemicals in urban sewage than they do from
industrial wastes. Environmentalists
remain much more interested in attacking industry than in the real problem. One especially interesting passage in the
book describes the history of a natural wonder, identified, purchased, and
preserved (with public access) for more than two centuries. It is Natural Bridge in Virginia, and its
original “warden” was Thomas Jefferson. Not only is environmentalism now highly
organized, its top organizations pay their CEOs annual salaries ranging from
$125,000 to $700,000. Murray cites ten
such organizations with recently reported top salaries averaging just over
$200,000. Most significant of his criticisms is the
contention that environmentalist work and money is focused, not directly upon
protection of the environment, but indirectly, into lobbying and law suits
directing governments to behave in ways that the environmentalists favor,
largely towards socialism. Is environmentalism, today, a third Great
Awakening, or is it a larger edition of THE BIG SLEEP—confusing, corrupt, and
deadly? |