Video: Global Warming Swindle

teotwaki

Excelsior!
Haggis said:
I can remeber being in elementry school in the mid 70's and being taught all about how in thirty years that glaciers would extend as far down south as here in NW PA and that there would be hundreds of feet of ice covering our ruined towns. There were videos and worksheets, there was even a "expert" that came and visited our school to educate us poor dimwitted hick childrens. If an "expert" (ie. educated idiot) tells you something on any subject first check to see what his monetary interest in the subject is and you will most likely find someone looking for a handout (govt. grant or your donation) to finance himself instead of actually doing something productive with his time.

I just don't know..... science is so much more accurate now than 30 years ago. How could they be wrong this time??? :yikes: :exclaim: :hehe:
 

paulj

Expedition Leader
Since I don't recall much about coming ice age warnings in the 70s - even though I was in college at the time - I did a Google search on 'coming ice age 1970', and came up with quite a few items.

There's a wiki entry:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_cooling
and Real Climate article
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php?p=94
and
http://www.wmconnolley.org.uk/sci/iceage/

The gist in all those is that while there were some alarmist news magazine articles, there was little in the peer reviewed scientific literature. There had been something of a cooling trend at that time. There were also new discoveries and theories about the ice ages, and interglacial times, but nothing that would point to glacial ice rolling out of Canada in a matter of decades.

paulj
 

calamaridog

Expedition Leader
I love the GW debate. Reminds me of the Crest commercials where 9 out of 10 dentists prefer Crest.

I'm not saying that human activities don't impact the environment, but I'll say that the actual understanding of the extent of the problem is grossly overstated. Study of GW is definitely in the infancy stage.

Scientists who have no knowledge of the subject are asked to lend credibility to the position that is espoused by people like Al Gore.

And in the academic community you can't debate the merits of these arguements without getting hamstrung. It is VERY unpopular in the academic community to question GW. Unpopular in the media too.

This whole thing has taken on a life of its own. The local paper is running articles every week saying that GW is responsible for pretty much everything.
 

teotwaki

Excelsior!
Global Cooling references GALORE

PaulJ,

Fairly poor returns I'll agree. Google will sometimes only find as much as a searcher wants it to find within the limits of the overly specific search terms.
What I am sharing here is that "Global Cooling" was very much the fad of the day as is "Global Warming" today. Lets not get off on tangents about the validity of those studies but instead look at the "climate of fear" that was stoked.

In January1972 a working conference of top European and American investigators was convened at Brown University to discuss “The Present Interglacial, How and when will it End?”[1] Soon fashionable panic was about global cooling. In 1974 Fortune magazine warned that the temperatures had already dropped about 2.7° F (ca. 1,5°C) since the 1940s. Newsweek magazine published an article “The Cooling World”[2] from which following remarks is taken:

“There are ominous signs that the Earth’s weather patterns have begun to change dramatically and that these changes may portend a drastic decline in food production– with serious political implications for just about every nation on Earth.

A survey completed last year by Dr. Murray Mitchell of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration reveals a drop of half a degree in average ground temperatures in the Northern Hemisphere between 1945 and 1968.

Just what causes the onset of major and minor ice ages remains a mystery.

Climatologists are pessimistic that political leaders will take any positive action to compensate for the climatic change, or even to allay its effects. The longer the planners delay, the more difficult will they find it to cope with climatic change once the results become grim reality.”


(WOW. Sounds SO Familiar) :)

On Dec. 3, 1972 the head of the Dept. Of Geological Sciences of Brown University even wrote a letter to the President of the United States, warning him of global cooling.

“…a global deterioration of climate, by order of magnitude larger than any hitherto experienced by civilized mankind, is a very real possibility and indeed may be due very soon. The cooling has natural cause and falls within the rank of processes which produced the last ice age. This is a surprising result based largely on recent studies of deep sea sediments.”


more..........

Science 9 May 1975:
Vol. 188. no. 4188, pp. 535 - 541
DOI: 10.1126/science.188.4188.535


Weather Variability, Climatic Change, and Grain Production
Louis M. Thompson 1
1 College of Agriculture, Iowa State University, Ames 50010

A cooling trend in the world's climate would have serious effects in the monsoon belts depending on whether or not the recent changes in snow and ice cover in the polar regions were responsible for the droughts in Africa and the failure of the monsoons over South Asia. The cooling and shrinking of the atmosphere at the higher latitudes is believed to have brought the subtropical anticyclones nearer to the tropical rainbelt and have caused a shifting of the monsoon belt.


and more of That 70's Global Cooling show:

— Science, “Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide and Aerosols: Effects of Large Increases on Global Climate,” July 9, 1971

t is projected that man’s potential to pollute will increase six to eightfold in the next 50 years. If this increased rate of injection of particulate matter in the atmosphere should raise the present global background opacity by a factor of 4, our calculations suggest a decrease in global temperature by as much as 3.5° K [3.5° C]. Such a large decrease in the average surface temperature of the Earth, sustained over a period of a few years, is believed to be sufficient to trigger an ice age.

— Business Week, “The world’s climate is getting worse” August 2, 1976
Climatologists have advanced a number of theories to explain why the world’s climate is getting worse. The dominant school maintains that the world is becoming cooler, resulting in a loss of arable land at the higher latitudes and major shifts in rainfall patterns. A second school believes the world is warming, with equally serious consequences.

— National Geographic, “What’s Happening to Our Climate?” November 1976
Most scientists agree that today’s ice movement may reflect a worldwide cooling trend, but their explanations vary widely.

— National Science Board, 1972
Judging from the record of the past interglacial ages, the present time of high temperatures should be drawing to an end … leading into the next glacial age....

Time Magazine, June 24, 1974
"Climatological Cassandras are becoming increasingly apprehensive, for the weather aberrations they are studying may be the harbinger of another ice age."

Christian Science Monitor, August 27, 1974
"Warning: Earth's Climate is Changing Faster than Even Experts Expect"
Reported that "glaciers have begun to advance"; "growing seasons in England and Scandinavia are getting shorter"; and "the North Atlantic is cooling down about as fast as an ocean can cool".

Science News, March 1, 1975
"The cooling since 1940 has been large enough and consistent enough that it will not soon be reversed, and we are unlikely to quickly regain the 'very extraordinary period of warmth' that preceded it."

Newsweek, April 28, 1975
"The Cooling World"
"There are ominous signs that the Earth’s weather patterns have begun to change dramatically and that these changes may portend a drastic decline in food production – with serious political implications for just about every nation on Earth. The drop in food output could begin quite soon, perhaps only 10 years from now."

International Wildlife, July-August, 1975
"But the sense of the discoveries is that there is no reason why the ice age should not start in earnest in our lifetime."

New York Times, May 21, 1975
"Scientists Ponder Why World's Climate is Changing; A Major Cooling Widely Considered to Be Inevitable"


http://www.junkscience.com/mar06/Time_AnotherIceAge_June241974.pdf

http://www.businessandmedia.org/specialreports/2006/fireandice/fireandice.asp

And even BEFORE the 70's the fads flipp-flopped numerous times:


GLOBAL COOLING: 1890s-1930s
The Times, February 24, 1895
"Geologists Think the World May Be Frozen Up Again"
Fears of a "second glacial period" brought on by increases in northern glaciers and the severity of Scandinavia's climate.

New York Times, October 7, 1912
"Prof. Schmidt Warns Us of an Encroaching Ice Age"

Los Angeles Times, June 28, 1923
"The possibility of another Ice Age already having started ... is admitted by men of first rank in the scientific world, men specially qualified to speak."

Chicago Tribune, August 9, 1923
"Scientist says Arctic ice will wipe out Canada."

Time Magazine, September 10, 1923
"The discoveries of changes in the sun's heat and the southward advance of glaciers in recent years have given rise to conjectures of the possible advent of a new ice age."

New York Times, September 18, 1924
"MacMillan Reports Signs of New Ice Age"

GLOBAL WARMING: 1930s-1960s

New York Times, March 27, 1933
"America in Longest Warm Spell Since 1776; Temperature Line Records a 25-Year Rise"

Time Magazine, January 2, 1939
"Gaffers who claim that winters were harder when they were boys are quite right.... weather men have no doubt that the world at least for the time being is growing warmer."

Time Magazine, 1951
Noted that permafrost in Russia was receding northward at 100 yards per year.

New York Times, 1952
Reported global warming studies citing the "trump card" as melting glaciers. All the great ice sheets stated to be in retreat.

U.S. News and World Report, January 18, 1954
"[W]inters are getting milder, summers drier. Glaciers are receding, deserts growing."


I'll close with this Google Gem which has been argued about endlessly:

Dr. Schneider..."We need to get broadbased support to capture the public's imagination, which entails getting loads of media attention. We have to offer up scary scenarios, make simplified, dramatic statements, and make little mention of any doubts we might have"

Dr. Stephen Schneider of Stanford University and National Center for Atmospheric Research, Colorado, and Dr.Reid Bryson, Director of Environmental Studies at University of Wisconsin, were leading voices of the scientific community warning about global cooling. The theory actually blamed dust and particles, not CO2, for blocking sunlight and freezing the planet. The dust effect was adding to natural astronomical forces. Greenhouse effect from CO2 was supposed to help, but could not overcome the problem.
 

GeoRoss

Adventurer
teotwaki said:
Time Magazine has written an embarassed rebuttal of a previous 1974 Global Cooling shill piece. So did Newsweek about their 1975 article. In 30 years they'll do the same for Global Warming.


There is a world of difference getting scientific information from the scientific literature and mainstream media. One of the biggest shortcomings in science is in the accurate dissemination of information. I rarely see or read anything on science related subjects that don't have mistakes, are poorly organized or don't skew the results.


In the 70's there was a marked reduction or leveling off of solar activity (sunspot period length). Temperatures rise had leveled off or even delclined abit for about 30 years. We knew from the past periodicity of glaciation that we were due for another large glaciation event if the same periodicity remained the same. That led to the speculation that another cooling event may be in evidence.

What happen though is temperatures began to rise again in the mid 70's in the absence of increase solar event length.
 

teotwaki

Excelsior!
GeoRoss said:
There is a world of difference getting scientific information from the scientific literature and mainstream media. One of the biggest shortcomings in science is in the accurate dissemination of information. I rarely see or read anything on science related subjects that don't have mistakes, are poorly organized or don't skew the results.


In the 70's there was a marked reduction or leveling off of solar activity (sunspot period length). Temperatures rise had leveled off or even delclined abit for about 30 years. We knew from the past periodicity of glaciation that we were due for another large glaciation event if the same periodicity remained the same. That led to the speculation that another cooling event may be in evidence.

What happen though is temperatures began to rise again in the mid 70's in the absence of increase solar event length.

Thanks G-R, I appreciate your comments as well as PaulJ's. I learn more and think more due to each post. Your comments reinforce what I have believed all along and probably why this thread was started: Let science proceed, remove the politics and agendas, give the research adequate time without speculation and conclusion-jumping leading us to pass bogus laws and kill progress.
 

calamaridog

Expedition Leader
If we could all just agree not to jump to conclusions, you know, measure the data for a good long time, say perhaps several ten thousand years or so:shakin:
 

Forum statistics

Threads
188,420
Messages
2,904,538
Members
230,329
Latest member
Marka1
Top