It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Climate change the coming Ice Age .

page: 1
11
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 6 2015 @ 07:34 PM
link   
This is a history lesson .


In the 70s and 80s before personal computers. The people controlling our emotions then had a different venue to transmit their fear. A different venue you might say ? It was called a newspaper . I realize some of the millennium generation have not heard of these even fewer have actually touched one . [sic]

They used these evil mechanisms along with similar instruments that we refered to as book/magazines. But the powers to be soon figured out that what you wrote down in these venues could not be deleted. Nope it was there as a permanent record of their misdeeds .

Those evil perpetrators scared many people with their doom scenarios . One of the largest I remember was the prediction of the coming Ice Age .


Here's a newspaper clipping from that era does anyone notice anything similar to today's scenarios ?







During the 1970s the media promoted global cooling alarmism with dire threats of a new ice age. Extreme weather events were hyped as signs of the coming apocalypse and man-made pollution was blamed as the cause.

Environmental extremists called for everything from outlawing the internal combustion engine to communist style population controls. This media hype was found in newspapers, magazines, books and on television.


I fully realize that because of the limited availability of paper printed information in the current age. Some people are only able to get there information from YouTube so I will oblige them .






I recall the years I spent championing this cause. I felt like I was banging my head against the wall trying to enlighten the older generation . They laughed at me and told me I was nuts.

I shouted from my soapbox you will see by the year 2000 we will all be living in igloos !!!!

How humbled I am now to admit I was wrong. I was taken in by flawed science and a movie .

There's more links here I suggest you check them out and compare them to current dogma .



One of multiple sources


Before I get flamed I will tell you I believe in climate change . I will just never believe anyone pushing a agenda again .



Edit;

For new members that don't know me. Believe me the sarcasm in that post is no coincidence . Lol







edit on 6-6-2015 by Greathouse because: (no reason given)




posted on Jun, 6 2015 @ 07:39 PM
link   
Aren't we technically still in a mini ice age?



posted on Jun, 6 2015 @ 07:39 PM
link   
didn't nasa just the other day publish a report
something about temps slightly falling the last 18 years as MEASURED and
CO2 having climbed to its highest amount in hundreds of thousands perhaps millions of years
in every one of those last 18 years


CO2 concentrations haven't been this high in millions of years.

climate.nasa.gov...

Updated Global Temperature: No global warming for 17 years, 6 months – (No Warming for 210 Months)

www.climatedepot.com...

simple as that

from link 1

CO2 concentrations haven't been this high in millions of years. Even more alarming is the rate of increase in the last five decades and the fact that CO2 stays in the atmosphere for hundreds or thousands of years. This milestone is a wake up call that our actions in response to climate change need to match the persistent rise in CO2.

edit on Satpm6b20156America/Chicago34 by Danbones because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 6 2015 @ 07:42 PM
link   
a reply to: AdmireTheDistance

That depends on who you ask . Lol



posted on Jun, 6 2015 @ 07:48 PM
link   
army surplus = nice arctic wear cheep

solar radiation makes clouds they say, so less of that as they say this sun cycle will bring, means clear and cold in the extremes and
possibly hotter in the very mid latitudes
but colder over all

I understand the whole freon thing was about patents
not the ecology
i think I read somewhere those ozone holes float around the pole areas all the time
not what we were told by the dupont influenced PR campagn
edit on Satpm6b20156America/Chicago40 by Danbones because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 6 2015 @ 07:51 PM
link   
a reply to: Greathouse

How humbled I am now to admit I was wrong. I was taken in by flawed science and a movie .
There wasn't a lot of science involved, just media hype. Don't count on media to get science right. Ever.



There's more links here I suggest you check them out and compare them to current dogma .
I would avoid using Watts as a source when it comes to climate science. The fact is, there was far more (and earlier) science concerned with warming caused by increased radiative forcing than there was supporting cooling. Increased radiative forcing and warming as a result is not the soup de jour, it's been on the menu for a number of decades.

scholar.google.com...

edit on 6/6/2015 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 6 2015 @ 07:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: AdmireTheDistance
Aren't we technically still in a mini ice age?


No. We are actually (not technically) in an ice age.
geology.utah.gov...



posted on Jun, 6 2015 @ 07:52 PM
link   
I have a video someplace from the 70's, and if you replace the word "cooling" with "warming" you'd think it was made yesterday.

Its all about money and control.



posted on Jun, 6 2015 @ 07:52 PM
link   
a reply to: Danbones




didn't nasa just the other day publish a report something about temps slightly falling the last 18 years as MEASURE

No.



posted on Jun, 6 2015 @ 07:57 PM
link   
a reply to: Danbones




solar radiation makes clouds they say, so less of that as they say this sun cycle will bring, means clear and cold in the extremes and

You have the theory backwards. Less solar radiation results in increased cosmic radiation reaching the atmosphere. This, the theory says, leads to more clouds, not less.

In any case, the theory is not well supported by evidence.



edit on 6/6/2015 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 6 2015 @ 07:59 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage

Watts was just the easiest source I could find. The fact also is there were many scientist and climatologist supporting the issues in the 70s and 80s. All their opinions are echoed in the links.

I agree it was a lot of media hype I still see similarities between that hype then and this hype now . You did notice at the bottom of my post I do believe in climate change. I just don't believe it should go hand-in-hand with media hype.



It's also quite a coincidence that the original predictions were wrong just as they were for the current issue .



posted on Jun, 6 2015 @ 08:01 PM
link   
a reply to: Greathouse




The fact also is there were many scientist and climatologist supporting the issues in the 70s and 80s.
No. There was a small minority.
www.skepticalscience.com...



It's also quite a coincidence that the original predictions were wrong just as they were for the current issue .
Projections of cooling were wrong. Projections of warming have been correct.
edit on 6/6/2015 by Phage because: (no reason given)

edit on 6/6/2015 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 6 2015 @ 08:06 PM
link   
a reply to: Greathouse

A dramatic change in climate whether caused by cooling or warming is of course going to affect how nations govern. Migration, food shortages, increasing weather disasters aren't trifling things and yes most likely, in my opinion, will usher in greater authoritarianism. That's one of the reasons I'm so passionate about doing everything we can to, well it's too late to stop any consequences, stop the worst of it.



posted on Jun, 6 2015 @ 08:07 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage


Two quick questions . Were you old enough in the 70s and early 80s and experienced to the fear that was instilled over the coming Ice Age ?



Are the original prediction models that a inconvenient truth was based on accurate ?



posted on Jun, 6 2015 @ 08:12 PM
link   
a reply to: Greathouse

Were you old enough in the 70s and early 80s and experienced to the fear that was instilled over the coming Ice Age ?
Well old enough. I did not experience fear over the coming ice age.


Are the original prediction models that a inconvenient truth was based on accurate ?
Within their margin of error, yes. Did you read the book, btw? I did. It was horrible.



posted on Jun, 6 2015 @ 08:18 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage

No I didn't read the book. I did look into the evidence from both sides. The correlation between temperature and CO2 is suspect to me .


I think you got my main position out of the OP though. Both of these have been thoroughly hyped in the media and since my first experience I always take anything height with a grain of salt .


This would not even be much of an issue if it was not for " A inconvenient truth "

Here's a list of source articles for the coming Ice Age . Wow I am met I did not read the mall I looked at a lot of them and everyone quoted a scientist or study . They range from popular science tO time magazine .

The biggest irony is I found myself on the other side of the issue 35 years ago . That is why I am applying this to today's situation.

Calgary Herald, Chicago Tribune, Fortune Magazine, Hartford Courant, International Wildlife (Magazine), Isaac Asimov, Los Angeles Times, Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, Montreal Gazette, Newsweek (Magazine), New Scientist (Magazine) - New York (Magazine), Popular Science (Magazine), Radio Times (Magazine), Sarasota Herald-Tribune, Science News (Magazine), St. Petersburg Times, Time Magazine, The Age, The Blade, The Boston Globe, The Christian Science Monitor, The New York Times, The Saturday Review (Magazine), The Sydney Morning Herald, The Washington Post, U.S. News & World Report

Bangor Daily News (Maine), Beaver Country Times (Beaver, Pennsylvania), Boca Raton News (Boca Raton, Florida), Daily Chronicle (Spokane, Washington), Daily Record (Ellensburg, Washington), Deseret News (Utah), Eugene Register-Guard (Eugene, Oregon), Harlan Daily Enterprise (Kentucky), Kentucky New Era (Hopkinsville, Kentucky), Lewiston Evening Journal (Lewiston, Maine), Lewiston Morning Tribune (Idaho), Ludington Daily News (Ludington, Michigan), Middlesboro Daily News (Kentucky), Pittsburgh Press (Pittsburg, Pennsylvania), Reading Eagle (Reading, Pennsylvania), Sumter Daily Item (Sumter, South Carolina), The Argus-Press (Owosso, Michigan), The Canberra Times (Canberra, Australia), The Bryan Times (Bryan, Ohio), The Daily Sentinel (Ohio), The Day (New London, Connecticut), The Free-Lance Star (Fredericksburg, Virginia), The Ledger (Florida), The Portsmouth Times (Ohio), The Press-Courier (Oxnard, California), The Robesonian (Lumberton, North Carolina), The Schenectady Gazette (Schenectady, New York), The Southeast Missourian (Missouri), The Spartanburg Herald (Spartanburg, South Carolina), The Sun (Vancouver, Canada), The Telegraph (Nashua, New Hampshire), The Windsor Star (Windsor, Canada), Times Daily (Florence, Alabama), Tri City Herald (Kennewick, Washington), Youngstown Vindicator (Youngstown, Ohio)



posted on Jun, 6 2015 @ 08:24 PM
link   
a reply to: Greathouse

This would not even be much of an issue if it was not for " A inconvenient truth "
Why does a book make this an issue?



Here's a list of source articles for the coming Ice Age . Wow I am met I did not read the mall I looked at a lot of them and everyone quoted a scientist or study . They range from popular science tO time magazine .
How many different studies or scientists are quoted?



The biggest irony is I found myself on the other side of the issue 35 years ago . That is why I am applying this to today's situation.
Thirty five years ago a majority of scientists supported the theory of AGW and a minority supported the theory of global cooling. Now, compare that to today's' situation; a vast majority of scientists support AGW while a very small minority do not.


edit on 6/6/2015 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 6 2015 @ 08:26 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage

Phage do you believe that 97% of climate scientists believe man is the main cause of global warming?



posted on Jun, 6 2015 @ 08:27 PM
link   
a reply to: c0gN1t1v3D1ss0nanC3
I think a vast majority do.
I also happen to think that the science supports their position.



posted on Jun, 6 2015 @ 08:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Greathouse

This would not even be much of an issue if it was not for " A inconvenient truth "
Why does a book make this an issue?



Here's a list of source articles for the coming Ice Age . Wow I am met I did not read the mall I looked at a lot of them and everyone quoted a scientist or study . They range from popular science tO time magazine .
How many different studies or scientists are quoted?



The biggest irony is I found myself on the other side of the issue 35 years ago . That is why I am applying this to today's situation.
Thirty five years ago a majority of scientists supported the theory of AGW and a minority supported the theory of global cooling. Now, compare that to today's' situation; a vast majority of scientists support AGW while a very small minority do not.




Why does a book make it a issue?


The book does not make it a issue. The movie makes it a issue in my opinion. A movie is media hype and all the media cover's is hype . When the media hypes something I immediately become suspicious .



How many different scientist or studies were quoted


In honor of who I am talking to I will answer just like you.

" Good question I would suggest you count them " ( honestly that was a tip of the hat to you )



Thirty five years ago a majority of scientists supported the theory of AGW and a minority supported the theory of global cooling. Now, compare that to today's' situation; a vast majority of scientists support AGW while a very small minority do no


I don't remember it that way. But you may be right, so I would like to investigate that claim. You mentioned it earlier but your link took me to some chart .



edit on 6-6-2015 by Greathouse because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
11
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join