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.

 

1970s Global Cooling Scare..Graphs, scientific papers and everything !

page: 1
13
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 26 2014 @ 09:52 AM
link   

Effects on the global temperature of large increases in carbon dioxide and aerosol densities in the atmosphere of Earth have been computed. It is found that, although the addition of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere does increase the surface temperature, the rate of temperature increase diminishes with increasing carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. For aerosols, however, the net effect of increase in density is to reduce the surface temperature of Earth. Because of the exponential dependence of the backscattering, the rate of temperature decrease is augmented with increasing aerosol content. An increase by only a factor of 4 in global aerosol background concentration may be sufficient to reduce the surface temperature by as much as 3.5 ° K. If sustained over a period of several years, such a temperature decrease over the whole globe is believed to be sufficient to trigger an ice age.


stevengoddard.wordpress.com...

The link provides many news paper clipping from the 70s and even quotes a CIA report on the coming Ice age. You will notice some of the same tactics used back then as now only not as sophisticated or well funded. IMO they learned their lessons although slowly.. Global Warming was probably an Al Gore type mentality but the real professional marketers have control now and figured "CLIMATE CHANGE" is the way to go.. Every time anything happens we can blame it on climate change and the consequences of mankind's existence on the globe. We must pay for our existence and pay them well with the greatest redistribution of wealth the world has ever seen..

Not DE neighing climate change is real; been that way since the sun got it's first light... I do find the propaganda and B.S. reports on both sides do not help anyone interested in factual treads. To much money, political band wagons, graft and corruption for truthful discourse and fact finding.. Considering much of the present scare mongering started with computer models that absolutely had no basis in observed reality mostly due to lack of FACTUAL DATA .... well go figure ! The 70s had the same thing because fear sells.. They just didn't have a world collection point for the money... Everyone knows money can fix anything...Kinda like pass this bill so we can find out what is inside only this time it is, pay them and we can have them take care of everything.

www.iceagenow.com...

lastresistance.com...


Al Gore was once the Vice President of what was at that time still the most powerful nation on Earth, but he decided to squander his own legacy by becoming the world’s most famous crackpot. Oh well.

Starting over a year ago, according to Oracle Gore, we were supposed to have been living in a world completely free of a northern polar ice cap. No, really, that’s what he warned us about in 2009. It was just supposed to have vanished into thin, hot hair, much like what comes out of Gore himself.

The ice caps are still there and still not going anywhere…again, like Gore. In fact, since 2012, that ice cap has grown by 50 percent, which is very fortunate for those of us who appreciate delicious, chuckle-inducing irony.

And speaking of hot air, Gore was in Kansas City over the weekend to bug everybody about how the world is burning up (can’t you feel it, folks?). He’s like the world’s richest End Times hobo, traveling the land with Power Point presentations declaring the end is nigh, repent, repent!

Gore did in fact make reference to God in his 90-minute presentation, saying that Vatican City wants to be the first CO2-neutral city-state in the world, adding that “they have God on their side.”

Read more at lastresistance.com...



Anyway for those who were not around in the 70s I thought you might find some of the news paper articles and climate expert procrastinations worth a read; same story different tune.




posted on Feb, 26 2014 @ 10:02 AM
link   
reply to post by 727Sky
 


This story kind of backs up your theory 100%!!!

Report: Nearly 200-Year Old ‘Farmer’s Almanac’ More Accurate Than Gov’t Climate Scientists

NOW HOW IS THAT POSSIBLE????? *sarcasm*

How DO THEY DO IT?


The Farmers’ Almanac weather predictions are based on a secret mathematical and astronomical formula. Developed in 1818 by David Young, the Almanac‘s first editor, this formula takes many factors into consideration, including sunspot activity, moon phases, tidal action, and more. This carefully guarded formula has been passed along from calculator to calculator and has never been revealed.


Source


edit on 26-2-2014 by seeker1963 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 26 2014 @ 10:02 AM
link   

727Sky


Anyway for those who were not around in the 70s I thought you might find some of the news paper articles and climate expert procrastinations worth a read; same story different tune.


I was around. I remember the press jumping all over it. But that was not the generally accepted view of climatology at the time.
Here's a sample of the kind of research being done before 1980.
www.skepticalscience.com...


scholar.google.com...

edit on 2/26/2014 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 26 2014 @ 10:09 AM
link   
Dr. Iain Stewart gives us a history of the climate war. Including the 1970's ice age warnings.

oops- wrong link

www.youtube.com...

I'm only going comment on one aspect of the current debate. The talk about the caps not melting is wrong. The Arctic is melting. The ice pack around Antarctica is growing but the glaciers inland are still melting. The sea-ice is not the same as the glaciers and the ice is thinner. The reason for the growth is not because the world is getting colder. Or, there is a "pause". It is because of ocean currents and the jet-stream. The current is keeping the cold water isolated and circling the lone continent. Saying that the warming is not happening due to one factor is failing to understand climate. It's one dimensional thinking and it only provides easy, incomplete answers. Even if we put aside the argument about whether we're cooling or warming, there can be no disputing that we are changing our environment, and changing weather patterns, and ultimately the climate itself. The pollution factor is off the chart. Ocean acidification, etc, etc, etc.

Oh, as for ice ages. Yes, we'll be back there soon enough. A warming earth will awaken the volcanoes. One of the will put us back into a long winter's sleep.

I guess we're past remembering the dark ages, and ice ages.
In China today, they're in the smog age.


edit on 26-2-2014 by ericblair4891 because: (no reason given)

edit on 26-2-2014 by ericblair4891 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 26 2014 @ 10:10 AM
link   
If you do a research of the earth history since the continents broke apart you will see that the earth is a relatively colder planet. It has brief warm periods but always descends back into the cold. While there are some earth based reasons for this, it is mostly because of the sun. The sun experiences brief periods of excitement followed by long periods of calm.

We are slowly descending back into the cold. Summers are still hot, but shorter ever so slightly, but we will eventually get back to the normal cold temperatures again.

So we can't really call it global cooling but rather that we are near the ending of a global warming period.



posted on Feb, 26 2014 @ 10:18 AM
link   
Interestingly, I had a coversation with somebody at the supermarket the other day.

I was just coming in from the cold, shivering and mumbling how cold it was. As I was getting a cart for shopping, the lady next to me said...

"This was all engineered you know. Back in the 70's we had a very very cold winter one year, directly after our scientists set off a rocket in the atmosphere. Did you know Japan set one off just last year? And now here we are... same sort of weather due to the hole they punched into the atmosphere allowing freezing cold space air to seep in."

I just stood there a littlem dumbfounded. Where did that come from? Do I have conspiracy theorist stamped on my head or something? LOL. She was on her way out the store while I was coming in. She just smiled at me and left before I could curb my surprise and ask any questions. It was bizarre.

CdT
edit on 26-2-2014 by CirqueDeTruth because: grammar



posted on Feb, 26 2014 @ 10:53 AM
link   
To me one of the biggest scams is that they are saying the science is settled .If that was the case then why keep paying people to be blowing hot air with their chicken little stories .Oh that's right because its cooling now . It would be curious to see how past records in temps in Bermuda compare to today's .They have or so I have been told a relatively constant temperature there .I guess they dont have mosquitoes either ...lucky buggers .:>)



posted on Feb, 26 2014 @ 11:33 AM
link   
It seems the leading cause of climate change is politicians that want to tax the air you breathe.



posted on Feb, 26 2014 @ 12:01 PM
link   

VictorVonDoom
It seems the leading cause of climate change is politicians that want to tax the air you breathe.


The Above I Agree With Completely!
Taxes is the way they get next year's Big Raise, While you're left Breathless!
Here is what the old co-founder of Green Peace had to say recently.


A co-founder of Greenpeace told lawmakers there is no evidence man is contributing to climate change, and said he left the group when it became more interested in politics than the environment.



“There is no scientific proof that human emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) are the dominant cause of the minor warming of the Earth’s atmosphere over the past 100 years,” he said.



Moore said he left Greenpeace in the 1980s because he believed it became more interested in politics than science.

“After 15 years in the top committee I had to leave as Greenpeace took a sharp turn to the political left, and began to adopt policies that I could not accept from my scientific perspective,”

NO!!!!!
A Sharp Turn To The Political Left,,, WHY
Money, What Else..
Green Peace Co-Founder



posted on Feb, 26 2014 @ 12:12 PM
link   
The problem in the 70s was that we knew much less then about glacial cycles - we thought interglacials always lasted ~10,000 years and given the current one began ~10,000 years ago it seemed logical a new ice age was imminent. Better understanding of the Milankovitch cycles, and studies of a great many ice and seabed cores, mean we now expect the current interglacial to last at least another 5 to 10,000 years, with or without human assistance (notwithstanding which, decining axial tilt means we don't expect temps to return to those at the peak of this interglacial ~6,000 years ago, and some further slight cooling, especially at the poles, is expected, all else being equal)

Nonetheless, a great many climataologists were already predicting in the 60s and 70s that rising CO2 levels would delay if not prevent such an event.

Of course, we should also remember that 'new ice age imminent' sells more copy than 'new ice age probably not imminent' ......

The media were no better then than now.



posted on Feb, 26 2014 @ 12:13 PM
link   

VictorVonDoom
It seems the leading cause of climate change is politicians that want to tax the air you breathe.


That's why it took 30 years for politicians to finally start listening to scientists .......



posted on Feb, 26 2014 @ 01:08 PM
link   
This artical on wuwt is a must read in so many ways ." Our friend Dr. Patrick Moore, co-founder of Greenpeace, went before the U.S. Senate yesterday to tell his story as it relates to global warming/climate change." There are so many points that Mr. Moore brings up in this well written ,easily understood piece, I just had to share .
Like this part ...Statement of Patrick Moore, Ph.D. Before the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, Subcommittee on Oversight February 25, 2014
“Natural Resource Adaptation: Protecting ecosystems and economies”

wattsupwiththat.com...-103850

Just a snip, of some of the body .[After 15 years in the top committee I had to leave as Greenpeace took a sharp turn to the political left, and began to adopt policies that I could not accept from my scientific perspective.] "There is no scientific proof that human emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) are the dominant cause of the minor warming of the Earth’s atmosphere over the past 100 years. If there were such a proof it would be written down for all to see. No actual proof, as it is understood in science, exists."

"Perhaps the simplest way to expose the fallacy of “extreme certainty” is to look at the historical record. With the historical record, we do have some degree of certainty compared to predictions of the future. When modern life evolved over 500 million years ago, CO2 was more than 10 times higher than today, yet life flourished at this time. Then an Ice Age occurred 450 million years ago when CO2 was 10 times higher than today. There is some correlation, but little evidence, to support a direct causal relationship between CO2 and global temperature through the millennia. The fact that we had both higher temperatures and an ice age at a time when CO2 emissions were 10 times higher than they are today fundamentally contradicts the certainty that human-caused CO2 emissions are the main cause of global warming.

Today we remain locked in what is essentially still the Pleistocene Ice Age, with an average global temperature of 14.5°C. " Moving closer to the present day, it is instructive to study the record of average global temperature during the past 130 years. The IPCC states that humans are the dominant cause of warming “since the mid-20th century”, which is 1950. From 1910 to 1940 there was an increase in global average temperature of 0.5°C over that 30-year period. Then there was a 30-year “pause” until 1970. This was followed by an increase of 0.57°C during the 30-year period from 1970 to 2000. Since then there has been no increase, perhaps a slight decrease, in average global temperature. This in itself tends to negate the validity of the computer models, as CO2 emissions have continued to accelerate during this time.

The increase in temperature between 1910-1940 was virtually identical to the increase between 1970-2000. Yet the IPCC does not attribute the increase from 1910- 1940 to “human influence.” They are clear in their belief that human emissions impact only the increase “since the mid-20th century”. Why does the IPCC believe that a virtually identical increase in temperature after 1950 is caused mainly by “human influence”, when it has no explanation for the nearly identical increase from 1910- 1940?" I realize that my comments are contrary to much of the speculation about our climate that is bandied about today. However, I am confident that history will bear me out, both in terms of the futility of relying on computer models to predict the future, and the fact that warmer temperatures are better than colder temperatures for most species."
edit on 26-2-2014 by the2ofusr1 because: (no reason given)

edit on 26-2-2014 by the2ofusr1 because: I don't agree with all of the specifics of this piece but the basic reasoning and and presentation are well worth considering in trying to figure out for ourselves what we are seeing



posted on Feb, 26 2014 @ 01:12 PM
link   
I just heard on the radio that this is the third coldest winter since records have been kept in the US
I guess cause global warming makes it colder....
( where is that finger up the nose smiley when you need it )

climate change....yep they want your money to change from your hands to theirs
edit on 26-2-2014 by Danbones because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 26 2014 @ 03:49 PM
link   
reply to post by AndyMayhew
 





That's why it took 30 years for politicians to finally start listening to scientists


What makes you think politicians weren't listening? A tax backed by 'science'. Who wouldn't want to have one.


Since 1991, the European Community has been debating the merits and desired method of implementation of a plan to reduce the EC's emission of greenhouse gases, in this case specifically CO2. The impetus for this debate was the Rio Conference on Climate Change in 1991; the EU jointly ratified the Rio Convention on Climate Change in December 1993. The European Community (EC) proposed to stabilize carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions to 1990 levels by the year 2000.

"Greenhouse gases", gases that consist largely of CO2, are believed to be responsible for the global warming trend. In order to reduce CO2 emissions, the European Commission proposed a carbon tax -- a tax on non-renewable energy sources, such as oil and coal, that release CO2 into the atmosphere.

www1.american.edu...


www.env.go.jp...

www.nytimes.com...



posted on Feb, 26 2014 @ 06:54 PM
link   
reply to post by the2ofusr1
 


I had a belly laugh at this ..Nancy C says:
February 26, 2014 at 9:04 am
Sean P Chatterton says:
February 26, 2014 at 7:48 am
Do we know what the response is to this yet?

Yes, Sen. Whitehouse said something about the bay by his house being really deep. I didn’t see it, but that’s what happened. wattsupwiththat.com...

Now put Nancy C in front of a green screen with Elen D interviewing some cute penguins and WAM .prime time ,you tube viral and we have the consensuses settled along with the science .:>)

Oh waite ,there is more funnies "
jauntycyclist says:
February 26, 2014 at 9:03 am
i knew someone who was on the original boat for a short time and he said on the boat they had a form of autocratic democracy. Often they would have a meeting where they would discuss everything that needed doing and have votes then at the end an intimidating earth mother type would over ride all that and then proceed to TELL them what they all were ‘really going to do’ lol"
been there ,done that, not going back ! ...lol
"crabalocker says:
February 26, 2014 at 9:01 am
"Sadly, Dr. Moore will be another victim of the big oil fallacy! " Well good for him I say ...way too many fat useless politicians warming up to that trough . As a fellow reasonable person I wouldn't begrudge him some $ to help him teach us some of the truths , especially if it's coming from our shared planet .



posted on Feb, 26 2014 @ 07:31 PM
link   
reply to post by 727Sky
 


I remember when all that stuff came out - people were still denying there was more than one ice age. ...One thing I've considered - what if the climate really is changing dramatically and TPTB know we're in seriously deep doodoo and some are just trying to stem the tide without telling us what's really going on? And the others don't give a flying copulation and they just want to grab all the cash they can before the poop hits the fan so they can insulate themselves, also without telling us what's really going on?



posted on Feb, 26 2014 @ 08:18 PM
link   

soficrow
reply to post by 727Sky
 


I remember when all that stuff came out - people were still denying there was more than one ice age. ...One thing I've considered - what if the climate really is changing dramatically and TPTB know we're in seriously deep doodoo and some are just trying to stem the tide without telling us what's really going on? And the others don't give a flying copulation and they just want to grab all the cash they can before the poop hits the fan so they can insulate themselves, also without telling us what's really going on?

*sigh*
What are the odds that the people who invented the "bail in" have our best interests at heart?
It was a nice thought though Sofi



posted on Feb, 26 2014 @ 08:24 PM
link   

soficrow
reply to post by 727Sky
 


I remember when all that stuff came out - people were still denying there was more than one ice age. ...One thing I've considered - what if the climate really is changing dramatically and TPTB know we're in seriously deep doodoo and some are just trying to stem the tide without telling us what's really going on? And the others don't give a flying copulation and they just want to grab all the cash they can before the poop hits the fan so they can insulate themselves, also without telling us what's really going on?



All valid points and a flying copulation or mile high club is a wondrous thing if you can get it... Unfortunately many will never be able to attain that fulfillment and I have serious doubts if anyone actually really knows what is going on much less afford an airplane or ticket for the coming weather show.

My attitude really got soured with the climate models using the incomplete data points and then trying to scare the stuffing's out of everyone until the actual temps fell out of the bottom of their highly touted graphs.. The models were sold as real until nothing matched, not past, present, or the future of 2000 or 2010.... OK time for a new models with predetermination's (programing) to fit the agenda is another possibility and round two add infinitude with climate change ...



posted on Feb, 27 2014 @ 11:57 AM
link   
reply to post by talklikeapirat
 


Took a lot longer for the Americans to come on board.

And science had been taking about it since the 60s



posted on Feb, 27 2014 @ 12:30 PM
link   

Danbones
I just heard on the radio that this is the third coldest winter since records have been kept in the US
I guess cause global warming makes it colder....
( where is that finger up the nose smiley when you need it )

climate change....yep they want your money to change from your hands to theirs
edit on 26-2-2014 by Danbones because: (no reason given)


And the relevance of this is?

Here in SE Australia we're already headed for another anomalously warm year after 2013 was the hottest on record.

www.smh.com.au...

On top of this Australia has had 10 of its warmest years on record (actually more since this is a 2010 article)

www.abc.net.au...

Have you actually read any of the 97% of peer reviewed scientific papers on anthropogenic global warming?

I'll take your 3rd coldest winter, and raise you 11 or more of the warmest years ever since 1998 down under.
edit on 27-2-2014 by cuckooold because: (no reason given)

edit on 27-2-2014 by cuckooold because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
13
<<   2 >>

log in

join