In the 70s, They said there'd be an Ice Age

To help support Climate Denial Crock of the Week
Go to
http://climatecrocks.com/


Everyone has a favorite decade, and for Climate deniers, that decade has got to be, the 70s.
Yes, the decade of disco, kung fu, and watergate

Because in the 70's, Deniers will tell you, All climate scientists believed an ice age was coming. Those crazy climate scientists! Why can't they make up their minds?

But is that really true?
Maybe a little historical perspective is in order.
This remix is re-edited, includes better sound, and new film clips. Definitely a Christmas must-see for Uncle Dittohead and Aunt Teabag!

http://smartenergyshow.com/node/67
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2T4UF_Rmlio

Bulletin of American Meteorological Society article on the
"Myth of Global Cooling"
http://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/pdf/10.1175/2008BAMS2370.1

additional resources
http://climateprogress.org/2008/11/16/1953-popular-mechanics-growing-blanket-...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Global_2000_Report_to_the_President
http://www.usatoday.com/weather/climate/globalwarming/2008-02-20-global-cooli...

These links work best if pasted into browsers:
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,890597,00.html
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,937403,00.html

Category:

Science & Technology

Tags:

• Climate change climate
• ice age
• seventies
• 70s

[abarrathemaster]

now wait a minute, if climit tempetures stay the same during 1940s and 1980s and corban dixide increase during that time, what facters cause the tempeture to stay the same during that time?

[greenman3610]

@abarrathemaster

, temps stayed the same or cooled slightly from the 40s till about 76. The reasons are several, first, greenhouse warming was less of a factor 70 years ago, since CO2 was lower, and natural fluctuations could easily erase the effect. Moreover, adding a years worth of co2 is a very slight effect, and only becomes evident over time, as the warmth makes its way slowly thru the deep ocean.

The warming we are seeing now, actually started some 40 years ago, due to the lag

[greenman3610]

@greenman3610

during the 80s and 90s, temps rose rather abruptly -- see NASA's graph by googling

nasa key indicators

[cupera1]

1972 – Kukla-Mathews publishes about the end of the current inter glacial. Also writes to Nixon in 72, specifically warning about global cooling.

1973 – First Climate office started in Feb 1973 (Panel on the Present Inter Glacial). This was after a meeting of prominent climatologists, and apparently there was consensus about cooling. Especially as the NOAA, NWS and ICAS were involved.

1978 -Carter signs Climate Program Act due to a number of SEVERE WINTER experiences the preceding years.

[greenman3610]

@cupera1

There is no doubt that people were talking about global cooling in the 70s. The globe was cooling. Stephen Schneider co-wrote a paper about it. But by the mid seventies, it was clear what the actual evidence was saying, and had been saying all along - that the theory, which was pretty much defined by the 1950s, was correct.

Hence the conspiracy theory, like most conspiracy theories, is simply nonsense.

[jimmi161]

In 2040 they will deny that they ever said there was man made global warming in the 90s and 2000's

[flowmaster45]

CO2 is what plants breath in. If you want to CO2 enrich an indoor garden you need a ppm of 1500. Doing so would mean you have to raise the temp so the plants can breath in that CO2. This is like putting plants on steroids and they would be huge and harvest would be also. If there is to much CO2 in the atmosphere right now, then why are the plants not so much bigger than times when CO2 was at acceptable levels?

[robhoneycutt]

@RealOldOne2 The only failure is your capacity to comprehend.

The problem with your "source" is that it is attributable to no one.

[RealOldOne2]

@robhoneycutt Nice try, but FAIL.

I provided the SOURCE DOCUMENT for my 70s global cooling consensus claim.

We are STILL WAITING for I'macluelessblowhard3610 to produce his SOURCE document! After all he ALWAYS cites a source. Actually, iceman found that it was Peterson2008, we're just waiting for gm to admit it.

And airandfingers nailed it when he pointed out that gm SAID 'believed'(from Peterson) while the graphic had 'thought'.

Tell us rob, why gm SAID 'believed' if Peterson wasn't the source?

[robhoneycutt]

@RealOldOne2 If attributable sources are THAT important for you how about you find out who wrote that 1974 CIA report and who the "prominent climate scientists" were?

[RealOldOne2]

@robhoneycutt "twisted up"

Haha. Not at all, just amused because our cluelessblowhard friend backed himself into a corner, trapped by his own words and now he stonewalls.

So every once in a while I remind him that he is not living up to his claim that he ALWAYS provides a source for his statements, in case he's ready to honor his word.

It IS such a minor thing, that I'm bewildered that he won't just admit that he made a mistake and correct it. True SCIENCE corrects its mistakes. Religion doesn't

[robhoneycutt]

@RealOldOne2 But we all know that's not what you want to do. You don't want to be skeptical. You're a fake skeptic. If you were skeptical and checked Peterson's results you might find that Peterson is correct, and then where would you be? You'd have scored a point for the other side. You'd have to hide your own research or admit Peterson was correct.

But for REAL skeptics that would not be a problem because the only thing that matters is accuracy and contributing to a search for the truth.

[robhoneycutt]

@RealOldOne2 So, you believe a draft report from a non-scientific agency that has no named author, discusses a group of no named "experts" over just looking at the published literature of the day?

Look, you don't even need to take Peterson's word for the state of science in the 1970s. If you were truly skeptical (you're not) you would take the time to try to recreate his work. Hey, maybe he's missing a lot of published research! You'd get a lot of press if you could show Peterson in error.

[robhoneycutt]

@RealOldOne2 I really have a hard time believing this video has you so up in arms as to spend days commenting on it. The phrase you're talking about where Peter says, "In the 70's, all climate scientists thought that an ice age was coming."

1) I have run into deniers saying exactly that on MANY occasions.

2) Can you not read the tone of Peter's voice? He's merely using a bit of hyperbole (a very small amount), and you're getting all twisted up in your undies over it.

Priceless.