The 1970's Global Cooling Compilation – looks much like today

A compilation of news articles on the global cooling scare of the 1970’s

pollution_sacrifice_DemocracyDoes the bullet point list for solutions to global cooling at right look familiar? It reads almost like some of the manifestos we get from warmists today, including the suspension of Democracy as the article in the Owosso Newspaper clearly demonstrates. Thanks to Poptech for the compilation.

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;

News articles*:

1970 – Colder Winters Held Dawn of New Ice Age – Scientists See Ice Age In the Future (The Washington Post, January 11, 1970)

1970 – Is Mankind Manufacturing a New Ice Age for Itself? (L.A. Times, January 15, 1970)

1970 – New Ice Age May Descend On Man (Sumter Daily Item, January 26, 1970)

1970 – Pollution Prospect A Chilling One (Owosso Argus-Press, January 26, 1970)

1970 – Pollution’s 2-way ‘Freeze’ On Society (Middlesboro Daily News, January 28, 1970)

1970 – Cold Facts About Pollution (The Southeast Missourian, January 29, 1970)

1970 – Pollution Could Cause Ice Age, Agency Reports (St. Petersburg Times, March 4, 1970)

1970 – Pollution Called Ice Age Threat (St. Petersburg Times, June 26, 1970)

1970 – Dirt Will .Bring New Ice Age (The Sydney Morning Herald, October 19, 1970)

1971 – Ice Age Refugee Dies Underground (The Montreal Gazette, Febuary 17, 1971)

1971 – U.S. Scientist Sees New Ice Age Coming (The Washington Post, July 9, 1971)

1971 – Ice Age Around the Corner (Chicago Tribune, July 10, 1971)

1971 – New Ice Age Coming – It’s Already Getting Colder (L.A. Times, October 24, 1971)

1971 – Another Ice Age? Pollution Blocking Sunlight (The Day, November 1, 1971)

1971 – Air Pollution Could Bring An Ice Age (Harlan Daily Enterprise, November 4, 1971)

1972 – Air pollution may cause ice age (Free-Lance Star, February 3, 1972)

1972 – Scientist Says New ice Age Coming (The Ledger, February 13, 1972)

1972 – Scientist predicts new ice age (Free-Lance Star, September 11, 1972)

1972 – British expert on Climate Change says Says New Ice Age Creeping Over Northern Hemisphere (Lewiston Evening Journal, September 11, 1972)

1972 – Climate Seen Cooling For Return Of Ice Age (Portsmouth Times, ‎September 11, 1972‎)

1972 – New Ice Age Slipping Over North (Press-Courier, September 11, 1972)

1972 – Ice Age Begins A New Assault In North (The Age, September 12, 1972)

1972 – Weather To Get Colder (Montreal Gazette, ‎September 12, 1972‎)

1972 – British climate expert predicts new Ice Age (The Christian Science Monitor, September 23, 1972)

1972 – Scientist Sees Chilling Signs of New Ice Age (L.A. Times, September 24, 1972)

1972 – Science: Another Ice Age? (Time Magazine, November 13, 1972)

1973 – The Ice Age Cometh (The Saturday Review, March 24, 1973)

1973 – Weather-watchers think another ice age may be on the way (The Christian Science Monitor, December 11, 1973)

1974 – New evidence indicates ice age here (Eugene Register-Guard, May 29, 1974)

1974 – Another Ice Age? (Time Magazine, June 24, 1974)

1974 – 2 Scientists Think ‘Little’ Ice Age Near (The Hartford Courant, August 11, 1974)

1974 – Ice Age, worse food crisis seen (The Chicago Tribune, October 30, 1974)

1974 – Believes Pollution Could Bring On Ice Age (Ludington Daily News, December 4, 1974)

1974 – Pollution Could Spur Ice Age, Nasa Says (Beaver Country Times, ‎December 4, 1974‎)

1974 – Air Pollution May Trigger Ice Age, Scientists Feel (The Telegraph, ‎December 5, 1974‎)

1974 – More Air Pollution Could Trigger Ice Age Disaster (Daily Sentinel – ‎December 5, 1974‎)

1974 – Scientists Fear Smog Could Cause Ice Age (Milwaukee Journal, December 5, 1974)

1975 – Climate Changes Called Ominous (The New York Times, January 19, 1975)

1975 – Climate Change: Chilling Possibilities (Science News, March 1, 1975)

1975 – B-r-r-r-r: New Ice Age on way soon? (The Chicago Tribune, March 2, 1975)

1975 – Cooling Trends Arouse Fear That New Ice Age Coming (Eugene Register-Guard, ‎March 2, 1975‎)

1975 – Is Another Ice Age Due? Arctic Ice Expands In Last Decade (Youngstown Vindicator – ‎March 2, 1975‎)

1975 – Is Earth Headed For Another Ice Age? (Reading Eagle, March 2, 1975)

1975 – New Ice Age Dawning? Significant Shift In Climate Seen (Times Daily, ‎March 2, 1975‎)

1975 – There’s Troublesome Weather Ahead (Tri City Herald, ‎March 2, 1975‎)

1975 – Is Earth Doomed To Live Through Another Ice Age? (The Robesonian, ‎March 3, 1975‎)

1975 – The Ice Age cometh: the system that controls our climate (The Chicago Tribune, April 13, 1975)

1975 – The Cooling World (Newsweek, April 28, 1975)

1975 – Scientists Ask Why World Climate Is Changing; Major Cooling May Be Ahead (PDF) (The New York Times, May 21, 1975)

1975 – In the Grip of a New Ice Age? (International Wildlife, July-August, 1975)

1975 – Oil Spill Could Cause New Ice Age (Milwaukee Journal, December 11, 1975)

1976 – The Cooling: Has the Next Ice Age Already Begun? [Book] (Lowell Ponte, 1976)

1977 – Blizzard – What Happens if it Doesn’t Stop? [Book] (George Stone, 1977)

1977 – The Weather Conspiracy: The Coming of the New Ice Age [Book] (The Impact Team, 1977)

1976 – Worrisome CIA Report; Even U.S. Farms May be Hit by Cooling Trend (U.S. News & World Report, May 31, 1976)

1977 – The Big Freeze (Time Magazine, January 31, 1977)

1977 – We Will Freeze in the Dark (Capital Cities Communications Documentary, Host: Nancy Dickerson, April 12, 1977)

1978 – The New Ice Age [Book] (Henry Gilfond, 1978)

1978 – Little Ice Age: Severe winters and cool summers ahead (Calgary Herald, January 10, 1978)

1978 – Winters Will Get Colder, ‘we’re Entering Little Ice Age’ (Ellensburg Daily Record, January 10, 1978)

1978 – Geologist Says Winters Getting Colder (Middlesboro Daily News, January 16, 1978)

1978 – It’s Going To Get Colder (Boca Raton News, ‎January 17, 1978‎)

1978 – Believe new ice age is coming (The Bryan Times, March 31, 1978)

1978 – The Coming Ice Age (In Search Of TV Show, Season 2, Episode 23, Host: Leonard Nimoy, May 1978)

1978 – An Ice Age Is Coming Weather Expert Fears (Milwaukee Sentinel, November 17, 1978)

1979 – A Choice of Catastrophes – The Disasters That Threaten Our World [Book] (Isaac Asimov, 1979)

1979 – Get Ready to Freeze (Spokane Daily Chronicle, October 12, 1979)

1979 – New ice age almost upon us? (The Christian Science Monitor, November 14, 1979)

A couple of the news stories are duplicates in different papers with slightly different titles, this is intentional to show that these types of stories were not isolated to a certain regional paper.

And from the National Center for Atmospheric Research:

ScreenHunter_86 Feb. 24 04.50

ScreenHunter_89 Feb. 24 04.56

Source: http://www.iaea.org/Publications/Magazines/Bulletin/Bull165/16505796265.pdf

While a silent majority of the scientific community may have been more skeptical, you ironically find one of the most outspoken supporters of modern day Al Gore style global warming alarmism was promoting global cooling in the 1970s, the late Dr. Steven Schneider;

Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it. – Life of Reason, George Santayana

Advertisements

  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
Pull My Finger

Obvioulsy we need to pollute more, that will cool the earth off.

awesome post! thanks so much!

ciphertext

[trimmed at writer’s request]

cipherstream

Thank you for posting this. I can remember the “global cooling” scare from when I was a child in grade school. My, how the pendulum has swung (cold to hot). It seems folly to me that we would believe ourselves so confident (arrogant?) in our belief that our understanding of climate science is complete to a degree such that we can make claims about the imminence of climate catastrophe. It seems we have not learned the lessons of our history.
I suspect there are other, more veiled reasons for the such proclamations, but that is for another thread perhaps?

Dont forget this gem from the past:-
The outstanding generahzations of my world tour are what may be summed up as the “six overs”; these “six overs” are, in the genetic order of cause and effect
Over-destruction of natural resources, now actually world-wide;
Over-mechanization, in the substitution of the machine for animal and human labor, rapidly becoming world-wide;
Over-construction of warehouses, ships, railroads, wharves and other means of trans- port, replacing primitive transportation;
Over-production both of the food and of the mechanical wants of mankind, chiefly during the post-war speculative period;
Over-confidence in future demand and supply, resulting in the too rapid extension of natural resources both in food and in mechanical equipment;
Over-population beyond the land areas, or the capacity of the natural and scientific resources of
the world, with consequent permanent unemployment of the least fitted.

A decade of progress in Eugenics, papers from the 1932 International Eugenics Congress.
http://ia700402.us.archive.org/2/items/decadeofprogress00inte/decadeofprogress00inte.pdf
Same tired complaints, recycled time and again, for the eternal “crisis which is our fault”.

SandyInLimousin

Having been told by many of the (young) faithful that there was no new iceage scare in the 70s this is a wonderful posting.
Thanks to all

MarkW

It’s amazing how the solutions to global cooling are almost identical to the solutions for global warming.

The ‘solutions’ always remain the same even though the scare has evolved to the complete opposite claim of what it once was. This is basically a give away that the motivations and goals of these people are political, not scientific. It’s called “…therefore, socialism.” It’s getting too hot, therefore, socialism. It’s getting too cold, therefore, socialism. There are too many people, therefore, socialism. There are too few people, therefore, socialism. Funny, how no matter what the problem is, the solution always seems to be to give a select group of people, with no discernible expertise in any particular subject, more and more of our money and freedom.

James Ard

No doubt brought to us by the same likely suspects who are currently running the warming scam. These guys never give up.

Richard111

Brilliant work. Thank you.
I shall advise any warmists I meet that clearing up atmospheric pollution in the 1970s to prevent a coming ice age is directly responsible for our present global warming and I have a lovely list of citations. Thank you.

Jimbo

Now let’s have some Fire and Ice. Here we have a small compilation of global warming and global cooling scares since 1895 reported by the media. These alarms run in cycles, just like the climate.
Fire and Ice Published 2010
http://www.mrc.org/node/30586

Authoritarians for hire. We do not work for individualists, only for collectivists.
Just contact any of the IPCC’s Directorates or get a referral from anyone with an alias email account at the US EPA.
John

Otter

I would very much like any and ALL pro-AGW commenters who come by here, to explain how all of the above evidence is ‘meaningless,’ ‘didn’t happen,’ ‘no real scientists involved.’
Please include my name in your comment when you do, it will make it easier for me to search it out.

MattS

MattS says:
Oops, some text [got] picked up as HTML tags, corrected below
Your comment is awaiting moderation.
March 1, 2013 at 10:33 am
ciphertext,
” Did the pendulum swing that far? Or have we gotten to a point where we are so smug in our belief that our understanding of climate has reached a point such that we can declare the imminence of catastrophe with such precision and surety?”
No and No. What this article demonstrates it that it has NEVER been about what the climate is really doing, it has ALWAYS been about using [scary story] to control the world. The only thing that ever changes is [scary story].

Thank you for the research! It will come in handy.

PaulH

There sure were a lot of experts convinced that their conclusions were absolutely correct and that we had better act before it’s too late. The more things change…

Luther Wu

A few years ago, the Lefty sites were claiming that we didn’t really remember the cooling claims of the 70’s because just a couple of nuts made the claims and they weren’t widely known, i.e. the cooling meme didn’t really exist.
I’d show some Lefties this article, but I’d only make ’em mad and they’d turn the air blue making Anthony’s ears burn… while denying this list of articles is real.

It always comes down to the same thing: “Due to ‘X’ you have to give me more money and power over your life.”

Crispin in Waterloo

What is so funny is that the articles are being recycled concept for concept with cooling replaced by warming. The parallels indicate that there is an in-built human penchant (in Western cultures, anyway) to blame anything that happens on ‘us’. ‘It is all our fault!’ ‘OMG think about the children!’
It is interesting to me that other cultures have a different mechanism for self-blame, or the blaming of those all around in an effort to generate a socially agreeable need for compensatory behaviour.
The list of articles is amazing for their lack of breadth of vision and re-parrotting without checking the alarmism against the historic record (at that time far less contaminated by the sticky fingers of GISS). Alas, how news repeats itself!

Bob

I remember discussing the coming ice age with a member of the meterology faculty in ’74. He was telling us how fast the new northern glaciation would happen. Scary stuff. He got a bit upset when we started calculating how fast we would have to run to stay ahead of the northern state’s glacier. I’ve been a bit skeptical about climate change and humanity’s sins ever since.

Mark Bofill

:> Listen to you guys generating all this counterfactual thinking and conspiracy ideation. Obviously, it was global wierding that was misunderstood to be global cooling that gave rise to what was once thought to be global warming but is now known conclusively to be extreme weather, until we see what to label it next after it happens.
/sarc

be cause

So our University of East Anglia were warning of a ice age .. 09.11 1972 and now ???

Jeff L

Since the claim was pollution was the cause of cooling do we need to polite more to offset our CO2 warming ??? Seems logical enough . /sarc off
Seriously, has anyone looked at what % of 80s-90s warming might be due to less pollution? If pollution was the cause of cooling & we cleaned it, might the result be warming ???
The irony is killing me … Or roasting me.
The law of unintended consequences in full effect.

Otter

Luther Wu~ Please DO contact those lefties. I’m down with a major case of SADS, and I could really use the entertainment of the Mindless.

Jimbo

Great video of Schneider. Now here is his 1971 paper predicting another ice age.

Description/Abstract
Rasool, S.I., and S.H. Schneider, 1971:
Atmospheric carbon dioxide and aerosols: Effects of large increases on global climate.
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.
http://pubs.giss.nasa.gov/abs/ra00600k.html

And years later Dr. James Hansen is predicting a runaway Venus style Earth. By the way they used a program written by Dr. James Hansen. Here it is in Hansen’s own words.

“……What was that program? It was a ‘Mie scattering’ code I had written to calculate light scattering by spherical particles. Indeed, it was useful for Venus studies, as it helped determine the size and refractive index of the particles in the clouds that veil the surface of Venus. I was glad to let Rasool and Schneider use that program to calculate scattering by aerosols…..”
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2007/09/28/nasa-s-james-hansen-claims-he-s-being-swift-boated-critics

Otter

Shoutout to everyone: If anyone knows of any more such links, please post them! This list is great but it can’t even be close to all of them.

David, UK

Yep. The Ice Age. The Russians. Acid Rain. Islam. Global Warming Climate Disruption. If it’s not one bogeyman it’s another. Governments; I despise them for the evil they are.

nuclearcannoli, excellent post.

fearless

Scientists are covering their tracks with today’s AGW alarmism. Looks to me like we’re headed more towards a cooling trend than a warming one. When the new ice age hits, these same alarmists can point back to the 70s cooling scare and say “See??? We were right all along!”

Jeff L

Many good comments on how this compilation destroys the all too common appeal to authority argument currently made by CAGW proponents.
I hope this article gets some wider circulation so the general public gets a better understanding of the fallacy of the appeal to authority argument. The pro-CAGW supporters seem to be getting pretty vocal lately so this could be very timely

RS

No matter the problem, no matter the question, the answer is ALWAYS a global government with unlimited power to control all aspects of life and commerce.
Funny that.

McComber Boy

Anthony,
Typo in the first paragraph. “at the article in the Owosso” looks like it should be “as the article”.
Thanks for the post.
pbh
[Now “the suspension of … as the article” Mod]

john robertson

The irony, remember the “Teams” response to Wegman?
Plagiarism.
The sin of academia.
Lying, falsifying results and stealing grant money; Not a problem.
Plagiarism; we get rid of all kinds of academics with, its so powerful in academia that its used to deflect attention from a scathing critique of the stats skills of team IPCC.
Now much of the alarmist “science” is recycled, word for word from past works.
Same solution, same causative agent, deferring effect.
Small wonder the UN wants to control the internet, this tool never forgets.
Unlike the compulsive liars of the Cult, or do I mean the cause?

[Mods: please delete my 11:07 am above and use this one instead. The blockquotes are better formatted]
The Intersection of Climate Change and the Clean Air Act
• 43 ARIZONA STATE L. J. 901(2011).
Arnold W. Reitze Jr.
University of Utah – S.J. Quinney College of Law
Arizona State Law Journal, Vol. 43, No. 901, 2011
Paragraph 2:

In the United States, CO2 is the chemical responsible for 81.5 percent of the nation’s greenhouse gases (“GHGs”) emissions in 2009. Ninety-eight percent of the CO2 was emitted from fossil fuel combustion, which is 80 percent of the nation’s total GHG emissions. Electric power generation produced 39.91 percent of the CO2 in 2008, and the transportation sector produced 30.15 percent. For this reason, fossil fuel combustion is the focus of stationary source GHG control efforts in the United States.

For PDF, follow the link: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2153842
The misrepresentations are breathtaking!
H2O is also a green house gas, a product of hydrocarbon combustion, more powerful than CO2, but is not counted as such. “Ninety-eight percent of the CO2 was emitted from fossil fuel combustion,” like animals and termites aren’t sources of CO2.
It is a first class paper and summarizes into a few pages (and 345 footnotes!) all history and law about the Clean Air Act and how the EPA is using it for CO2 regulation. A worthy reference to keep handy.
His concluding paragraph:

The U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling that GHGs are air pollutants under the CAA was not a wise decision, but a good result could flow from the decision if it spurs Congress to adopt an intelligent energy policy that would
protect both the environment and the economy. Unfortunately, Congress has demonstrated little interest in solving the nation’s pressing problems, which includes addressing climate change and developing a sustainable energy
policy. So, EPA will continue to use the CAA as the vehicle for developing a national energy policy, primarily by increasing the stringency of stationary source emission control and mandated improvements in mobile source fuel economy. Pollution control requirements may make coal too expensive to burn. This is not the intended role for a pollution control
statute, nor should EPA become the czar of energy policy. But, the CAA has become the basis for a default energy policy in the United States.

Bold mine. He may be a good lawyer, but he’s no skeptic.

Brilliant compilation. It shows the same constellation of dark forces of money and control at work these days. Now that “AGW science” is fully in the grip of the aforementioned constellation, the emphasis will shift to the activities of Ball and Monckton in the legal sphere.

We’re not actually dealing with a particular scare, just a certain type of anti-human mentality that revels in the certitude of its own ignorance.
http://thepointman.wordpress.com/2013/03/01/sleeping-with-the-enemy/
Pointman

Nigel S

“It’s weather Jim, but not as we know it.”

BJ

Looks like someone figured out how to use the “find/replace all” feature and changed “cooling” to “warming”… Does this qualify as plagurism???

Gary Hladik

nuclearcannoli says (March 1, 2013 at 10:25 am): “The ‘solutions’ always remain the same even though the scare has evolved to the complete opposite claim of what it once was.”
Snake oil salesmen will always be with us.

Mark

I Find it rather ironic that the experts predicted a coming ice age in the 70’s and right on queue, the climate stalls and warms up a bit. Now the experts are predicting unprecedented warming and right on queue, the climate stalls and cools down a bit. Perhaps the experts should tell us the opposite of what they think will happen to actually get it right.

Rob Ricket

Nice work poptech!

Copied from “Rasool, S.I., and S.H. Schneider, 1971:
Atmospheric carbon dioxide and aerosols: Effects of large increases on global climate.” posted by Jimbo supra:-
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.
There’s no such unit as ‘degrees Kelvin’. A real scientist would know this.

JDN

May I suggest you look for all politicians in the 80s that said sea levels would rise significantly by 2020 (or in that time frame).
Also, did they cancel the SST (supersonic transport, the US Concorde project) because of the ice age or because of ozone. I can’t remember.

Latitude

During the 1970s the media promoted global cooling alarmism with dire threats of a new ice age
==========
That is absolutely impossible….
…for one thing, we now know that “history” didn’t even start until the late ’70s
for another, no honest scientist would start measuring temp increases at a low point
SNARK

Manfred

Thank you for a riveting post! A couple of observations spring to mind, that demonstrate ‘consistent’. First, MSM reporting favours ANY alarmism over vapid reporting. Second, Arnold Reitze was perspicacious in the 1970’s.
His publications are available on the Social Science Network.
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/cf_dev/AbsByAuth.cfm?per_id=361683#show1618596
‘New Source Review: Should it Survive?’ (2004) Environmental Law Reporter, Vol. 34, No. 10673. Arnold Reitze reviews the Clean Air Act’s new source review program and concludes that as applied to existing major emission sources it is uncertain, vague, complex and often ignored. It concludes that it should be replaced with a cap-and-trade program imposed on all industries on either a regional or national basis.
‘Electric Power in a Carbon Constrained World’ (2010) Arnold Reitze observes that using existing laws is a poor way to develop an energy policy, and Congress should create a comprehensive energy policy that will reduce our dependence on carbon-based fuels in a manner that does not harm the economy, but the pending cap-and-trade bills will not accomplish this goal.

Jimbo

Add these to the list.
“John Holdren in 1971: “New ice age” likely”
http://www.zombietime.com/zomblog/?p=873
“Here are some “global cooling” quotations and comments from an earlier era.”
http://www.masterresource.org/2009/09/the-global-cooling-scare-revisited/
“A New Treasure Trove Of 1970s “Global Cooling” Articles”
http://omnologos.com/a-new-treasure-trove-of-1970s-global-cooling-articles/

This is very good stuff and a useful reference. Congratulations on all the research behind it.
Coincidentally I did a brief response on the global cooling scare last week in response to someone who posted the notorious Connelley article in which he cited material that claimed the scare didnt exist.
My item may be useful in putting the documentation provided here into an overal scientific context so I have reproduced it below;hope its useful as an addendum to your useful article, sorry for its length.
—– ——– —
Response from a warmist posted here;
http://judithcurry.com/2013/02/22/spinning-the-climate-model-observation-comparison/#comment-298268
“mosomoso, more scientists were predicting warming in the 70s than cooling. See: Who sparked the global cooling myth?”
My response;
er…Lamb, Mitchell, Budyko, Ladurie etc etc sparked it. I thought that ‘study’ by Connelley had gone the same way as the hockey stick-into the forgotten cellars of history.
As Budyko himself says (who seems to have subsequently changed his mind about cooling as did Lamb-as scientists should do when new evidence comes to light) in his 1982 book “The earths climate past and future’ pages 148 ;
‘it was generally accepted that a tendancy towards climatic cooling appeared during the last few decades; since the sign of temperature fluctuations changes relatively rarely, the scientists concerned with climatic change almost UNANIMOUSLY (my capitalization) believed that the temperature would continue to decrease in the near future…Lamb 1973 mentioned that more than 20 forecasts of the early 70’s concerning climatic change predicted a cooling trend in the next few decades, but (then) indicated a lack of sufficient scientific grounds for these forecasts and two years later obtained the FIRST (my capitalization) evidence of a possible climatic change towards warming.”
(The temperature cooling can be seen in the Willett/Mitchell curves of the time)
Budyko continues;
‘in the 1940’s the warming trend was overcome by a cooling trend which intensified in the 1960’s and in the mid 60’s the mean air temperature of the Northern Hemisphere (once again) approached the level of the cold seasons of the late 1910’s .”
To summarise, here is what seems to have happened; As you know there was a very substantial warming from the 1920’s to 1940’s. This reversed itself. By 1962/3 the dropping temperature made Callendar himself doubt his greenhouse theory. Budyko, Lamb and an almost ‘unanimous’ agreement of climate scientists believed we were heading into a significant cooling phase . Lamb eventually pointed out in 1973 that the cooling was not sufficiently long lived to be a a scientifically meaningful climatic trend of at least 30 years. The widespread scare of cooling changed into a scare of warming as temperatures started to recover.
Here are a couple of additional links and a quote;
“The second important group analyzing global temperatures was the British government’s Climatic Research Unit (CRU) at the University of East Anglia, founded by Lamb in 1971 and now led by Tom Wigley. Help in assembling data and funding came from American scientists and agencies. The British results agreed overall with the NASA group’s findings — the world was getting warmer. In 1982, East Anglia confirmed that the Northern Hemisphere cooling that began in the 1940s had turned around by the early 1970s.
http://www.aip.org/history/climate/20ctrend.htm
Also see;
http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Features/GISSTemperature/giss_temperature2.php
So the 20 year long (very real) cooling scare was most rife during the 1960’s and came to an end in the early 70’s. It is pointless of Connelley to cite selected later studies when the scare had ended, rather than the earlier studies when it was in full swing.”
——— end of original post——-
tonyb

Jack Maloney

Dr. Reitze’s current CV from the University of Utah lists “climate change policy” as an “area of expertise,” and he has published numerous articles on climate change, greenhouse gases, carbon sequestration, etc. The climate alarms may change, hotter or colder, but the “experts” remain the same. 🙁

Ray

Our vision of the future died in the 70’s. Before the 70’s, people had ideas of how the future should be. Then these doomsday ideas came by. Unsurprisingly, those were times of personal liberty, sex drugs and rock&roll. I guess some people did not take the changes well and decided to find a way to scare people back in submission, like the Church did before that. But by then the Wrath of God had no more power over the People.
The list of proposed solutions is all about control of the people but nothing about the change of technologies to make combustion engines more efficient and less polluting. I don’t think they even thought that people could make better technologies. But we did.
I was never about protecting the people, but more about controlling them.

Bart

cipherstream says:
March 1, 2013 at 10:17 am
“I can remember the “global cooling” scare from when I was a child in grade school.”
I want to be sure to echo this sentiment and bear witness. They scared the pants off of us back then with incessant assurances of the coming Ice Age. Young people are so vulnerable to being influenced by cherry picked source re-writing of history, so for all you babes in the woods, this is the straight dope: Yes, the Global Cooling scare was real. Yes, they assured us that scientists were all in agreement about it. Yes, they proposed the same “solutions” they are proposing now for Global Warming. No, world history did not begin on the day you were born.
At least this time around, we have a huge paper trail, all captured on the internet, so that nobody can deny that they were serious about Global Warming when the next Global Cooling scare comes around.