In 1961, there was 100% consensus that the world was cooling.
Government scientists now get paid to push warming, so they have erased the inconvenient cooling before 1961.
In 1961, there was 100% consensus that the world was cooling.
Government scientists now get paid to push warming, so they have erased the inconvenient cooling before 1961.
Steve,
is that chart their data or your real data?
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs_v3/
That is GISS data, which has been repeatedly tortured.
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs_v3/
And what is your point?
If you put those plots on a chart using the daily extremes in temperature as the scale, you would get a slightly wavy straight line with a barely detectable slope. It will be that way even with all the “adjustments” to the record.
Global cooling was just one article in Newsweek. It’s a myth the anti-science deniers just made up, while they were taking money from Exxon-Mobil, watching Fox News, and helping the tobacco companies deny lung cancer.
Nigel Calder who wrote the above and reported on these meetings graduated from Cambridge University, and spent two years as a research physicist for the Philips Group. He was a science writer on the original staff of New Scientist in 1956 and became editor in 1962. He wrote books, articles and TV scripts winning the UNESCO Kalinga Prize for the Popularization of Science… Bio
The resulting 1974 CIA report: A Study of Climatological Research as it Pertains to Intelligence Problems
So yes there was concern about a cooling planet and what it would mean to food production. This is also the time period Holdren and Erhlich were writing “Population Bomb”, “Ecoscience”, “Human Ecology: Problems and Solutions” and other doom and gloom books. This is the time when Maurice Strong hosted the UN First Earth Summit. Strong invited activists and paid their way and then told them to go home and raise He!! thereby shifting political power from the adults to easily manipulated spoiled teenagers.
Elaine Dewar wrote in Toronto’s Saturday Night magazine:
So it would seem that by 1972 the powers behind the UN already knew the climate was cyclical and took advantage of it. In 1944 W. Gleissberg published A Table of Secular Variations of the Solar Cycle
The 80- 90 year solar cycle was detected by Gleissberg (1958, 1965) and the 200 year cycle was found by (Suess 1965, 1980) The Milankovitch cycle theroy was already under discussion and by 1976 Shackleton, Hays and Imbrie had published the paper confirming the Milankovitch cycles. “Variations in the Earth’s orbit: Pacemaker of the ice ages”
However you can not use variations in the sun to beat the sheeple over the head with to lend “legitimacy” to the need for a world goverment. Former Director-General of the WTO laments The reality is that, so far, we have largely failed to articulate a clear and compelling vision of why a new global order matters — and where the world should be headed. Therefore the political necessity of ignoring the sun’s effects on the climate while CO2 is made the boogeyman. After all it is for our own good.
What the general public is unaware of is the IPCC does NOT exist to summarise climate science.
The IPCC is only permitted to say AGW is a significant problem because they are tasked to accept that there is a “risk of human-induced climate change” which requires “options for adaptation and mitigation” that can be selected as political polices and the IPCC is tasked to provide those “options”.
This is clearly stated in the “Principles” which govern the work of the IPCC. These are stated at
http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/ipcc-principles/ipcc-principles.pdf
Near its beginning that document says
The IPCC exists to provide
(a) “information relevant to understanding the scientific basis of risk of human-induced climate change”
and
(b) “options for adaptation and mitigation” which pertain to “the application of particular policies”.
Hence, its “Role” demands that the IPCC accepts as a given that there is a “risk of human-induced climate change” which requires “options for adaptation and mitigation” which pertain to “the application of particular policies”. Any ‘science’ which fails to support that political purpose is ‘amended’ in furtherance of the IPCC’s Role.
The IPCC reports and especially the Summary for Policymakers is pure pseudoscience intended to provide information to justify political actions – WorldwIde Lysenkoism – that was agreed to by the USA and other countries by the signing of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change The USA signed on 12/06/92 and ratified the treaty on 21/03/94.
Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. ~ Albert Einstein
What is rather amusing is the amount of apathy and inertia the movers and shakers are running into.
You would think they would learn from experience.
The Plymouth colony of the 1600s was an attempt to set-up a society based on Communism.
These obvious and repeated failures of the socialist/communist form of economic organization did not deter the preditors and parasites from trying again and again to use ‘Socialism’ as an excuse to grab power and wealth.
“Our cause is an international cause, and so long as a revolution does not take place in all countries our victory is only half a victory. Or perhaps less.” ~Vladimir Lenin, October 1917.
Yet the reality was the “workers” were not interested in “The Cause” or in revolution.