In 1974, authorities predicted a new ice age, and had sixty theories to explain global cooling.
Fraudsters John Kook, Dana Nuttercelli and William Connelley say it never happened.
Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Google Search
-
Recent Posts
- The Clock Is Ticking
- “hottest weather in 120,000 years”
- “Peace, Relief, And Recovery”
- “Earth’s hottest weather in 120,000 years”
- Michael Mann Hurricane Update
- Michael Mann Hurricane Update
- Making Themselves Irrelevant
- Michael Mann Predicts The Demise Of X
- COP29 Preview
- UK Labour To Save The Planet
- A Giant Eyesore
- CO2 To Destroy The World In Ten Years
- Rats Jumping Off The Climate Ship
- UK Labour To Save The Planet
- “False Claims” And Outright Lies”
- Michael Mann Cancelled By CNN
- Spoiled Children
- Great Lakes Storm Of November 11, 1835
- Harris To Win Iowa
- Angry Democrats
- November 9, 1913 Storm
- Science Magazine Explains Trump Supporters
- Obliterating Bill Gates
- Scientific American Editor In Chief Speaks Out
- The End Of Everything
Recent Comments
- Gordon Vigurs on “Peace, Relief, And Recovery”
- Disillusioned on “Peace, Relief, And Recovery”
- Disillusioned on “Earth’s hottest weather in 120,000 years”
- Francis Barnett on “Peace, Relief, And Recovery”
- dm on “Earth’s hottest weather in 120,000 years”
- arn on “Peace, Relief, And Recovery”
- Tel on “Peace, Relief, And Recovery”
- Gamecock on “Peace, Relief, And Recovery”
- conrad ziefle on “Earth’s hottest weather in 120,000 years”
- conrad ziefle on “Earth’s hottest weather in 120,000 years”
Ha ha ha ha ha! That’s hilarious.
I’d love to see all these theories – and see just how similar they look to the latest batch.
Only 60?! So few ??? Now, seriously speaking, there was no doubt that global cooling was a serious phenomenon. Although the threat was imminent, neither the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) nor other groups concerned with the global warming issue have ever showed true interest in analyzing the pronounced global cooling. The half century climate change occurred without any implication of the CO2. Then what was the determinant factor? Nothing out of the ordinary happened. Throughout the early 20th century, nature resumed its course. No serious earthquake, tsunami, meteorite fall, sunspots occurred. Industrial plants and combustion machines abundantly released smoke, soot, sulfate, carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, but, instead of a global warming, the world clime cooled down. The only serious event which took place for three years in European waters and for four years at a global level (since 1942) was the warfare. The conduction of a naval war at a global level and the turning and churning of huge sea areas in the Atlantic, Pacific and Indian Oceans lead to the inevitable. Climate changed dramatically into a colder one, for four decades. Oceans and seas which had undergone a strong warming during World War I became now significantly colder. This change lasted half a century and for more data on the issue you can visit http://www.1ocean-1climate.com.
So one world war made the world warmer, and the other made it cooler. Got it.
It’s not just naval warfare that changes climate. Napoleon’s invasion caused bitter cold in Russia in 1812 and the Germans made the winter of 1941/1942 just as bad by executing Operation Barbarossa. Don’t underestimate the impact of infantry and cavalry.
https://coloradowellington.files.wordpress.com/2015/10/grande-armee-in-russia-1812-retreat.jpg
https://coloradowellington.files.wordpress.com/2015/10/wehrmacht-in-russia-1942.png
Who painted the first picture? What is the significance of the Sphinx in the clouds??
OK, I found out:
http://encyclopedia.mil.ru/encyclopedia/history/more.htm?id=11219100@cmsArticle
The painting is misattributed on the Russian Ministry of Defense site: it is by Jerzy Kossak and painted in 1927. He was Polish and born in 1886 and died in 1955. He lived in Poland and the UK.
The painting looked a bit too modern to have been painted in the early 19th century.
Here is one of many peer reviewed papers predicting a coming ice age.
ATMOSPHERIC CARBON DIOXIDE AND AEROSOLS:
Effects of Large Increases on Global Climate.
Abstract.
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. Becuase 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 deg.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.
The rate at which human activities may be inadvertently modifying the climate of Earth has become a problem of serious concern . In the last few decades the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere appears to have increased by 7 percent . During the same period, the aerosol content of the lower atmosphere may have been augmented by as much as 100 percent .
How have these changes in the composition of the atmosphere affected the climate of the globe? More importantly, is it possible that a continued increase in the CO2 and dust content of the atmosphere at the present rate will produce such large-scale effects on the global temperature that the process may run away, with the planet Earth eventually becoming as hot as Venus (700 deg. K.) or as cold as Mars (230 deg. K.)?
We report here on the first results of a calculation in which separate estimates were made of the effects on global temperature of large increases in the amount of CO2 and dust in the atmosphere. It is found that even an increase by a factor of 8 in the amount of CO2, which is highly unlikely in the next several thousand years, will produce an increase in the surface temperature of less than 2 deg. K.
However, the effect on surface temperature of an increase in the aerosol content of the atmosphere is found to be quite significant. An increase by a factor of 4 in the equilibrium dust concentration in the global atmosphere, which cannot be ruled out as a possibility within the next century, could decrease the mean surface temperature by as much as 3.5 deg. K. If sustained over a period of several years, such a temperature decrease could be sufficient to trigger an ice age!
Schneider S. & Rasool S., “Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide and Aerosols – Effects of Large Increases on Global Climate”, Science, vol.173, 9 July 1971, p.138-141
Those results were bases on a climate model developed by none other than James Hansen, incidentally.
I remember a headline from British paper that read something like “Has Cleaner Air Caused Global Warming?” It went on to explain how eliminating sunlight-blocking pollution allowed it to get warmer. I thought that was a simple explanation.
There was a recent post at WUWT where a study found that partculates caused warming.