National Geographic 1967 – Sunspots Control Earth’s Climate, Not CO2

Some people speculate that increasing smog will cause our atmosphere to capture and retain more solar heat, gradually melting the world’s icecaps. But I believe smog and other factors, such as changing carbon dioxide content and volcanic dust, will prove only marginal in their effects on our climatic future.

Dr. Hurd C. Willett, Professor of Meteorology at Massachusetts Institute of Technology, suggests the answer. Dr. Willett, one of our staff affiliates this year, has shown us how cyclic changes in the climate closely parallel the cyclic changes in sunspot activity—the manifestations of powerful electrical energy discharges from the sun.* We now feel confident that our investigations here back up the solar-climate theory of weather cycles. Sunspots have been diligently recorded for well over 200 years. We find that glacier fluctuations over these past two centuries show a tantalizing correlation, taking into account the glaciers’ flow lag, with sun storms and temperature trends.

The National Geographic Archive | February 1967 | page 1

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

22 Responses to National Geographic 1967 – Sunspots Control Earth’s Climate, Not CO2

  1. arn says:

    I wonder when and how climate scientists lost all their knowledge
    and forgot about sun spots or smog as heat trap.
    Co2 is so strong that it causes amnesia.

    • Fred Hubler says:

      Climate scientists forgot that knowledge when the government started passing out grant money to prove CO2 was the problem, and fired any government scientists who didn’t buy the party line.

      • Roger says:

        Yeah? The ‘government’ controls all the private universities, the oil companies, the insurance companies, the multinational organizations, the NGOs and the media now? Get off your ridiculous conspiracy horse before it rides you into the sunset, never to be heard from again.

  2. Anon says:

    Here is Willie Soon going into this in more detail (Very interesting, he attributes sun spots to the orbit of the sun around the solar system barycenter) and can actually explain /hindcast all of the minimums (Wolf, Sporer, Maunder, Dalton, Modern)

  3. republic says:

    Sometimes I wonder what Maynard Miller would think of the current CO2 nonsense. Would he appreciate the “tricks” of Ben Santer et al.? The failed predictions of the CO2 crowd have not caused much critical thought among the initiates nor the priestly caste. Unfortunately, I don’t believe that the conditions of the glaciers of the Juneau Icefield will do much to cause reflection among this crowd.

    South East Alaska is an intetesting measuring tool from a historical and cyclical standpoint. When the jetstream shifts to a more meridional flow this part of Alaska actually warms up. The uncovered trees disgorged from retreating glaciers testify to the cyclical nature of our climate and to the warm conditions that can prevail in this region. Depending on the exact location of the Aleutian Low and the Continental High this region’s winter can vary from balmy maritime conditions to dry arctic conditions. Snow being deposited in the greatest extents when the frontal boundary sits closely offshore, allowing incursions of moist maritime air up the mountainsides to fall as snow and not as rain.

    • Jim says:

      If we all want to be very honest, snd I know we do, let’s chat…. Let’s google micro-nova and read very carefully what it says…. Then let’s google the Diehold Foundation and start watching the videos…. Be prepared to be stunned. For extra credit you can google the Georgia guidestones and read the first commandment of the new ten commandments… I know you are thinking I am a tinfoil hat wearing idiot, please reserve your assessment for after you find out the greatest secret man could ever imagine… Your Welsome.

  4. Nelson says:

    Great find Tony! Anyway chance that you could post more of the article. I lived in Juneau and have climbed all over the Juneau Icefield. I would love to send the article to friends in Juneau that have bought the CO2 scare hook.line, and sinker. I gave up on Nat Geo years ago. Talk about a publication that has gone downhill. Thanks

  5. rah says:

    Historic predictions by authorities in their fields.

  6. GW Smith says:

    How could anyone believe the universe is infinite, everyone knows it was created out of nothing in a big bang.

    • arn says:

      Isn’t it a contradiction that the slightest violation of thermodynamic laws
      (except AGW)
      is not allowed in a universe that got created out of nothing :)

      • Jason Calley says:

        There’s no special problem creating a universe in violation of thermodynamic laws. You just create the universe FIRST, and THEN you create the laws that govern it.

        (Just joking! I think. Hmmm… Now I’m not sure, it’s starting to make sense!)

        • arn says:

          you mean the universe where thermodynamic laws can not be violated can exist before before the laws??
          Must be an evolutionary universe and a pretty smart one too to know that it’s about time to create some laws.
          The lawless universe must have looked like the wild wild west back then.

  7. Patp1222 says:

    Got Locked out of my Twitter account. I print screened where the 20’s had ARCTIC Ice melting.
    Weather Journal.

  8. Patp1222 says:

    Account Locked out

  9. jon parks says:

    so have we learned anything new i the past 50 years? If not we can just read the old copies of Nat. Geo. by the side of the toilet. And treat them as today’s news

    • Gator says:

      Another history denier.

      Actually climate science has stalled over the past half century, thanks to science deniers such as yourself, and grantologists who throw out actual data in favor of artifacts. And you lefties wonder why you always get it wrong…

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *