1979 UN Global Cooling Conference

In 1979, the World Meteorological Organization gathered 450 experts to discuss the threat of global cooling.

14 Feb 1979, 20 – News-Journal at Newspapers.com

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

11 Responses to 1979 UN Global Cooling Conference

  1. Steve Case says:

    Wow Tony! That is a Goddamn gem!!

  2. arn says:

    Where have all those ‘experts’ gone?
    Abducted by UFO’s?
    Or did every one of them pulled a Stephen Schneider and switched from ice age doom zealot to global warming doom zealot,because the rats left a sinking ship and found a new home?
    It seems that a global doom scenario was and is absolute necessary for the New World Order that was so many times announced by US presidents.

    • oldefarte says:

      I don’t know about “all of them”, Arn, but I remember, sometime in the last couple of years, reading an interview with Paul Ehrlich (most famous for his book “The Population Bomb”, but he was also an enthusiastic supporter of “Global Cooling” – which, of course, was going to further exacerbate our ruinous population pressure) in which he was asked about his earlier predictions of catastrophe (and there were few of these popular concerns with which he disagreed) and he says he was absolutely right. He doesn’t even concede that he might have been off a bit on the timing. Everything he said has come true and our doubts are nothing more than our stubborn refusal to recognize or admit our errors (yes, I know, I thought that “ironic”, too). I also recall a supporter of global warming (whose identity briefly escapes me) whose “take” on this matter is that “global cooling” IS “global warming”. It’s we humans screwing up the planet and it matters little whether we’ve turned up the heat or turned it off, which, I must say, seems rather sophisticated and certainly explains the current preference for the term “climate change” instead of “global warming”. Yup, we are responsible for “climate change” and if it rains too much, well, that’s our fault and if we have a drought, that’s our fault, too, and we need to fix this mess we’ve made, whatever the mess may actually be..

      • arn says:

        and your last sentence is proof that this not about warming but totalitarian control,
        as no matter what happens or what we do and how much we bow down to their wishes , it(the reduction of fossil fuels,the quality of weather)will never be enough to satisfy their demands.
        And if we continue this trend/train of thought till the very end
        that they will torture us as long a we are here.
        Than the only way to please them,the end goal is that we stop to exist,except the most equal of all animals.

        And Ehrlich is proof how crazy they are.
        No matter that his quote of failure is 100% and that he was promoting 2 total contradictory doom scenarios he thinks he is right.
        Seems there is no difference between a psychopath and a machine,
        both will execute there programs and stick to their code no matter how the real results are.

    • John Sutcliffe says:

      Follow the money.

  3. oldefarte says:

    On my bookshelf there are a couple of volumes from the mid-1970’s, one called “The Cooling” and the other (a best seller, btw) called “The Coming Ice Age”. I remember reading those when they came out. I was told the Earth was in imminent danger of becoming, once again, a “Snowball Earth” if we didn’t do something drastic (like, umm, dumping bazillions of tons of CO2 into the atmosphere to stabilize it). When, however, we didn’t freeze to death, I kind of lost interest in this whole climate change issue and was, as a result, taken by surprise when “An Inconvenient Truth” once more thrust climate change in my face. And I bought into it. UNTIL I began to research it (incl. rereading those earlier books). My conclusion? It’s hard to NOT be a (manmade) Climate Change Denier if you know the facts (among which is the cautionary tale of “The Coming Ice Age”). BUT, increasingly, I see climate change activists, when confronted with that “Global Cooling” embarrassment, dismissing it as “a single magazine article” which we deniers have parlayed into a wholly fallacious defense of our hateful, anti-earth notions. It wasn’t. It was considered (along with the warnings from Rachel Carson and Paul Ehrlich) a “real thing” and the uproar lasted for years (indeed, over a decade), generating all types of hype (incl. what became “Newsweek’s” 3rd best selling “Special Edition”). Indeed, as this article shows, it even generated a UN affiliated international conference to help us save ourselves (a conference, interestingly, which was held after the “unmistakable and uninterrupted 40 year cooling trend” – yes, a real quote from the environmentalist literature of the time – had already reversed itself naturally). So how did the current day climate hysterics come up with this “single magazine article” story? Well, it seems that that particular assertion was made in an editorial in, I believe, the Feb. 2014 issue of either “Science” or “Nature” magazine. That’s it. This assertion was and is supported by a single sentence in a single article in a single magazine, however, because it “supported the (current) narrative” it has been taken to heart and endlessly repeated whenever the matter comes up. Well, folks, I was there and it was a whole lot more than that and it was a concern that did not go away until 1988 when James Hanson, despairing of the glaciers ever arriving, suddenly decided that we were all actually gonna die from a new heat wave – and, of course, we are obliged to believe that because we are told that there is a 97% scientific consensus on that matter. Then again, I was assured (multiple times in multiple books and magazines and newspapers, etc.) that this imminent ice age was “unanimously supported” by climate scientists. That’s encouraging. It means that the degree of certitude is actually slipping.

  4. Tom Goldie says:

    So successful.

  5. MrTea says:

    The “single article” theme can be found on just about every “skeptical science” site or blog in existence. It’s as if–as seems often the case–that some Meme Central thing pukes these out and the minions lap it right up.
    I was taking Environmental Physics in 1979 at Cal-Berkeley, the instructor was so tight with “Bomb” Ehrlich that he was part of team (along with the insufferable John Holdren) that helped Ehrlich choose the 5 price indicators to use in the “Simon wager” presented by iconoclast economist Julian Simon (Ehrlich wound up having to fork over $10K when all the indicators went DOWN in the 80s as Simon predicted). The whole theme was running out of everything/era of limits that was being pushed by Jerry (Small Is Beautiful) Brown. The greenhouse effect was in the curriculum but it was not emphasized and there was certainly no “meltdown panic”. It was in sync with how the Club of Rome predicted NO MORE oil as of….2015.
    The chicken littles’ “predictions” are so easily demolished they can only be supported by a pervasive Lie Of Omission. Hansen wrote that seminal paper predicting warming in 1975–but in 1985 said “3 degrees C up by 2020′ (it was 1/2 degree). Web search for “predictions on the first Earth Day” and you’ll laugh–they are all 100% gloom and doom and Ehrlich said agriculture collapses (from clouded skies) in the 90s.
    If you look up the numbers, the US demographic that came of age in the 70s DID do “ZPG”. No increase. The entirety of the 40% increase in US population came from immigrants and their descendants, who are breeding like it’s a contest.
    Texas A&M published research 7 years ago showing emissions from Asia–the biggest and fastest-growing source, as US has gone down since 2005–are what is disrupting North American weather patterns (the “Northern Pacific Storm Track). NatGeo website picked it up, and NO corporate media TV has ever touched it. It’s like they are working for China.

  6. arn says:

    I have a question :
    If you already knew about the ice age scare and were well aware and educated about the subject
    How could you fall for the lie?

    I am not trying to mock you .I am just trying to understand the way of thought and why your BS detector was not working from the beginning and when and why the moment of awareness arrived.
    I wasn’t born when the ice age scare started so I’m pretty useless in this case,
    but it would help us a lot to counterbalance the AGW propaganda if we understand what mental and rhetorical methods paralyze our brain(fear,good intentions,gentle approach,good presentation etc) so we ignore existing knowledge( ice age) and don’t even wonder how a politician with
    a bachelor of arts degree in government can become the ultimate climate authority?
    And what triggered your enlightenment?

  7. Thomas Heath says:

    What do we know for certain? This: Climate scammers love to gather and party on the taxpayers withered teat.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.