Not 0.3% but 97% of the world's climatologists agree

[gwb-trading]

That's easy isn't it? Just declare any facts that contradict to be fraud.

And I know you're stupid, but whether I or you saw and heard stories about a cool down is irrelevent. Did you even read the material I showed? It was the popular press, NOT the scientists that popularized the idea. The scientists mostly predicted warming. Understand now? What you hear on TV is NOT the same as what the science is.

Previously we have provided a link with a long list of global cooling papers written by scientists in the 70s. But true to form... you never read it. Because - as you claimed before - you refuse to read any material that is not aligned with your global warming religion. The 'popular press' in the 70s simply picked up on global cooling as a news theme because it was regularly being pushed by scientists with an agenda -- no different than it is with global warming today.

Once again you have failed to answer the question... Did you attend high school or college in the United States during the 1970s?

Nobody who went to high school or college in the United States during the 1970s would ever claim that global cooling was not pushed as an 'accepted scientific fact'... it was in the material for every Earth Science class.

 

[futurecurrents]

Previously we have provided a link with a long list of global cooling papers written by scientists in the 70s. But true to form... you never read it. Because - as you claimed before - you refuse to read any material that is not aligned with your global warming religion. The 'popular press' in the 70s simply picked up on global cooling as a news theme because it was regularly being pushed by scientists with an agenda -- no different than it is with global warming today.

Once again you have failed to answer the question... Did you attend high school or college in the United States during the 1970s?

Nobody who went to high school or college in the United States during the 1970s would ever claim that global cooling was not pushed as an 'accepted scientific fact'... it was in the material for every Earth Science class.

What part of " It does not matter what we heard, but what the scientists were actually doing".....don't you get. Wow you are stupid. Anecdotal evidence is trumped by the actual facts. Know what that means?

In fact, I was in college in the seventies getting my Env Sci degree and no, there was no widespread talk about it that I can remember. Certainly not in the classroom. There WAS talk about nuclear power, which now is looking like the best answer given the problems of CO2 pollution.

 

[gwb-trading]

What part of " It does not matter what we heard, but what the scientists were actually doing".....don't you get. Wow you are stupid. Anecdotal evidence is trumped by the actual facts. Know what that means?

In fact, I was in college in the seventies getting my Env Sci degree and no, there was no widespread talk about it that I can remember. Certainly not in the classroom. There WAS talk about nuclear power, which now is looking like the best answer given the problems of CO2 pollution.

Time for a fact sheet...

http://www.climatedepot.com/2009/10...s-factsheet-on-1970s-coming-ice-age-claims-2/

Despite many claims to the contrary, the 1970′s global cooling fears were widespread among many scientists and in the media. Despite the fact that there was no UN IPCC organization created to promote global cooling in the 1970s and despite the fact that there was nowhere near the tens of billions of dollars in funding spent today to promote man-made global warming, fears of a coming ice age, showed up in peer-reviewed literature, at scientific conferences, voiced by prominent scientists and throughout the media.

A couple of examples:

National Academy of Sciences Issued Report Warning of Coming Ice Age in 1975
Excerpt: “A major climatic change would force economic and social adjustments on a worldwide scale,” warns a recent report by the National Academy of Sciences, “because the global patterns of food production and population that have evolved are implicitly dependent on the climate of the present century.” – Newsweek – April 28, 1975 “The Cooling World

NASA warned of human caused coming ‘ice age’ in 1971 – Washington Times – September 19, 2007
Excerpt: “The world “could be as little as 50 or 60 years away from a disastrous new ice age, a leading atmospheric scientist predicts,” read a July 9, 1971 Washington Post article. NASA scientist S.I. Rasool, a colleague of James Hansen, made the predictions. The 1971 article continues: “In the next 50 years” — or by 2021 — fossil-fuel dust injected by man into the atmosphere “could screen out so much sunlight that the average temperature could drop by six degrees,” resulting in a buildup of “new glaciers that could eventually cover huge areas.” If sustained over “several years, five to 10,” or so Mr. Rasool estimated, “such a temperature decrease could be sufficient to trigger an ice age.

(many more examples at above url)

Plus some more links to 1970s global cooling alarmism - http://www.populartechnology.net/2013/02/the-1970s-global-cooling-alarmism.html

and even more here - with links to many scientific papers from the 1970s pushing global cooling in the comments - http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/03/01/global-cooling-compilation/

and yet even more from the 1970s here - http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/1970s-ice-age-scare/

So much for your denial that there was no 'global cooling' scare in the 1970s driven by scientists and the media. No different than it is today with 'global warming'.

 

[futurecurrents]

Time for a fact sheet...

http://www.climatedepot.com/2009/10...s-factsheet-on-1970s-coming-ice-age-claims-2/

Despite many claims to the contrary, the 1970′s global cooling fears were widespread among many scientists and in the media. Despite the fact that there was no UN IPCC organization created to promote global cooling in the 1970s and despite the fact that there was nowhere near the tens of billions of dollars in funding spent today to promote man-made global warming, fears of a coming ice age, showed up in peer-reviewed literature, at scientific conferences, voiced by prominent scientists and throughout the media.

A couple of examples:

National Academy of Sciences Issued Report Warning of Coming Ice Age in 1975
Excerpt: “A major climatic change would force economic and social adjustments on a worldwide scale,” warns a recent report by the National Academy of Sciences, “because the global patterns of food production and population that have evolved are implicitly dependent on the climate of the present century.” – Newsweek – April 28, 1975 “The Cooling World

NASA warned of human caused coming ‘ice age’ in 1971 – Washington Times – September 19, 2007
Excerpt: “The world “could be as little as 50 or 60 years away from a disastrous new ice age, a leading atmospheric scientist predicts,” read a July 9, 1971 Washington Post article. NASA scientist S.I. Rasool, a colleague of James Hansen, made the predictions. The 1971 article continues: “In the next 50 years” — or by 2021 — fossil-fuel dust injected by man into the atmosphere “could screen out so much sunlight that the average temperature could drop by six degrees,” resulting in a buildup of “new glaciers that could eventually cover huge areas.” If sustained over “several years, five to 10,” or so Mr. Rasool estimated, “such a temperature decrease could be sufficient to trigger an ice age.

(many more examples at above url)

Plus some more links to 1970s global cooling alarmism - http://www.populartechnology.net/2013/02/the-1970s-global-cooling-alarmism.html

and even more here - with links to many scientific papers from the 1970s pushing global cooling in the comments - http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/03/01/global-cooling-compilation/

and yet even more from the 1970s here - http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/1970s-ice-age-scare/

So much for your denial that there was no 'global cooling' scare in the 1970s driven by scientists and the media. No different than it is today with 'global warming'.

Yes but there were more science papers predicting global warming than cooling. That's what's important. I don't know why you are having so much trouble with this. It's unimportant regardless. That was then, this is now. A previous mistake does not mean the current opinion is wrong. That's basic logic.

 

[gwb-trading]

Yes but there were more science papers predicting global warming than cooling. That's what's important. I don't know why you are having so much trouble with this. It's unimportant regardless. That was then, this is now. A previous mistake does not mean the current opinion is wrong. That's basic logic.

There was not more science papers in the 1970s predicting global warming rather than cooling. That is the entire point - you are attempting (with others) to re-write history.

Earlier in this thread you posted a fabricated chart that perpetuates this fraud - by attempting to assert that less than 10 papers supporting global cooling were written each year in the 70s. The links I provided above show clearly this is not true.

 

[futurecurrents]

There was not more science papers in the 1970s predicting global warming rather than cooling. That is the entire point - you are attempting (with others) to re-write history.

Earlier in this thread you posted a fabricated chart that perpetuates this fraud - by attempting to assert that less than 10 papers supporting global cooling were written each year in the 70s. The links I provided above show clearly this is not true.

No, there were scientific papers, written by scientists not journalists, that predicted global warming. Multiple studies have shown this. I would show you again but it is pointless. You are a lost cause.

 

[futurecurrents]

No, there were scientific papers, written by scientists not journalists, that predicted global warming. Multiple studies have shown this. I would show you again but it is pointless. You are a lost cause.

 

[gwb-trading]

Methane leaks from some fracking sites 1000 times above official figures
http://www.ecnmag.com/news/2014/04/...?et_cid=3887540&et_rid=210448619&location=top

Interesting article.... Why is this bad you ask? Not due to some fanciful idea that more methane causes global warming. It is more an issue of local ground water pollution and local quality of life. Combined with fracking waste, methane causes problems in all the local wells of nearby residents.

 

[futurecurrents]

Methane leaks from some fracking sites 1000 times above official figures
http://www.ecnmag.com/news/2014/04/...?et_cid=3887540&et_rid=210448619&location=top

Interesting article.... Why is this bad you ask? Not due to some fanciful idea that more methane causes global warming. It is more an issue of local ground water pollution and local quality of life. Combined with fracking waste, methane causes problems in all the local wells of nearby residents.

So then you admit you are not aware that methane is a much more powerful ghg than CO2 and so therefore is contributing to global warming. Do you even know what a ghg is?

 

[gwb-trading]

So then you admit you are not aware that methane is a much more powerful ghg than CO2 and so therefore is contributing to global warming. Do you even know what a ghg is?

Once again... Let me spell it out... Global Warming is a farce.

No different than the global cooling alarmism in the 1970s.

Do you know what a farce is?