Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
TIME Magazine Archive Article -- Another Ice Age? -- Jun. 24, 1974(ENVIRONMENTALISM BARF!!!)
The 1970s Ice Age Myth and Time Magazine Covers ? by David Kirtley ? Greg Laden's Blog
Newsweek on the cooling world
The weather conspiracy: the coming of the new ice age : a report - Impact Team - Google Books
January 1999 contrarian Patrick Michaels wrote a commentary offering to "take even money that the 10 years ending on December 31, 2007, will show a statistically significant global cooling trend in temperatures measured by satellite", on the basis of his view that record temperatures in 1998 had been a blip. Fighting Fire With Facts | Cato Institute
The National Science Board's Patterns and Perspectives in Environmental Science report of 1972 discussed the cyclical behavior of climate, and the understanding at the time that the planet was entering a phase of cooling after a warm period. "Judging from the record of the past interglacial ages, the present time of high temperatures should be drawing to an end...followed by a long period of considerably colder temperatures leading into the next glacial age some 20,000 years from now. https://archive.org/details/patternsperspect00nati
In 2008, Al Gore boldly declared to a German audience that “the entire North ‘polarized’ cap will disappear in 5 years.” (Needless to say, that did not happen. In fact, the ice cap in the Arctic actually got larger this year.) Perhaps Mr. Gore should give up on his "Global Warrming Career" and return to his family legacy - the KKK
Nope!... And yoar a bigot!
peace...
Yes 7 whole scientists predicted cooling. 7.
Nice way to pick the exception and make an example out of them because thats hard to do *he said with a smirk*
I didn't pick these bogus arrogant theories such as glowarm an glocool.
No but you did choose to go with the one that no scientist agrees with as proof of how wrong scientist are.
I didn't pick these bogus arrogant theories such as glowarm an glocool.
No but you did choose to go with the one that no scientist agrees with as proof of how wrong scientist are.
No, I wouldn't choose either one of these bs theories against each other and ruin my reputation.
I lived through it. The reality is that it was a marginal view, even at the time.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K9RygL_bfQM
Climate myths: They predicted global cooling in the 1970s - environment - 16 May 2007 - New Scientist
The calls for action to prevent further human-induced global warming, by contrast, are based on an enormous body of research by thousands of scientists over more than a century that has been subjected to intense - and sometimes ferocious - scrutiny. According to the latest IPCC report, it is more than 90% certain that the world is already warming as a result of human activity (see Blame for global warming placed firmly on humankind).
Update: A survey of the scientific literature has found that between 1965 and 1979, 44 scientific papers predicted warming, 20 were neutral and just 7 predicted cooling. So while predictions of cooling got more media attention, the majority of scientists were predicting warming even then.
No but you did choose to go with the one that no scientist agrees with as proof of how wrong scientist are.
No, I wouldn't choose either one of these bs theories against each other and ruin my reputation.
You already choose it. You chose to go with the glocool theory that no scientist agree with as proof that scientist were wrong.
It makes total sense. Its like declaring you dont post here and as proof I link your posts
TIME Magazine Archive Article -- Another Ice Age? -- Jun. 24, 1974(ENVIRONMENTALISM BARF!!!)
The 1970s Ice Age Myth and Time Magazine Covers ? by David Kirtley ? Greg Laden's Blog
Newsweek on the cooling world
The weather conspiracy: the coming of the new ice age : a report - Impact Team - Google Books
January 1999 contrarian Patrick Michaels wrote a commentary offering to "take even money that the 10 years ending on December 31, 2007, will show a statistically significant global cooling trend in temperatures measured by satellite", on the basis of his view that record temperatures in 1998 had been a blip. Fighting Fire With Facts | Cato Institute
The National Science Board's Patterns and Perspectives in Environmental Science report of 1972 discussed the cyclical behavior of climate, and the understanding at the time that the planet was entering a phase of cooling after a warm period. "Judging from the record of the past interglacial ages, the present time of high temperatures should be drawing to an end...followed by a long period of considerably colder temperatures leading into the next glacial age some 20,000 years from now. https://archive.org/details/patternsperspect00nati
In 2008, Al Gore boldly declared to a German audience that the entire North polarized cap will disappear in 5 years. (Needless to say, that did not happen. In fact, the ice cap in the Arctic actually got larger this year.) Perhaps Mr. Gore should give up on his "Global Warrming Career" and return to his family legacy - the KKK
Nope!... And yoar a bigot!
peace...
Are you always such a frappuccino-sipping envirofreak, or did you get up on the wrong side of your padded room this morning?
If its the KKK - Gore comment that upset you -perhaps you should look into the History of this creeps family-his fathers record in the SEnate and so forth - but then again that woulld too much work for a loony, business-bashing douchebag, aren't you late for your Flag Burners Anonymous meeting ?
How the hell do you figure that???It just shows how ignorant we are of geological cycles. It was bullshit back then and its bullshit now.
Deniers back then and deniers now.
Whatever noun that you want to use will suffice. Looks like the deniers were correct in both instances. Keep worshipping your glowarm though if it makes you feel good.
Is that the NINETEEN 70s?The Liberal Global Cooling Scare of the 70s...
LOL
BTW,
No, I wouldn't choose either one of these bs theories against each other and ruin my reputation.
You already choose it. You chose to go with the glocool theory that no scientist agree with as proof that scientist were wrong.
It makes total sense. Its like declaring you dont post here and as proof I link your posts
Lol. I've stated that both are hoaxes and you're saying that I'm picking one over the other. Are you confused, CC? You're making no logical sense at all. But you are a true believer in your worship of glowarm.
You already choose it. You chose to go with the glocool theory that no scientist agree with as proof that scientist were wrong.
It makes total sense. Its like declaring you dont post here and as proof I link your posts
Lol. I've stated that both are hoaxes and you're saying that I'm picking one over the other. Are you confused, CC? You're making no logical sense at all. But you are a true believer in your worship of glowarm.
Proof that they are a hoax is....?
Lol. I've stated that both are hoaxes and you're saying that I'm picking one over the other. Are you confused, CC? You're making no logical sense at all. But you are a true believer in your worship of glowarm.
Proof that they are a hoax is....?
Did we go through an ice age or meltdown in the last 40 years?
Proof that they are a hoax is....?
Did we go through an ice age or meltdown in the last 40 years?
No one said that we would.
Again, your proof both are a hoax is?
Did we go through an ice age or meltdown in the last 40 years?
No one said that we would.
Again, your proof both are a hoax is?
Both theories said we would endure such atrocities. We didn't but throwing out a postulation that has already been proven ie glowarm, glocool is simply theatre. Geological cycles....the earth warms and cools and has been doing this for millions of years. We have no direct bearing on such cycles.
No one said that we would.
Again, your proof both are a hoax is?
Both theories said we would endure such atrocities. We didn't but throwing out a postulation that has already been proven ie glowarm, glocool is simply theatre. Geological cycles....the earth warms and cools and has been doing this for millions of years. We have no direct bearing on such cycles.
No. they. Did. Not.
Do you know what proof is? Its NOT you telling me things its you PROVING THINGS.
Both theories said we would endure such atrocities. We didn't but throwing out a postulation that has already been proven ie glowarm, glocool is simply theatre. Geological cycles....the earth warms and cools and has been doing this for millions of years. We have no direct bearing on such cycles.
No. they. Did. Not.
Do you know what proof is? Its NOT you telling me things its you PROVING THINGS.
Proof of what? That glowarm and glocool are simply retreads of an already known phenomenom? You can't be that dense, CC. I know you're smarter than that. You can try to riddle your questions but the truth is simple.
No. they. Did. Not.
Do you know what proof is? Its NOT you telling me things its you PROVING THINGS.
Proof of what? That glowarm and glocool are simply retreads of an already known phenomenom? You can't be that dense, CC. I know you're smarter than that. You can try to riddle your questions but the truth is simple.
Proof that they are hoaxes. You called it a hoax, I asked for proof that it was, you keep responding with "it is!"
Proof of what? That glowarm and glocool are simply retreads of an already known phenomenom? You can't be that dense, CC. I know you're smarter than that. You can try to riddle your questions but the truth is simple.
Proof that they are hoaxes. You called it a hoax, I asked for proof that it was, you keep responding with "it is!"
Simple. Go study geology. The proof is all there. I've studied it for 25 years.
Proof that they are hoaxes. You called it a hoax, I asked for proof that it was, you keep responding with "it is!"
Simple. Go study geology. The proof is all there. I've studied it for 25 years.
Sure you did. You missed the class on being authentic but aced the full of shit 101 course
