A look at the left over the decades...

[toobfreak]

1970’s: The new ice age! We’re all gonna die!

1980’s: Acid rain! We’re all gonna die!

1990’s: The ozone layer is deteriorating! We’re all gonna die!

2000’s: Global warming is melting the glaciers! We’re all gonna die!

2010’s: Climate Change! In 12 years, we’re all gonna die!

See the pattern? Declare a catastrophic problem. Build it up with hyperbole. Demand power and control over private citizens and private industry to “solve” the “problem”.

You left one out.

2019's: Trump's in office! We're all gonna die!

 

[toobfreak]

Um...births are way down across the entire planet. That is a fact.

Poodle, the world population has gone from over 2 billion in 1950 to nearly 8 billion today.

Moron, he was talking about the birth RATE. That doesn't mean population doesn't still go up. More people still equals more babies. Just that each family on average are having fewer. But there are still more families. But I know basic math eludes you so you still won't get that.

The only way to have an actual DECLINE in world population is for most people to stop having kids altogether for an extended period of time.

 

[Erinwltr]

1970’s: The new ice age! We’re all gonna die!

1980’s: Acid rain! We’re all gonna die!

1990’s: The ozone layer is deteriorating! We’re all gonna die!

2000’s: Global warming is melting the glaciers! We’re all gonna die!

2010’s: Climate Change! In 12 years, we’re all gonna die!

See the pattern? Declare a catastrophic problem. Build it up with hyperbole. Demand power and control over private citizens and private industry to “solve” the “problem”.

So where is the Bison Mod?

 

[JoeB131]

You might have been there, but apparently you weren't all "there."

Yeah, actually, I was... and, no, even though we had some brutal winters in the 1970's, no one really thought the world was freezing.

 

[JoeB131]

Moron, he was talking about the birth RATE. That doesn't mean population doesn't still go up. More people still equals more babies. Just that each family on average are having fewer. But there are still more families. But I know basic math eludes you so you still won't get that.

The only way to have an actual DECLINE in world population is for most people to stop having kids altogether for an extended period of time.

Well, no, the way to have a decline is to have more deaths than births...

Japan is already there, but most of the world, isn't.

 

[Erinwltr]

Um...births are way down across the entire planet. That is a fact.

Poodle, the world population has gone from over 2 billion in 1950 to nearly 8 billion today.

Moron, he was talking about the birth RATE. That doesn't mean population doesn't still go up. More people still equals more babies. Just that each family on average are having fewer. But there are still more families. But I know basic math eludes you so you still won't get that.

The only way to have an actual DECLINE in world population is for most people to stop having kids altogether for an extended period of time.

You know, if you'd stop calling folks names, you might just get somewhere. So this caught my attention. Sir.

 

[Erinwltr]

You might have been there, but apparently you weren't all "there."

Yeah, actually, I was... and, no, even though we had some brutal winters in the 1970's, no one really thought the world was freezing.

70s winters on the East coast were a Breeze.

 

[toobfreak]

Um...births are way down across the entire planet. That is a fact.

Poodle, the world population has gone from over 2 billion in 1950 to nearly 8 billion today.

Moron, he was talking about the birth RATE. That doesn't mean population doesn't still go up. More people still equals more babies. Just that each family on average are having fewer. But there are still more families. But I know basic math eludes you so you still won't get that.

The only way to have an actual DECLINE in world population is for most people to stop having kids altogether for an extended period of time.

You know, if you'd stop calling folks names, you might just get somewhere. So this caught my attention. Sir.

Get somewhere with Joe B? Are you delusional? On a forum where leftard's first, last and middle words to everyone are insults and name calling, I only call names back to beat them to the punchline. Get a grip.

 

[toobfreak]

no one really thought the world was freezing.

No one except about 100 news stories I saw, 500 articles I read, all the examples I posted plus about 1,000 others easily found on the web. Other than that, Joe, you are dead right.

 

[sparky]

On a forum where leftard's first, last and middle words to everyone are insults and name calling

really? seems the rightards are keeping up

~S~

 

[JoeB131]

No one except about 100 news stories I saw, 500 articles I read, all the examples I posted plus about 1,000 others easily found on the web. Other than that, Joe, you are dead right.

Except you didn't find them on direct sources, you found them on denier websites... Half of them are probably fake.. the rest come from non-credible sources or are taken out of context.

 

[Erinwltr]

no one really thought the world was freezing.

No one except about 100 news stories I saw, 500 articles I read, all the examples I posted plus about 1,000 others easily found on the web. Other than that, Joe, you are dead right.

I'll take that as a given. You like Joe, don't you?

 

[toobfreak]

No one except about 100 news stories I saw, 500 articles I read, all the examples I posted plus about 1,000 others easily found on the web. Other than that, Joe, you are dead right.

Except you didn't find them on direct sources, you found them on denier websites... Half of them are probably fake.. the rest come from non-credible sources or are taken out of context.

Let's face it Joe:

1. You have NO IDEA where I found them. They came off Bing as photos of actual magazine covers and news articles so you are wrong again as always.
2. Your "denier websites" theory is just your usual way of dismissing everything that conflicts with your narrow ideology so you don't have to deal with reality.
3. Your "Half of them are probably fake" rationalization is just another convenient deflection with no basis in known or proven fact.

Talking to you as always is like trying to push a car with a wet piece of rope.

 

[JoeB131]

Let's face it Joe:

1. You have NO IDEA where I found them. They came off Bing as photos of actual magazine covers and news articles so you are wrong again as always.
2. Your "denier websites" theory is just your usual way of dismissing everything that conflicts with your narrow ideology so you don't have to deal with reality.
3. Your "Half of them are probably fake" rationalization is just another convenient deflection with no basis in known or proven fact.

Talking to you as always is like trying to push a car with a wet piece of rope.

The reality is, if you were around in the 1970's, is that "New Ice Age" was a pop-culture thing that had no grounding in the Scientific community.

https://skepticalscience.com/ice-age-predictions-in-1970s-intermediate.htm

However, these are media articles, not scientific studies. A survey of peer reviewed scientific papers from 1965 to 1979 show that few papers predicted global cooling (7 in total). Significantly more papers (42 in total) predicted global warming (Peterson 2008). The large majority of climate research in the 1970s predicted the Earth would warm as a consequence of CO2. Rather than 1970s scientists predicting cooling, the opposite is the case.

In the 1970s, the most comprehensive study on climate change (and the closest thing to a scientific consensus at the time) was the 1975 US National Academy of Sciences/National Research Council Report. Their basic conclusion was "…we do not have a good quantitative understanding of our climate machine and what determines its course. Without the fundamental understanding, it does not seem possible to predict climate…"

This is in strong contrast with the current position of the US National Academy of Sciences: "...there is now strong evidence that significant global warming is occurring... It is likely that most of the warming in recent decades can be attributed to human activities... The scientific understanding of climate change is now sufficiently clear to justify nations taking prompt action." This is in a joint statement with the Academies of Science from Brazil, France, Canada, China, Germany, India, Italy, Japan, Russia and the United Kingdom.

In contrast to the 1970s, there are now a number of scientific bodies that have released statements affirming man-made global warming. More on scientific consensus...

 

[toobfreak]

The reality is, if you were around in the 1970's,

The reality is Joe that I was around in the 1950s. I grew up in the 70s hearing about the coming ice age everywhere on television, newspapers and magazines, and all the bullshit in the world from you cannot change that.

 

[JoeB131]

The reality is Joe that I was around in the 1950s. I grew up in the 70s hearing about the coming ice age everywhere on television, newspapers and magazines, and all the bullshit in the world from you cannot change that.

What you heard on TV doesn't really matter. I remember TV in the 1970's had a bunch of shows about Bigfoot, that wasn't real, either.

 

[toobfreak]

The reality is Joe that I was around in the 1950s. I grew up in the 70s hearing about the coming ice age everywhere on television, newspapers and magazines, and all the bullshit in the world from you cannot change that.

What you heard on TV doesn't really matter. I remember TV in the 1970's had a bunch of shows about Bigfoot, that wasn't real, either.

Big difference between Walter Cronkite, Time Magazine and Scientific American from stories about Sasquatch seen in the hills on the Unsolved Mysteries Channel. If what all the credible news sources back then reported as valid, latest scientific thinking doesn't matter, then neither do any of the CURRENT news sources claiming Global Warming.

THANKS FOR TRIPPING RIGHT INTO THAT ONE FACE FIRST.

 

[JoeB131]

Big difference between Walter Cronkite, Time Magazine and Scientific American from stories about Sasquatch seen in the hills on the Unsolved Mysteries Channel. If what all the credible news sources back then reported as valid, latest scientific thinking doesn't matter, then neither do any of the CURRENT news sources claiming Global Warming.

Except they really didn't. Bigfoot stories made the nightly news. The Chicago Tribune ran a front page story about those two rednecks who claimed they were abducted in MS in 1973, even published drawings of the aliens. (This was before they decided all aliens looked the same.) Mainstream news was pop culture, and there was a lot of psuedo-science that found its way into 1970's news reporting.

MEANWHILE, real scientists discounted such theories then and now.

 

[bripat9643]

Um...births are way down across the entire planet. That is a fact.

Poodle, the world population has gone from over 2 billion in 1950 to nearly 8 billion today.

OMG....you freaking Drama Queen. This “rock” can sustain 10x’s our current population. 70% of the Earth’s planet is covered by the ocean. There is enough seafood out there today alone to feed the world for thousands of years.

Um.. yeah, I'm sure you think you'll be dining on Lobster, but...

We're kind of fucked.

If we extrapolate the temperature change from 6:00 AM to 3:00 PM, it should be 300 degrees by midnight.

 

[JoeB131]

If we extrapolate the temperature change from 6:00 AM to 3:00 PM, it should be 300 degrees by midnight.

Thanks for reminding us that you are math challenged due to your head injury...