Ramble on hairball...all you proved was that you are unable to read and comprehend.
In almost every case here, your fraud technique is to cherrypick a couple sentences from the body that describe past cooling, and then ignore the conclusions where they predict warming, or simply make no prediction.
Insolation and glacials
Kukla 1972, one of the few papers that actually predicted warming. Your fraud tally is 0 out of 1.
Atmosphere-surface exchange of particulate and gaseous pollutants (1974). Proceedings of a symposium, Richland, Washington, September 4--6, 1974 (Conference) | SciTech Connect
Not a paper, just a mention that a symposium exists. No predictions made. Fraud on your part to claim it's a paper predicting cooling. Your fraud tally is 1 out of 2.
The Upward Trend in Airborne Particulates That Isn’t - Springer
Ellsaesser, 1975. Made no future predictions. So, your second outright fraud. Your fraud tally is 2 out of 3.
http://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/pdf/10.1175/1520-0477(1980)061<1356
CCAAP>2.0.CO;2
Agee 1980. Specifically predicts warming in the future. Your fraud tally is 3 out of 4.
http://www.pnas.org/content/67/2/898.short
Benton 1970. Makes no future predictions. Your fraud tally is 4 out of 5.
Full text of "Understanding climatic change"
National Academy of Sciences discussion. Not a paper, and makes no future predictions. Your fraud tally is 5 out of 6.
http://www.readcube.com/articles/10.1038/254014a0
Gribben 1975. Paywalled. Gribben was not a climate scientist, and was a conspiracy theorist who made up things like "The Jupiter Effect", so lumping him in with Climate Sceintists is fraud. Your tally is 6 out of 7.
https://docs.lib.noaa.gov/rescue/journals/noaa/QC851U461974oct.pdf#page=5
NOAA magazine. Not a paper. Your fraud tally is 7 out of 8.
https://www2.meteo.uni-bonn.de/bibliothek/Flohn_Publikationen/K227-K255_1972-1977/K242a.pdf
Flohn 1974. Makes no cooling predictions. Your fraud tally is 8 out of 9.
Holocene glacial and tree-line variations in the White River Valley and Skolai Pass, Alaska and Yukon Territory - ScienceDirect
Denton 1977. Makes no cooling predictions. Your fraud tally is 9 out of 10.
Interglacial and postglacial climates: The pollen record - ScienceDirect
Wright 1972. Predicts only extremely long glacial cycles, so not a cooling prediction. Your fraud tally is 10 out of 11.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/23926700_Climate_Stability_for_a_Sellers-Type_Model
Predicts cooling only if solar radiation drops 2%, so not a prediction of cooling. Your fraud tally is 11 out of 12.
http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.395.3637&rep=rep1&type=pdf
Whal 1968. Weakly predicts cooling. One of Bryson's crew, so one of the deniers. Your fraud tally is 12 out of 13.
Climatology of a glacial cycle - ScienceDirect
Fairbridge 1972. Predicts only very long glacial cycles, so not a prediction of cooling. Your fraud tally is 13 out of 14.
https://empslocal.ex.ac.uk/people/staff/gv219/classics.d/Budyko69.pdf
Budkyo 1968. Predicts cooling, but things were very primitive in 1968. By 1972, Budkyo had reversed and predicted warming. Failing to mention that puts your fraud tally at 14 out of 15.
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00963402.1970.11457871
Fletcher 1970. Not possible to figure out what it's predicting. Your snippet from the first page certainly wasn't a prediction of cooling.
So, your final fraud tally is 15 out of 16. Impressive. You must be upset you didn't get 100%. You'll have to work harder, you let something true slip through.
And I could go on at length...
Indeed. Your ability to engage in open and brazen fraud does seem to be limitless.
That was the point, right? At least it's the point everyone understands now.