extracted from The Anomalist-11
from Scribd Website
An article from the April 28, 1975 issue of Newsweek titled “The Cooling World” (click below image) makes for fascinating reading. It becomes very clear that the great weather debate has been with us for some time.
But we seem to forget how quickly the issues and forecasts get completely turned around. In the mid 1970s scientists were worried about a cooling trend,
This brings up an intriguing point that most of today’s journalists reporting on global warming seem to have missed.
The so-called “global warming” that is being alleged to have occurred over the past century is a myth. The warming trend occurred between 1900 and 1940 that was then replaced by colder weather.
The article reported that a survey completed by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
The article went on to mention the “little ice age” that took place from the 16th to the middle of the 19th centuries and the stark fact,
The last 1000 years underscores just how complex the alternating weather cycles really are.
In 987 A.D, Erik the Red sailed
to Greenland with a band of Vikings to escape punishment for the
crime of manslaughter. It was not known to be a hospitable climate,
the ice sheet was usually very thick. But the Vikings got lucky:
things had changed during a global warm spell and Erik established
two farming settlements where the ice had formerly been.
The “little ice age” set its icy grip on the world in the 15th and 16th centuries. Historical records in Great Britain and China complain of vintners having to relocate their vineyards 300 miles south of where they had been and orange groves that had suddenly been killed by hard frosts. By 1700 Iceland was surrounded by sea ice again.
The “little ice age” lasted until
the middle of the 19th century.
The hypothesis soon turned into established
science, at least according to its promoters, and it became the
daily bread of the mass media throughout the 1990s (and still is).
Earth’s land-based ecosystems absorbed all the naturally produced
carbon dioxide plus 1.4 billion tons that humanity produced. The
media published this report but never made mention of it being the
cornerstone prediction of the “global warming” theory. Interesting.
A paper titled “Antarctic Climate Cooling and Terrestrial Ecosystem Response” recently appeared on Nature’s web site:
The scientists who are shouting the loudest about warming trends at the South Pole, who seem to have the media’s ear, are studying a strip of land on the Antarctic Peninsula, not the western ice sheet or the interior valleys.
On January 14, 2002 the Washington Post reported,
major U.S. papers failed to pick up this story.
We will find more compelling evidence to the contrary,
but do not expect to see it covered with same “white heat” that
global warming has been for two decades.
stations in the Alps and Nordic countries show a 1°C decline
In Patagonia, the Mount Moreno
glacier is expanding. These
reports may come as a surprise because all we seem to hear about are
the glaciers and ice features that are melting.
A 1992 Gallup survey of
climatologists found that 81 percent believed that the global
temperature had not risen over the past 100 years, were uncertain
whether or why such warming had occurred, or believed any
temperatures increases during that period were within the natural
range of variation. What consensus has the media been referring to
we might ask?
Average global temperatures can be very misleading since many of the
readings are taken around major metro areas that are known to be
“heat islands.” Satellite data, which is not subject to any local
ground-based distortion, indicate a slight cooling over the past 18
Now let us interject and interpose the data and the historical context that the “global warmers” leave out of their scenario: We are about 10,500 years into an interglacial warming period.
been punctuated by several “mini ice ages” but on the whole the
Earth has been warming and the ice sheets thinning and the glaciers
melting since the end of the last
Great Ice Age. The long-term
climate models clearly show oscillations between alternating ice
ages and interglacials. The current warm trend has already lasted
longer than previous ones.
It only ended in 1850 when the industrial revolution was underway adding CO2 to the atmosphere. In his article Hecht notes that,
Admittedly, this is a complex set of cycles with many variables, however the graphs of ice core studies show a fairly predictable pattern geared, not to CO2 levels, but to the Earth’s tilt, precession and the fluctuations of solar radiation reaching the Earth.
The 100,000- year Ice Age is a convergence of 41,000 year and
26,000 cycles. They are complex but not chaotic. These patterns are
very precise and have been rigorously studied and established.
About 18,000 years ago the last Ice Age
was at its peak. Vast ice sheets covered the Northern Hemisphere.
Sea levels were about 300-feet lower than today. An Ice Age gains
momentum and feeds on itself as
the albedo effect reflects incoming
solar radiation back to space, the oceans also cool and the Polar
seas freeze and the summers get colder and colder.
The ice sheets disappear, the land holds in more heat and the ocean warms, melting glaciers and raising sea levels. Now 10 millennia into that process all that we see are the warming cycle, the trends and momentum of the interglacial epoch. But isn’t this how a cyclical phenomena with a trend operates? Every waveform has a peak and a trough. Just as the trend seems to be manifesting some stability it dissolves and reverses polarity.
And it is just like people to start believing the
trend is permanent just before the reversal.
Greenland was actually another land mass that bucked the alleged “global warming” trends by,
Dr. David Deming of the University of Oklahoma points out that Earth’s average temperature was higher than at present for 7,500 of the past 10,000 years. The only “global warming” we are experiencing is in relation to the last “little ice age” we have been coming out of.
So what then, we may wonder, is the danger of a little rise in
the global temperature, if it were indeed happening?
This is troubling because it points up a fact that many people are becoming aware of: science and the mass media have been operating in a very unscientific way by making ludicrous proclamations and statements that sound more like the Psychic Hotline than what we should expect from our key scientific and journalistic institutions.
What happened to the rules of objectivity