Study debunks 'global cooling' concern of '70s

[Yellowdogtexan]

Another crackpot claim goes down in flames. http://www.usatoday.com/tech/science/environment/2008-02-20-global-cooling_N.htmThe supposed "global cooling" consensus among scientists in the 1970s — frequently offered by global-warming skeptics as proof that climatologists can't make up their minds — is a myth, according to a survey of the scientific literature of the era.

The '70s was an unusually cold decade. Newsweek, Time, The New York Times and National Geographic published articles at the time speculating on the causes of the unusual cold and about the possibility of a new ice age.

But Thomas Peterson of the National Climatic Data Center surveyed dozens of peer-reviewed scientific articles from 1965 to 1979 and found that only seven supported global cooling, while 44 predicted warming. Peterson says 20 others were neutral in their assessments of climate trends.

The study reports, "There was no scientific consensus in the 1970s that the Earth was headed into an imminent ice age.

"A review of the literature suggests that, to the contrary, greenhouse warming even then dominated scientists' thinking about the most important forces shaping Earth's climate on human time scales."

[Oceanbreeze]

YDT: You know how some people believe the bible is a bunch of fairy tales? Well, the same applies to alot of us in regards to globaloney. 5 years. Mark my words, 5 years and globaloney will be debunked.

[Yellowdogtexan]

YDT: You know how some people believe the bible is a bunch of fairy tales? Well, the same applies to alot of us in regards to globaloney. 5 years. Mark my words, 5 years and globaloney will be debunked.Dream on. Your ignorance of science is amusing.

[patriotsblade]

Science is the enemy of conservatives.

http://www.globalcultures.net/worldblog/wp-content/uploads/2007/09/flat-earth-society.jpg

[Ringo]

Dream on. Your ignorance of science is amusing.


You are fucking amusing, I picture a Pee Wee Herman type of Bottom Feeder nerd whose has a split personality, IGNORANT/Arrogant! Here is some real truth being hid from Americans, and is ever bit as TRUTHFUL as Globaloney!!

http://www.usatoday.com/weather/climate/2005-09-20-wacky-weatherman_x.htm

[Wabash]

Another crackpot claim goes down in flames. http://www.usatoday.com/tech/science/environment/2008-02-20-global-cooling_N.htm
No concensus, it says in your artical, ...that doesn't mean Conclusive by any means...your piece is just another opinion, by another confused scientists! The fuckers don't have empirical conclusive evidence!
YDT: You know how some people believe the bible is a bunch of fairy tales? Well, the same applies to alot of us in regards to globaloney. 5 years. Mark my words, 5 years and globaloney will be debunked.
I'd guess it might be a tad longer...but I agree. I wonder what the looney left will come up with next to further the agenda of total control. They talk of conservatives wanting to control the masses....so do the liberals!

Science is the enemy of conservatives.

http://www.globalcultures.net/worldblog/wp-content/uploads/2007/09/flat-earth-society.jpg

That's nothing but leftist bull shit! Pure and simple! And it sure doesn't take a scientist to figure it out!

[Wabash]

You are fucking amusing, I picture a Pee Wee Herman type of Bottom Feeder nerd whose has a split personality, IGNORANT/Arrogant! Here is some real truth being hid from Americans, and is ever bit as TRUTHFUL as Globaloney!!

http://www.usatoday.com/weather/climate/2005-09-20-wacky-weatherman_x.htm

I think it might be ARROGANT first, followed by Extreme Bias...

[Yellowdogtexan]

I think it might be ARROGANT first, followed by Extreme Bias...But your opinion does not matter. As Vice President Gore has urged, we are wasting time with idiots who are too stupid to understand the science involved. People like wabby should be treated like people who believe that the earth is flat. Laughed at but ignored

[Yellowdogtexan]

Science is the enemy of conservatives.

http://www.globalcultures.net/worldblog/wp-content/uploads/2007/09/flat-earth-society.jpgContrary to the claims of the global warming deniers, the science is in on global warming. Only idiots and people who believe that the world is flat (or who are stupid enought to beleive that there are still WMDs in Iraq) believe to the contrary. http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/306/5702/1686#ref7Policy-makers and the media, particularly in the United States, frequently assert that climate science is highly uncertain. Some have used this as an argument against adopting strong measures to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. For example, while discussing a major U.S. Environmental Protection Agency report on the risks of climate change, then-EPA administrator Christine Whitman argued, "As [the report] went through review, there was less consensus on the science and conclusions on climate change" (1). Some corporations whose revenues might be adversely affected by controls on carbon dioxide emissions have also alleged major uncertainties in the science (2). Such statements suggest that there might be substantive disagreement in the scientific community about the reality of anthropogenic climate change. This is not the case.

The scientific consensus is clearly expressed in the reports of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Created in 1988 by the World Meteorological Organization and the United Nations Environmental Programme, IPCC's purpose is to evaluate the state of climate science as a basis for informed policy action, primarily on the basis of peer-reviewed and published scientific literature (3). In its most recent assessment, IPCC states unequivocally that the consensus of scientific opinion is that Earth's climate is being affected by human activities: "Human activities ... are modifying the concentration of atmospheric constituents ... that absorb or scatter radiant energy. ... [M]ost of the observed warming over the last 50 years is likely to have been due to the increase in greenhouse gas concentrations" [p. 21 in (4)].

IPCC is not alone in its conclusions. In recent years, all major scientific bodies in the United States whose members' expertise bears directly on the matter have issued similar statements. For example, the National Academy of Sciences report, Climate Change Science: An Analysis of Some Key Questions, begins: "Greenhouse gases are accumulating in Earth's atmosphere as a result of human activities, causing surface air temperatures and subsurface ocean temperatures to rise" [p. 1 in (5)]. The report explicitly asks whether the IPCC assessment is a fair summary of professional scientific thinking, and answers yes: "The IPCC's conclusion that most of the observed warming of the last 50 years is likely to have been due to the increase in greenhouse gas concentrations accurately reflects the current thinking of the scientific community on this issue" [p. 3 in (5)].

Others agree. The American Meteorological Society (6), the American Geophysical Union (7), and the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) all have issued statements in recent years concluding that the evidence for human modification of climate is compelling (8).

The drafting of such reports and statements involves many opportunities for comment, criticism, and revision, and it is not likely that they would diverge greatly from the opinions of the societies' members. Nevertheless, they might downplay legitimate dissenting opinions. That hypothesis was tested by analyzing 928 abstracts, published in refereed scientific journals between 1993 and 2003, and listed in the ISI database with the keywords "climate change" (9).

The 928 papers were divided into six categories: explicit endorsement of the consensus position, evaluation of impacts, mitigation proposals, methods, paleoclimate analysis, and rejection of the consensus position. Of all the papers, 75% fell into the first three categories, either explicitly or implicitly accepting the consensus view; 25% dealt with methods or paleoclimate, taking no position on current anthropogenic climate change. Remarkably, none of the papers disagreed with the consensus position.This article is three years old and since then the case for man caused global warming has only gotten stronger in the scientific community

Global warming deniers and members of the flat earth society are welcome to hold their views while the rest of the world laugh at them