“A massive campaign must be launched to restore a high-quality environment in North America and to de-develop the United States…De-development means bringing our economic system (especially patterns of consumption) into line with the realities of ecology and the global resource situation…Redistribution of wealth both within and among nations is absolutely essential, if a decent life is to be provided for every human being.” – John Holdren
If you’re relatively familiar with the climate “debate”, you will know that the rapid cooling period from the 1940’s to the 1970’s led to climate “experts” (climate scientists) declaring the end of life as we know it, in the form of the “Global Cooling” scare:
A few examples (And apologies if these sound all too familiar with the current
global warming climate change scare) :
1. In 1976 the CIA warned that (man-made) Global Cooling would bring – “Drought, Starvation, Social Unrest And Political Upheaval”:
2. The UN was so concerned about man-made Global Cooling during the 1970’s that they wanted to melt the Arctic by spreading black soot on it:
3. Our featured climate expert ‘John Holdren’ predicted and feared a new “Ice Age” during the 1970’s Global Cooling scare:
(Interestingly, the link to Holdren’s global cooling hysteria no longer exists)
Now time to introduce our second climate change “Expert” (UN climate scientist) – Dr Stephen Schneider…
Steve Schneider pleaded with President Nixon for funding in order to halt the feared Global Cooling crisis of the 1970’s:
Four years later (1981) Professor Stephen Schneider became a Global Warming alarmist:
Published: August 22, 1981
A team of Federal scientists says it has detected an overall warming trend in the earth’s atmosphere extending back to the year 1880. They regard this as evidence of the validity of the ”greenhouse” effect, in which increasing amounts of carbon dioxide cause steady temperature increases.
The seven atmospheric scientists predict a global warming of ”almost unprecedented magnitude” in the next century. It might even be sufficient to melt and dislodge the ice cover of West Antarctica, they say, eventually leading to a worldwide rise of 15 to 20 feet in the sea level. In that case, they say, it would ”flood 25 percent of Louisiana and Florida, 10 percent of New Jersey and many other lowlands throughout the world” within a century or less.
A leading participant in past carbon dioxide studies has been Dr. Stephen H. Schneider of the National Center for Atmospheric Research in Boulder, Colo.
And yes, nowadays, expert scientist John Holdren (Obama’s former science Czar), just like his comrade Professor Stephen Schneider, fears not man-made Global Cooling but Global Warming:
1997: John Holdren predicts ten degrees warming:
I don’t blame them for changing the name to “Climate Change” – covers all bases.
The perfect scam: Hot, cold, wet, dry, flood, drought, whatever – it’s all your fault…
1970′s Global Cooling Scare Related :
- Feds Alarmed By Global Cooling in 1974 | Climatism
- CIA 1974 National Security Threat : Global Cooling/Excess Arctic Ice Causing Extreme Weather | Real Science
- 1974 Shock News : CIA Said Global Warming Was A Good Thing | Real Science
- 1975 : Climatologists Wanted Permission To Melt The Arctic To Stop Disastrous Climate Change | Real Science
- 1972 : UN Scientists Wanted To Melt The Arctic By Spreading Soot On It | Real Science
- 1974 : NCAR Called Global Cooling The “New Norm” And Blamed Climate Disasters On It | Real Science
- 1970s Global Cooling Alarmism
- The New Crisis : The Same As The Old Crisis | Climatism
- 1922 US Government Shock News : Radical Change In Arctic Climate – Glaciers Gone | Climatism
- 1970s Global Cooling Scare | Real Science
- Every major climate organization endorsed the ice age scare, including NCAR, CRU, NAS, NASA – as did the CIA.
- 21 Jul 1976 – C.I.A. WARNING Changes to climate to bring upheaval
- Climate Change And Its Effect On World Food (1974)
- TIME – Weather – The Big Freeze
A MUST SEE interview on Tucker Carlson Tonight, featuring Professor Judith Curry who has recently quit her position as the chair of the School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences at the Georgia Institute of Technology.
Her reasoning is simple yet so very damaging and dangerous, not only to “climate science” but to the fate of all “sciences”. Her resignation is to do with, not only being vilified by colleagues for having a sceptical (scientific) view of “climate change”, but importantly the ongoing ‘monopolistic’ funding of research into the science of man-made global warming, versus the non-existent resources directed toward the study of natural climate change.
This imbalance of government funding skews and distorts the science that is output, and as Joanne Nova notes, a “lack of funding for alternatives leaves a vacuum and creates a systemic failure. The force of monopolistic funding works like a ratchet mechanism on science. Results can move in both directions, but the funding means that only results from one side of the equation get “traction.”
The systemic failure self-perpetuates :
- Where’s the motivation in proving anthropogenic global warming wrong?
- How serious are they about getting the data right? Or are they only serious about getting the “right” data?
- “It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends upon his not understanding it.” – Upton Sinclair, 1935
The oneway-traffic flow of government funding leads not only to an unhealthy distortion of science, but also to an unhealthy bias in the scientific and media reporting we receive on climate change.
MUST SEE interview between Tucker Carlson and Dr. Curry here:
- Judith Curry : Senate EPW Hearing on the President’s Climate Action Plan | Climatism
- Climate money: Monopoly science « JoNova (Judith Curry IPCC Update) | Climatism
- Climate Etc. – Dr Curry Website
- The Great “Extreme Weather” Climate Change Propaganda Con | Climatism
Right, Left, Centre, Conservative, Liberal or communist – I still can’t get my head around the fact that ANY human being can be intrinsically motivated by ideology over facts, data and reason in support of the wind experiment.
“Progressiveness is a sickness” has been thrown around a bit lately but surely hard data pertaining to blackouts, energy poverty and economic ruin must prove unequivocally that wind energy is a compete failure and surely MUST override stubborn “save the planet” ideology?!
In 2017, with examples like Germany, Ontario and South Australia on file, any political leader still pushing subsidised wind power on his or her people is either a certifiable lunatic or is in on it.
Andrew Cuomo, the Governor of New York State simply leaves that question begging with his move to throw $360 million of taxpayers’ money to the wind.
In New York, Wind And Solar Get Double Their Value In Subsidies
The Daily Caller
16 January 2017
New York state is paying 11 large wind and solar power projects two times more in subsidies than the projects actually generate in electricity.
New York Democratic Gov. Andrew Cuomo announced the $360 million in spending over the weekend, but didn’t reveal the precise amount of funding for each project. A good portion of the funding will go to the large company Invenergy’s 105.8 megawatt Number Three wind…
View original post 355 more words
Climate zealots, Greens politicians (Obama) and their armchair sycophants, fail to acknowledge or realise that as CO2 has increased, wildfire acreage has decreased, where the U.S. is concerned.
But yes, facts and empirical evidence (science) are irrelevant when you’re pushing “save the planet” ideology, and when that ideology “climate change” is now a $1.5 Trillion industry.
Greens get hysterical when forests burn, because they don’t understand anything about science, forests, or nature. Many species of trees can’t exist without fire. Aspens are making a rapid comeback in California, thanks to the fires.
The Sangre de Cristo Mountains of Northern New Mexico (where I used to work as a wilderness ranger) have the tallest Aspen trees in the world. These were the result of huge fires during the hot/dry 1890’s.
New Mexico has been very wet the last two years, with few fires – and huge new Aspen Groves are growing around Los Alamos, which was hit by several large fires earlier this century.
Not only do greens not understand the climate, but they imagine they can control it. They are complete imbeciles, who have no business influencing policy.