Climate Change Denial

Ken Fabian · **#5221** by **Ken Fabian** » Feb 02, 2020 10:06 pm

Attributing 1C drop in temperature to the Maunder Minimum is and always was a huge stretch - more like a correlation and, in the absence of better understanding of prevailing conditions (which included volcanic eruptions in close succession, believed to have made a short running cooling feedback) was considered a possible and even probable explanation. Widely and popularly taken to be the explanation but understanding of past climate changes is far more sophisticated now than when that explanation emerged. Zharkova is quite shameless.

No surprise that a News Corp paper prints this nonsense as public concern about climate change continues to grow and rises in the list of voting priorities. When Mr Murdoch said there is no denial of climate change in his news organisation I think that was probably a bit of what I call disingenuous ambiguity... ("Oh, you thought I was talking about denial of Anthropogenic climate change!").

Alan B · **#5222** by **Alan B** » Feb 03, 2020 2:12 pm

Hence the sarcasm: "The Sun - That well know Science Journal..."

felltoearth · **#5223** by **felltoearth** » Jul 13, 2020 12:38 am

I'm waiting for the Grand Solar Minimum to show up in my FB feed. Potholer has a couple of videos on the subject.

Ken Fabian · **#5224** by **Ken Fabian** » Jul 14, 2020 12:22 am

I find it telling that the US National Academy of Sciences/National Research Council report from 1975 made it clear that the science was immature and lacked the quantitative understanding of the climate "machine" needed to be able to predict it's future course. It suggested the programs that could change that - and did. Good on the 1970's ice age hype for raising the profile of climate science so that such programs could be funded.

Unfortunate that understanding exactly why we should not fear an imminent ice age turned out being NOT so reassuring as hoped but the knowledge climate science gives is beyond price. That the US government took the NAS/NRC seriously then but the current one does not take them seriously now is telling.

Alan B · **#5225** by **Alan B** » Jul 14, 2020 11:57 am

It was about that time (I think) that there was serious discussion on the possibility of a Nuclear Winter during the Cold War political climate.

Macdoc · **#5226** by **Macdoc** » Jul 14, 2020 1:06 pm

Good on the 1970's ice age hype for raising the profile of climate science so that such programs could be funded.

There never was any ice age hype. Just a bit of Orwellian media disinformation.

Global cooling is a known phenomena related to SO2 and continues today ....greatly overwhelmed by CO2 increase.

newolder · **#5227** by **newolder** » Jul 15, 2020 1:29 pm

Re: Solar minimum

There is no evidence that we are entering another Grand Solar Minimum at this time even though the 2019-2020 minimum is Century deep. Here's a new interactive tool from NASA for Solar Cycle investigation. Have fun!

Ken Fabian · **#5228** by **Ken Fabian** » Jul 15, 2020 10:49 pm

Alan B wrote:It was about that time (I think) that there was serious discussion on the possibility of a Nuclear Winter during the Cold War political climate.

And I think the media that promoted the idea of an imminent ice age were feeding - and feeding on - public awareness of Nuclear Winter as a possibility.

Macdoc -

There never was any ice age hype. Just a bit of Orwellian media disinformation.

Global cooling is a known phenomena related to SO2 and continues today ....greatly overwhelmed by CO2 increase.

I am not denying the cooling effects of aerosols but I call what the media made of valid but incomplete science "hype". I am not convinced there was deliberate or purposeful disinformation, just the universal media amorality that chooses the sensational and dramatic over balanced informing.

That it has been of great use to opponents of climate responsibility and accountability of the 1990's onwards, all the way to the present, that some popular and well regarded media outlets wrongly raised fears of global cooling in the 1970's doesn't mean it was deliberate disinformation - or do you have some evidence? Not that major fossil fuels companies should be presumed to have been ignorant of the state of climatic science in the 1970's, that included exploring the potential for anthropogenic global warming.

US governments of the 1970's appear to have acted on the advice from their top science agencies (NAS/NSC) - and sought to improve the science as their response - rather than rush to form an Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

Later governments - in the late 1980's and 90's - appear to have (again) acted on the advice from their top science agencies, advice that now did have the skills to make broad and coarse but consistent predictions about the future course of climate change. And moved to form an Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change to engage the whole world in understanding and addressing the issue.

Macdoc · **#5229** by **Macdoc** » Jul 15, 2020 11:38 pm

Looks pretty well manipulated and the damn thing still circulates

https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2017/05 ... olicy.html

felltoearth · **#5230** by **felltoearth** » Jul 16, 2020 12:38 am

I think Time's Art Director would object to the shitty and rather horrifying typesetting of the fake cover being passed off as their work.

Ken Fabian · **#5231** by **Ken Fabian** » Jul 16, 2020 12:49 am

Not sure what you are saying. Plenty of papers and magazines ran 'global cooling' stories in the 1970's - I remember that but there were no government responses; I don't think any science agencies were presenting serious advice suggesting a need to act. Except to give a boost to relevant science programs. Not sure any of the media referenced that 1975 NAS/NSC report or issued corrections in light of it.

: ice age media.PNG (809.56 KiB) Viewed 1791 times

felltoearth · **#5232** by **felltoearth** » Jul 16, 2020 1:13 am

THE MYTH OF THE 1970s GLOBAL COOLING SCIENTIFIC CONSENSUS

An enduring popular myth suggests that in the 1970s the climate science community was predicting “global cooling” and an “imminent” ice age, an observation frequently used by those who would undermine what climate scientists say today about the prospect of global warming. A review of the literature suggests that, on the contrary, greenhouse warming even then dominated scientists' thinking as being one of the most important forces shaping Earth's climate on human time scales. More importantly than showing the falsehood of the myth, this review describes how scientists of the time built the foundation on which the cohesive enterprise of modern climate science now rests.

Macdoc · **#5233** by **Macdoc** » Jul 16, 2020 2:23 am

Plenty of papers and magazines ran 'global cooling' stories in the 1970's

so what ....plenty carry aliens, area 51 and astrology stories too.....oh yeah flying cars

You don't display any actual science links.

Ken Fabian · **#5234** by **Ken Fabian** » Jul 16, 2020 7:32 am

The media stories about global cooling - hype vs Orwellian media disinformation? I think it was just sensationalism for the sake of sales rather than "Orwellian disinformation" aka conspiracy - but magazines and papers talking up global cooling certainly happened. Do you want to tell me who was running the conspiracy and what purpose?

The actual science link I provided was to NAS/NSC report "Understanding Climatic Change: a Program For Action" - which I cited for saying any predictions were beyond the science of that time -

"Unfortunately, we do not have a good quantitative understanding of our climate machine and what determines its course. Without this fundamental understanding, it does not seem possible to predict climate — neither in its short-term variations nor in its larger long-term changes."

Hermit · **#5235** by **Hermit** » Jul 16, 2020 7:43 am

Macdoc wrote:
Plenty of papers and magazines ran 'global cooling' stories in the 1970's

so what ....plenty carry aliens, area 51 and astrology stories too.....oh yeah flying cars

Not to mention Elvis Presley sightings after he allegedly died.

Ken Fabian · **#5236** by **Ken Fabian** » Jul 16, 2020 10:28 pm

Certainly the more recent referencing of 1970's global cooling hype by opponents of climate responsibility looks deliberate and calculated. The climate science denier hype about 70's media hype (global cooling predictions jumping the gun) being wrong back then "proving" some kind of fundamental and enduring inadequacy of climate science really only shows that it was inadequate back then - not that it is inadequate now. And that reveals how inadequate such denier arguments really are.

theropod_V_2.0 · **#5237** by **theropod_V_2.0** » Jul 17, 2020 6:57 pm

If things were not altered by human activity the earth would be entering a cooling phase. The Milankovitch cycles are fairly accurate at recording the natural tends of warm-cold over stupid long periods of time, and the current rate of warming is not supported by these formations.

RS

Macdoc · **#5238** by **Macdoc** » Jul 17, 2020 8:29 pm

The earth was already tipping down ...the Holocene max was about 6500 years ago ....was slowly drifting cooler and then ...

Climate Change Denial

Re: Climate Change Denial

Re: Climate Change Denial

Re: Climate Change Denial

Re: Climate Change Denial

Re: Climate Change Denial

Re: Climate Change Denial

Re: Climate Change Denial

Re: Climate Change Denial

Re: Climate Change Denial

Re: Climate Change Denial

Re: Climate Change Denial

Re: Climate Change Denial

Re: Climate Change Denial

Re: Climate Change Denial

Re: Climate Change Denial

Re: Climate Change Denial

Re: Climate Change Denial

Re: Climate Change Denial

Who is online