Thursday, February 19, 2009
Tuesday, February 17, 2009
Source: Arctic Researches and Life Among the Esquimaux: Being the Narrative of an Expedition in Search of Sir John Franklin in the Years 1860, 1861, and 1862 by Charles Francis Hall (1865), New York: Harper and Brothers.
Having not sufficiently refuted George Will's recent and recycled pundacity, "Dark Green Doomsayers" I tracked down a writer, climate modeler, and mathematician William M. Connolley, who has done great work in documenting, beginning in the '90s, the myth that "70s scientists predicted global cooling".
And it is essentially a myth. Only several articles were written, and these in popular publications, with sensationalistic headlines but much tamer and even-handed texts. At the time, no peer reviewed climatological journals predicted a "new ice age."
He started out here with an (excellent, not well organized, yet massively documented) website. This is what I stumbled upon when, in the early 2000s I attempted to debunk this persistent falsity.
BUT the dogged Mr. Connolley has a more up-to-date blog named Stoat. I have put it on my favorites list.
Also see an article about "global cooling." Also, one on climate change denial. And there was also talk of nuclear winter, (a continuing topic with more recent research and calculations). As well as examining nuclear winter, popular scientist Carl Sagan also once noted that massive burning of forests around the globe might cause cooling. And there was speculation that the massive amount of dust, smoke, explosive residue, and diesel exhaust during WWII may have cooled the globe somewhat. Perhaps masking the earliest effects of anthropogenic warming.
Sulfur and particulates from smokestacks have been reduced over the decades as well. The price for neglecting to do this would have been continuing worsening acid rain problems, accelerated forest die-offs, and seriously heightened health effects.
UPDATE: Feb. 23 2009 Here's an excellent summation -
The Myth of the 1970s Global Cooling Scientific Consensus
by Thomas C. Peterson, William M. Connolley, and John Fleck
Sunday, February 15, 2009
Years ago I pondered the future. One day, I thought, we will have gadgets in our heads that will simply answer any question we have, instantaneously.
Well, that day is here, and I didn't even need a gadget put in my head.
Like anything, Wikipedia is flawed, but recent research found it as reliable as Encyclopedia Brittanica. It is also much larger.
Click on the picture with a mouse click to view it full screen.
Click on this link with a mouse click to visit the site: