3 ms·

Just 40 years ago "global warming" was called "global cooling", and an ice-age apocalypse was predicted. Imagine if the powers-that-be decided to do global sca

Just 40 years ago "global warming" was called "global cooling", and an ice-age apocalypse was predicted. Imagine if the powers-that-be decided to do global scale climate geo-engineering by dispersing chemicals into the atmosphere (to increase the temperature). > We already know what needs to be done [1], now all we need to do is get on with. The good old thinking that you know everything and can't be wrong almost guarantees that you will be wrong.

tzs 11y ago
> Just 40 years ago "global warming" was called "global cooling", and an ice-age apocalypse was predicted That's rather misleading. As noted in the Wikipedia article on "global cooling" [1], which I know you are aware of because you cited it in the original version of your comment: This hypothesis had little support in the scientific community, but gained temporary popular attention due to a combination of a slight downward trend of temperatures from the 1940s to the early 1970s and press reports that did not accurately reflect the full scope of the scientific climate literature, which showed a larger and faster-growing body of literature projecting future warming due to greenhouse gas emissions. Those who did support it generally did so not because they thought global warming was wrong. They just thought that smog levels would continue rising faster than greenhouse gas levels, so that the cooling affect that smog causes would be more significant than the warming effect greenhouse gases cause. Their only mistake was not anticipating that we would actually start taking air pollution seriously enough to not only stop the smog rise but reverse it. Since the '70s smog levels have come way down. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_cooling https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_cooling
- powertower 11y ago
  The predominant theory with the media and general public was Global Cooling. You can quickly see this using Google Image Search and the news clippings ("Global Cooling"). Or just check this compilation - http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/03/01/global-cooling-compilation/ http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/03/01/global-cooling-compila... The point is they thought they were also very right.
danieltillett 11y ago
>Just 40 years ago "global warming" was called "global cooling", and an ice-age apocalypse was predicted No serious scientist ever thought we were going into an ice age 40 years ago. >The good old thinking that you know everything and can't be wrong almost guarantees that you will be wrong. Ad hominem arguments are not very helpful, but where exactly did I argue that I can’t be wrong? If you have an actual argument that shows I am wrong please post it. It has to be better than a warmed up precautionary principle.

tzs 11y ago

> Just 40 years ago "global warming" was called "global cooling", and an ice-age apocalypse was predicted That's rather misleading. As noted in the Wikipedia article on "global cooling" [1], which I know you are aware of because you cited it in the original version of your comment: This hypothesis had little support in the scientific community, but gained temporary popular attention due to a combination of a slight downward trend of temperatures from the 1940s to the early 1970s and press reports that did not accurately reflect the full scope of the scientific climate literature, which showed a larger and faster-growing body of literature projecting future warming due to greenhouse gas emissions. Those who did support it generally did so not because they thought global warming was wrong. They just thought that smog levels would continue rising faster than greenhouse gas levels, so that the cooling affect that smog causes would be more significant than the warming effect greenhouse gases cause. Their only mistake was not anticipating that we would actually start taking air pollution seriously enough to not only stop the smog rise but reverse it. Since the '70s smog levels have come way down. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_cooling https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_cooling

powertower 11y ago
The predominant theory with the media and general public was Global Cooling. You can quickly see this using Google Image Search and the news clippings ("Global Cooling"). Or just check this compilation - http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/03/01/global-cooling-compilation/ http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/03/01/global-cooling-compila... The point is they thought they were also very right.

danieltillett 11y ago

>Just 40 years ago "global warming" was called "global cooling", and an ice-age apocalypse was predicted No serious scientist ever thought we were going into an ice age 40 years ago. >The good old thinking that you know everything and can't be wrong almost guarantees that you will be wrong. Ad hominem arguments are not very helpful, but where exactly did I argue that I can’t be wrong? If you have an actual argument that shows I am wrong please post it. It has to be better than a warmed up precautionary principle.