We know global warming denialists like to point to the small number of "the Earth is cooling" articles in the 1970s to argue that the conclusions from climate c

We know global warming denialists like to point to the small number of "the Earth is cooling" articles in the 1970s to argue that the conclusions from climate cannot be trusted. What they don't point out is that while 10% of the articles in the 1970s predicted cooling, 62% of them predicted warming. https://skepticalscience.com/ice-age-predictions-in-1970s-intermediate.htm https://skepticalscience.com/ice-age-predictions-in-1970s-in... Cherry picking can easily give a false impression of the "historical perspective." While I don't know much about the accurate historical perspective of the Earth Day era, I can point out 6 of the 18 quotes from the AEI page come from Paul Ehrlich. These of course are easy to find as Ehrlich and his wife spearheaded the movement with "The Population Bomb", and "his charismatic and media-savvy methods helped publicize the topic" (quoting https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_R._Ehrlich https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_R._Ehrlich ). Three are from Kenneth Watt. Two are from Barry Commoner. If there were a lot of people making these predictions then there would be little need to cite the same people multiple times. This strongly suggest cherry picking, rather than representing the historical perspective. Furthermore, the first Earth Day was pre-EPA, back when smog covered L.A., people regularly threw their trash out the car windows, and the burning Cuyahoga river became a symbol of the ongoing environmental devastation. So to use the NYT's editorial saying “Man must stop pollution and conserve his resources, not merely to enhance existence but to save the race from intolerable deterioration and possible extinction.” as a dire prediction of “gloom and doom” and “existential threats”, when we actually did greatly stop pollution, strongly suggests some alternative motive for this article.