3 ms·

Didn't they predict ice ages at one point?

• Retric 3y ago
  No, some scientists discovered particulate pollution is associated with cooling and there was increasing particulates in the upper atmosphere from human activities, which is a well known effect today. People took it wildly out of context, think day of tomorrow’s ice hurricanes vs the extremely mildly by comparison effect changing ocean circulation was actually predicted to have.
• jakobnissen 3y ago
  Yeah, back in the day fossil fuel emitted more sulphur, which cools the planet (temporarily), offsetting some of the warming. It also causes acid rai and other stuff, so sulphur emissions have gone down. Back 50 years ago some scientists believe the sulphur cooling and smoke clouds would offset the greenhouse effect and lead to overall cooling, but this was always the minority view. We've since gotten way better models, and the warming has become much more obvious so it can be measured directly.
• tzs 3y ago
  Others have already mentioned that those who predicted cooling were basing it on increasing particulates. They also knew greenhouse gases would cause warming, but they thought our particulate emissions would continue to increase faster than our greenhouse gas emissions so the cooling would beat out the warming. We they right, or was the majority of scientists who felt that even with our increased particulates it would not be enough to counter the increasing greenhouse gases right? We never got to find out, because the particulate emissions are noticeable enough to the average person and annoying enough to the average person that bipartisan efforts to reduce those emissions can get political support, such as the Clean Air Act of 1970 in the US. This led to a massive reduction in particulate emissions.