4 ms·

It is absolutely false that "scientists were freaking out about Global Cooling". In fact, thirty years ago, the scientific consensus was for warming, and there

It is absolutely false that "scientists were freaking out about Global Cooling". In fact, thirty years ago, the scientific consensus was for warming, and there was grave and growing concern about the effect of greenhouse gases. Any review of the scientific literature from that period will prove this definitively. Fleck, Connolley, and Peterson have published on this point; you can probably find a summary of their findings online. Moreover, even if "Global Cooling" was not the lie it is, this argument is meaningless. History is littered with discarded scientific theories. This is not cause for concern. It is the way that science works. What matters is whether current theories are correct. It is interesting to note, then, that current climate models accurately describe--among many other things--the cooling period you mention. Finally, the statement, "Climates have always changed and they always will," is not informative. It's a blatantly bunk argument that since climate change is a normal occurrence, any change in climate is normal.

webwright 18y ago
"Finally, the statement, "Climates have always changed and they always will," is not informative. It's a blatantly bunk argument that since climate change is a normal occurrence, any change in climate is normal." <sigh> You're right. Good thing no one made that argument. Too bad you didn't read what I wrote about that, which was, approximately, that most people really don't that (sadly, most people also can't point at Mexico on a map). No one is arguing that because climate normally occurs that all climate change must be normal. They are just pointing out, "Hey guys-- this isn't the first time that climate HAS changed-- so let's not rush to conclusions". Scientific consensus 30 years ago was for warming? After Source? Here's a quote from that article (admittedly from Newsweek): Meteorologists disagree [!] about the cause and extent of the cooling trend, as well as over its specific impact on local weather conditions. But they are almost unanimous [!] in the view that the trend will reduce agricultural productivity for the rest of the century.

webwright 18y ago

"Finally, the statement, "Climates have always changed and they always will," is not informative. It's a blatantly bunk argument that since climate change is a normal occurrence, any change in climate is normal." <sigh> You're right. Good thing no one made that argument. Too bad you didn't read what I wrote about that, which was, approximately, that most people really don't that (sadly, most people also can't point at Mexico on a map). No one is arguing that because climate normally occurs that all climate change must be normal. They are just pointing out, "Hey guys-- this isn't the first time that climate HAS changed-- so let's not rush to conclusions". Scientific consensus 30 years ago was for warming? After Source? Here's a quote from that article (admittedly from Newsweek): Meteorologists disagree [!] about the cause and extent of the cooling trend, as well as over its specific impact on local weather conditions. But they are almost unanimous [!] in the view that the trend will reduce agricultural productivity for the rest of the century.