1974 Shock News : Ominous Global Cooling Causing Droughts And Floods

Government scientists are much smarter now and know that global warming causes droughts, floods, and massive tragedies – rather than global cooling.

Regardless, John Cook has proven that the global cooling scare never happened.

ScreenHunter_173 Feb. 06 13.35

ScreenHunter_174 Feb. 06 13.45ScreenHunter_174 Feb. 06 13.35

www.pennsylvaniacrier.com/filemgmt_data/files/Ominous Changes in the Worlds Weather.pdf

In April of the same year (which never happened) the worst tornado outbreak in US history occurred.


About stevengoddard

Just having fun
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

84 Responses to 1974 Shock News : Ominous Global Cooling Causing Droughts And Floods

  1. kbray in california says:

    A 33% chance of predicting it right:

    Either global warming, or global cooling, or no change in temperature, can happen alongside recurring droughts and floods.

    But it still doesn’t mean any of it is related or correct theory.

  2. davidappell says:

    “The Myth of the 1970s Global Cooling Scientific Consensus,” W. Peterson et al, Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc., 89, 1325–1337, 2008

  3. Strictly speaking, using the Peterson/Connolley/Fleck methodology I can prove there is no global warming consensus either. That’s the fun thing about a methodology that’s designed to support what you think you already knew.

  4. sunsettommy says:

    “People like you, who are so afraid they can’t even sign their real name to their opinions, get no say about the validity of the work of Fleck, Connolley, et al.

    Be a man, for once in your life.”

    Knowing their real names has not helped them write intelligently and honestly.

  5. sunsettommy says:

    I have read Dr. Appells resume at his website and it is impressive but reading him here there is no evidence that this is that man with the listed resume background.

    I LIVED through the 1970’s as a teenager and remember the concerns aired about the obvious cooling trend and even TV. programs were aired that showed such concerns about it:


  6. sunsettommy says:

    “You probably read Velikovsky, too β€” right?”


    I own the book that countered Velikovskys book.He pissed a lot of scientists off after Emmanual published his book in 1950 and thus assured his books exposure to the world.

  7. sunsettommy says:

    David writes not realizing that he just shot himself in the foot:

    “Yes, men less educated than me often appear, well, less educated.
    As do you.”

    Normally people who have a PH.D science degree would not spend a lot of time in skeptical blogs worrying about Steve’s and my real names because well gee whiz they would use the valuable time at the University in research or teaching instead and also that highly educated people strongly tend to be with other highly educated people.

    Again why are you here?

  8. sunsettommy says:

    David writes anothet foot in the mouth comment,

    “The CIA doesn’t do science β€” at best, it gathers what science that is out there.”

    Man you are oblivious to what you just did here since the available science in the decade was mostly about the cooling and the impacts it had at the time.

    Are you drinking a lot of beer now?

    • davidappell says:

      Do you realize that science advances with time?
      Do you what to know what else science at that time thought?
      * that the human genome has ~100,000 genes
      * that there were three quarks
      * it had no notion of dark energy
      * it had no clue that the expansion of the universe was accelerating
      * it had not proved Fermat’s Last Theorem
      * it had no notion of quantum computing
      * it did not know where particles got their mass

      Do you want me to go on?

      • sunsettommy says:

        Ha ha ha,
        you are so bad you are good.

        Why are you making a complete fool of yourself here since the discussion was what people thought about the climate in the 1970’s IN THE THE 1970’s!

        What beer are you drinking?

      • People were just too stupid to read thermometers or measure ice in the 1970s.

        Our recent expeditions to the moon are much more sophisticated than during the Apollo days. – before NASA understood that their primary role was to make Muslims feel happy.

      • davidappell says:

        NASA… Muslims… Whatever. You’re a complete fucking idiot.

      • davidappell says:

        Man up.
        I have half your IP address, and I am working on the other half. When I have it all I will expose you for the coward you are.

      • So what you are saying is that advances in science since the year 1999 have allowed Hansen to go back in time and convince the 1975 National Academy Of Science that the global cooling they reported was not actually occurring.

        What exactly are you smoking, David?

  9. sunsettommy says:

    I like this part where Dr. Hansen says late in 1999:

    “…Indeed, in the U.S. the warmest decade was the 1930s and the warmest year was 1934….”

    Which means even 1998 was a cooler year than 1934.


  10. sunsettommy says:

    David is obviously guzzling the beer:

    “Man up.
    I have half your IP address, and I am working on the other half. When I have it all I will expose you for the coward you are.?”

    By now readers is wondering why this obsessive twit with a PH.D in Physics spending a lot of time in a skeptic blog whining about what our names are and using street language in the process.

    Put down the beer!

  11. Brad says:

    Oh my. This is true comedic genius. This is akin to β€œWho’s on first?”

  12. Molly says:

    Appell is here for the link juice to his website. Can someone please buy some fake traffic for his needle dick website, that may be enough to get rid of this puerile alarmist.

  13. rw says:

    David, in his rebutals, keeps posting contemporary postnormal-science graphs. Thus, his graph on Arctic ice extent shows a flat curve until the recent decline. However, observations from the 20’s and 30’s show that there was a clear-cut decline in ice extent. And this was associated with a dramatic rise in temperatures in the areas at the margins of the ice pack – Spitsbergen, east Greenland, etc. (see for example, Scherhag, Ann. Hydrol. Maritimen Met. 1936).

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s