In 1975, Scientists Blamed Jet Stream Dips On Global Cooling

In an effort to save their funding and reputations, climate scientists are currently trying to blame jet stream dips on global warming.  But in 1975 scientists knew that they were caused by global cooling.

Science News, Vol. 107
March 1, 1975

ScreenHunter_2878 Sep. 17 11.56

ScreenHunter_2879 Sep. 17 12.00

During cooler climatic periods, however, the high-altitude winds are broken up into irregular cells by weaker and more plentiful pressure centers, causing formation of a “meridional circulation” pattern. These small, weak cells may stagnate over vast areas for many months, bringing unseasonably cold weather on one side and unseasonably warm weather on the other. Droughts and floods become more frequent and may alternate season to season, as they did last year in India. Thus, while the hemisphere as a whole is cooler, individual areas may alternately break temperature and precipitation records at both extremes. If global temperatures should fall even further, the effects could be considerably more drastic. According to the academy (National Academy Of Sciences) report on climate, we may be approaching the end of a major interglacial cycle, with the approach of a full-blown 10,000-year ice age, a real possibility…….CHILLING_POSSIBILITIES


About stevengoddard

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

36 Responses to In 1975, Scientists Blamed Jet Stream Dips On Global Cooling

  1. bobmaginnis says:

    The meandering of the jet stream blamed on a warming arctic is claimed due to less temperature differential between lower and higher latitudes. If the lower latitudes were cooler then, the same less temperature differential existed.

    • Nonsense. The largest swings in temperature always occur near the poles.

    • policycritic says:

      The meandering of the jet stream blamed on a warming arctic is claimed due to less temperature differential between lower and higher latitudes.

      That doesn’t make any sense. Look at the “Warm “zanal [sic] circulation” winds (left); cool “meridional circulation” figure.

      The greatest temperature differential is the one on the right.

  2. omanuel says:

    Steven (aka Tony):

    I have personally witnessed fifty years of deceptive government science since I started research on “The origin of elements in the solar system” with P. K. Kuroda (aka Kazuo Kuroda) in 1960 and discovered in 1964 that neon isotopes implanted into dark parts of the Fayetteville meteorite by the solar wind had been sorted by mass:

    For the next couple of decades, NASA-funded scientists denied solar mass-fractionation of neon and claimed that data points along the mass-fractionation line were mixtures of Ne-A, B, C, D, etc

    See: The neon alphabet game,” Proceedings Eleventh Lunar Planet Sci. Conf. 15, 879-899 (1980);

    I remember well the warnings of a new Little Ice Age in the mid-1970s and NASA’s scramble to hide evidence in the 1980s and 1990s that the Sun’s pulsar core made our elements and birthed the entire Solar System in a supernova explosion five billion years (5 Ga) ago: ; ;

    Click to access 5011.pdf

    Government deceit became even more obvious after the Climategate emails surfaced five years ago, in late November 2009.

    My question, Steven (aka Tony), Where is the statesmanship to lead society back to sanity?

    The best hope I have found is the Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity, but Ron is almost as old as me!

    • omanuel says:

      This paper gives a summary of sixty-eight years of government deception about the source of energy in cores of heavy atoms and stars, from 1946 until 2014.

      Click to access Solar_Energy.pdf

    • omanuel says:

      Now the same fraudulent scientific establishment is promising to green the deserts !

    • Hello Oliver,

      I’m sure a lot of us can empathize with your question. I’ve thought about it for a number of hours, and gone over about a dozen possible answers in my mind. In my opinion, the best answer to your question is this. There are still smart people to be found in positions of power, many of them behind the scenes. But it’s rather difficult for those leaders to lead a generation of people in a new direction when they’ve been leading them in the opposite direction for so many years, and scrambling the brains of that generation in a misguided belief that they must “fundamentally transform” the culture. Rest assured that there is evil, an evil force, behind the mistakes that have been made. And that same force has a degree of power to prevent attempts to correct the erroneous course on which we’ve been heading.

      I look at Ron Paul and I think to myself:

      The only reason this man survived to end of his political career is that he was too ineffective to be deemed worth the trouble of getting rid of.

      I look at Ross Perot, and I think:

      The only reason he survived to the end of his political career is because he agreed in advance to get out early, after the ’96 election.

      I look at Reagan, and I think:

      Considering the circumstances of his shooting, there is no question in my mind that he was not intended to survive that incident. So I think that the only reason he survived to the end of his political career is by agreeing to major (and otherwise unnecessary) political concessions in exchange for no further attempts to remove him from power.

      These are just three examples, and I could cite others of people who were personally close to me, but these ones illustrate my point … which is that those leaders with the ability to envision a powerful strategy for correcting some of the damage, and the skill to implement that strategy … have strong disincentives to act on their ideas.

      Bear in mind that the United States is not an island unto itself, but is part of a global power structure, and for it to try to go in the opposite direction as that global structure is going … is about as easy as rowing upstream in the Mississippi with only one oar.


      • Gail Combs says:

        For years those who tried to warn of a ‘New World Order’ were called Conspiracy Nuts and worse. Now we have global Leaders like former WTO Director-General Pascal Lamy coming right out and saying. “The reality is that, so far, we have largely failed to articulate a clear and compelling vision of why a new global order matters” and that the agreement was made among world leaders in the 1930s “that the road to peace lay with building a new international order…”

        The fact that world leaders are now coming right out in the open and saying that behind the scenes they WERE building a global government scares me to death.

        “For more than a century ideological extremists at either end of the political spectrum have seized upon well-publicized incidents such as my encounter with Castro to attack the Rockefeller family for the inordinate influence they claim we wield over American political and economic institutions. Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as ‘internationalists’ and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure–one world, if you will. If that’s the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it.”
        ― David Rockefeller in his 2002 book entitled “Memoirs”

        • Yes, we were called that, weren’t we? Nowadays, they usually let us say whatever we want, quote their statements or whatever, and then just give us the silent treatment. Surprisingly effective, too! This generation doesn’t even need ad hominem to follow the prescribed path. All they need to see is a leader ignoring his critics, and they just follow suit. Very well-programmed people!


  3. Stephen Richards says:

    Hubert Lamb proposed this hypothosis at about that time. In cold times, the jet stream produces more waves than warm periods. Quote.

  4. Brian D says:

    We have a blocking high developing over the Arctic basin this week which will allow temps to drop pretty good. Canadian Ice Service starting to show new ice formation in various places in the Archipelago and even starting in the Beaufort. These blocking patterns do cause weather extremes, and they have been doing so for as long as the Earth has been here. This year and last, we have seen some cooler summer temps in the Arctic overall, and temps this month are dropping pretty quickly.

    • Brian D says:

      Another note is the cooler waters in the Hudson Bay, Barents, and Kara seas. Ice could form a little quicker in these areas this Fall. The Summer pattern kept these areas from getting too warm unlike the past few years because of blocking patterns favoring more northerly winds. Looking for that this Fall again.

      • Billy Liar says:

        Where do Unisys get the data to create these charts? I’ve noticed that the range – high to low – has progressively increased over the years. The ranges now are often infeasible – somewhere on that chart is a sea surface temperature 16.2°C below the mean and somewhere else there is a sea surface temperature 27.1°C above the mean. These are both infeasible temperatures for Earth (assuming the mean is ~14°C. What is going on?

        • David A says:

          At first glance it looks like the same or similar colors repeat four times, so it looks like it is meant to be confusing.

  5. darrylb says:

    A major difficultly in human thought is that we have to blame any event on a slngle happening.
    I would suggest considering the idea that earth’s climate happens from the confluence of many things in many different cycles.
    If the timing is correct we can have a major shift in climate, but mostly we have negative feedbacks which keeps the earth closer to equilibrium, although I do not think we ever get there.
    CO2 is a minor player and really the system is so complex that for anyone to say they understand it completely is being a fool

    • Gail Combs says:

      Even the IPCC admitted the climate is ‘Chaotic’ (as in chaos theory) and therefore CAN NOT BE MODELED. (I have the quote stashed somewhere.)

      Dr. Brown has suggested that at this point the climate oscillates between two ‘Strange Attractors’ but in the distant past there seems to have been three.

      We can model out about three days and if we are lucky around five. After that it is a crap shoot because the outcome is very sensitive to the initial state and we do not yet know the unknown unknowns much less the exact values for the parameters we think we know.

      We are know thanks to the Milankovitch Cycles (and Lisiecki and Raymo’s 2005 rebuttal of Loutre and Berger’s 2003 astronomical model) we are in the transition zone for switching from the warm interglacial to glaciation. We haven’t the foggiest idea of what actually kicks the earth from the one Strange Attractor to the other. This is where the focus of Climate Science should be not on Gore Bull Warbling and wasting tax payer money on bird smokers and bat-chomping, bird-slicing eco crucifixes.

      On the other hand if the elite do know what kicks the earth into glaciation and they know it will happen soon, sucking as much wealth out of northern countries and buying large swaths of southern land makes sense…..
      World Bank policies “enabling” African land grab


      World Bank report on land grabbing: beyond the smoke and mirrors “on 7 September 2010, the World Bank finally decided to publish its much anticipated report on the global farmland grab…. “

      This is another very leftist organization but it does list some of the South American land grabs:
      (International Peasant’s Movement)

  6. tom0mason says:

    Given that the jet stream always sits above and between air mass cells, in this case the Mid-latitude Cell and the Polar cell, and is at the junction between the top of the troposphere/tropopause/stratosphere, where the ozone layer is; this is where the air circulations differ rapidly (in composition, temperature, pressure, humidity, and wind velocity and direction) as you cross any of these boundaries – is it not about time that more empirical research was done on this phenomenon?
    Human knowledge of why the jet-stream exists, and reasons for its movement are missing – regardless of what ‘scientist’ say. If there were an understanding of this effect then jet-stream ‘wobbles’ would never be a surprise, and to some degree would be predictable.

    • Gail Combs says:

      Δ solar wavelengths ===> Δ stratospheric Ozone ===> Δ Jet streams
      Especially the winds at the poles.
      Background on Sun, UV, Ozone, the Jet Stream, the Quasi-Biennial Oscillation (QBO) and the Brewer-Dobson Circulation:
      Chapter 6: Stratospheric Dynamics and the Transport of Ozone and Other Trace Gases

      An interesting slide presentation
      Influence of Solar Variability on Terrestrial Atmosphere through stratosphere
      SEE: slides 16 on especially #27 and #32

      Before Solar Cycle 24 the jets were more zonal due to the widening of the ‘tropical belt’ Now we see the tropical belt narrowing and the jets going more meridional.

      This is an older study (2007) about the widening of the tropical belt. Solar Cycle 24 began January 4, 2008. Cycle 23 was relatively active until ~ January 2006. So it was before the sun went into a funk.
      Widening of the tropical belt in a changing climate


      ….Several lines of evidence show that over the past few decades the tropical belt has expanded….. Most importantly, poleward movement of large-scale atmospheric circulation systems, such as jet streams and storm tracks, could result in shifts in precipitation patterns… The implications of the expansion for stratospheric circulation and the distribution of ozone in the atmosphere are as yet poorly understood.

      This is a more recent study
      Decadal Changes of Wind Stress over the Southern Ocean Associated with Antarctic Ozone Depletion.

      Using 40-yr ECMWF Re-Analysis (ERA-40) data and in situ observations, the positive trend of Southern Ocean surface wind stress during two recent decades is detected, and its close linkage with spring Antarctic ozone depletion is established. The spring Antarctic ozone depletion affects the Southern Hemisphere lower-stratospheric circulation in late spring/early summer. The positive feedback involves the strengthening and cooling of the polar vortex, the enhancement of meridional temperature gradients and the meridional and vertical potential vorticity gradients, the acceleration of the circumpolar westerlies, and the reduction of the upward wave flux. This feedback loop, together with the ozone-related photochemical interaction, leads to the upward tendency of lower-stratospheric zonal wind in austral summer. In addition, the stratosphere–troposphere coupling, facilitated by ozone-related dynamics and the Southern Annular Mode, cooperates to relay the zonal wind anomalies to the upper troposphere. The wave–mean flow interaction and the meridional circulation work together in the form of the Southern Annular Mode, which transfers anomalous wind signals downward to the surface, triggering a striking strengthening of surface wind stress over the Southern Ocean.

      • tom0mason says:

        I think it is strange that the jet-stream goes loopy after NASA reported that the stratosphere/thermosphere had reduced. Sorry I haven’t a link, I’m trying to remember where I saw that – it was just before the jet-stream was reported to have moving.

        • Gail Combs says:

          NASA: Deep Solar Minimum
          April 1, 2009: The sunspot cycle is behaving a little like the stock market. Just when you think it has hit bottom, it goes even lower.

          2008 was a bear. There were no sunspots observed on 266 of the year’s 366 days (73%). To find a year with more blank suns, you have to go all the way back to 1913….

          In 2008, the sun set the following records:
          A 50-year low in solar wind pressure: Measurements by the Ulysses spacecraft reveal a 20% drop in solar wind pressure since the mid-1990s—the lowest point since such measurements began in the 1960s. The solar wind helps keep galactic cosmic rays out of the inner solar system. With the solar wind flagging, more cosmic rays are permitted to enter…

          A 12-year low in solar “irradiance”: Careful measurements by several NASA spacecraft show that the sun’s brightness has dropped by 0.02% at visible wavelengths and 6% at extreme UV wavelengths since the solar minimum of 1996. The changes so far are not enough to reverse the course of global warming, but there are some other significant side-effects: Earth’s upper atmosphere is heated less by the sun and it is therefore less “puffed up.” ….

          A 55-year low in solar radio emissions: After World War II, astronomers began keeping records of the sun’s brightness at radio wavelengths. Records of 10.7 cm flux extend back all the way to the early 1950s. Radio telescopes are now recording the dimmest “radio sun” since 1955: plot. Some researchers believe that the lessening of radio emissions is an indication of weakness in the sun’s global magnetic field….

          But the change in the jet stream just couldn’t be caused by changes in the sun…. NAH, it is all the fault of the added 3 ppm of CO2 from humans since 1958!

          Per the IPCC, 4% of annual emissions are from Mankind, with 96% coming from natural sources. So mankind gets the blame based on 4% of the annual emission or ~ 4% of (400 ppm minus 315 ppm) = 3 to 4 ppm change in 56 years at the point where the log curve is going flat……

  7. WJohn says:

    It’s obvious innit.
    The meander waves caused by warming are in anti phase to those caused by cooling. The amplitude is the same though.

Leave a Reply

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

You are commenting using your 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