Let’s Review 50 Years Of Dire Climate Forecasts And What Actually Happened

Authored by Mike Shedlock via MishTalk,

Here are 21 headlines from various news sources regarding dire climate predictions over the last 50 years. Many of the predictions are outrageously funny.

Climate Forecast Headline Predictions

  1. 1967 Salt Lake Tribune: Dire Famine Forecast by 1975, Already Too Late
  2. 1969 NYT: “Unless we are extremely lucky, everyone will disappear in a cloud of blue steam in 20 years. The situation will get worse unless we change our behavior.
  3. 1970 Boston Globe: Scientist Predicts New Ice Age by 21st Century said James P. Lodge, a scientist at the National Center for Atmospheric Research.
  4. 1971 Washington Post: Disastrous New Ice Age Coming says S.I. Rasool at NASA.
  5. 1972 Brown University Letter to President Nixon: Warning on Global Cooling
  6. 1974 The Guardian: Space Satellites Show Ice Age Coming Fast
  7. 1974 Time Magazine: Another Ice Age “Telling signs everywhere.  Since the 1940s mean global temperatures have dropped 2.7 degrees F.”
  8. 1974 “Ozone Depletion a Great Peril to Life” University of Michigan Scientist
  9. 1976 NYT The Cooling: University of Wisconsin climatologist Stephen Schneider laments about the “deaf ear his warnings received.”
  10. 1988 Agence France Press: Maldives will be Completely Under Water in 30 Years.
  11. 1989 Associated Press: UN Official Says Rising Seas to ‘Obliterate Nations’ by 2000.
  12. 1989 Salon: New York City’s West Side Highway underwater by 2019 said Jim Hansen the scientist who lectured Congress in 1988 about the greenhouse effect.
  13. 2000 The Independent: “Snowfalls are a thing of the past. Our children will not know what snow is,” says senior climate researcher.
  14. 2004 The Guardian:  The Pentagon Tells Bush Climate Change Will Destroy Us. “Britain will be Siberian in less than 20 years,” the Pentagon told Bush.
  15. 2008 Associate Press: NASA Scientist says “We’re Toast. In 5-10 years the Arctic will be Ice Free”
  16. 2008 Al Gore: Al Gore warns of ice-free Arctic by 2013.
  17. 2009 The Independent: Prince Charles says Just 96 Months to Save the World. “The price of capitalism is too high.”
  18. 2009 The Independent: Gordon Brown says “We have fewer than 50 days  to save our planet from catastrophe.”
  19.  2013 The Guardian: The Arctic will be Ice Free in Two Years. “The release of a 50 gigaton of methane pulse” will destabilize the planet.
  20. 2013 The Guardian: US Navy Predicts Ice Free Arctic by 2016. “The US Navy’s department of Oceanography uses complex modeling to makes its forecast more accurate than others.
  21. 2014 John Kerry: “We have 500 days to Avoid Climate Chaos” discussed Sec of State John Kerry and French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabious at a joint meeting.

The above items are thanks to 50 Years of Failed Eco-pocalyptic Predictions.

The article has actual news clips and links to everyone of the above stories.

What Happened to the Glaciers?

On January 17, 2020 Montana Public Radio reported Scientists Predicted Glacier Park’s Glaciers Would Be Gone By Now. What Happened?

Last week, Glacier National Park announced that it will be changing signs warning that its signature glaciers would disappear by 2020. The park says the signs, put in more than a decade ago, were based on the best available predictions at the time.

In terms of the predictions, the latest that I’ve seen actually comes from a group of Swiss researchers. So I would have to look at their results in more detail than is possible from looking at the paper they published to be able to say definitively when all the glaciers are are hosed and no longer present, but certainly by 2100.

New Predictions and Stories 

Ocasio-Cortez called the fight to mitigate the effects of climate change her generation’s “World War II.”

“Millennials and Gen Z and all these folks that come after us are looking up, and we’re like, ‘The world is going to end in 12 years if we don’t address climate change, and your biggest issue is how are we gonna pay for it?’ ” she said.

OAC then blasted the GOP for taking her doomsday prediction literally.

We have had 50 years of this kind of BS and yes, many people do take it literally.

On February 7 2020, she unleashed her Stunningly Absurd “New Green Deal” that suggests she was serious.

  1. Upgrade all existing buildings in the US
  2. 100% clean power
  3. Support family farms
  4. Universal access to healthy food
  5. Zero-emission vehicle infrastructure
  6. Remove greenhouse gasses form the atmosphere
  7. Eliminate unfair competition
  8. Affordable access to electricity
  9. Create high-quality union jobs that pay prevailing wages
  10. Guaranteeing a job with a family sustaining wage, adequate family and medical leave, paid vacations, and retirement security to all people of the United States

More $90 Trillion Solutions

In 2015, Business Insider noted A Plan Is Floating Around Davos To Spend $90 Trillion Redesigning All The Cities So They Don’t Need Cars

The $90 trillion proposal came from former US vice president Al Gore, former president of Mexico Felipe Calderon, and their colleagues on The Global Commission on the Economy and Climate.

Where is the CO2 Coming From?

CO2 Stats

  • Please note that the US reduced its carbon footprint from 6.13 billion tons in 2007 to 5.28 billion tons in 2019.
  • Meanwhile, China increased its footprint from 6.86 billion tons in 2019 to 10.17 billion tons in 2019.
  • In the same timeframe, global output rose from 31.29 billion tons to 36.44 billion tons.
  • In 2007, the US accounted for 19.6% of the total global carbon footprint.
  • In 2019, the US accounted for only 14.5% of the total global footprint.

Key Questions

  1. How much money are we willing to spend to reduce our 14.5% and falling percentage of carbon emissions?
  2. What would it cost to cut that by half in 10 years?
  3. Assuming we could cut that in half in 10 years, what would it do to total carbon output?
  4. By what force do we get China, India, and all the developing economies in the Mideast and Africa to reduce their carbon output?
  5. Assuming we achieve number 4 peacefully by some sort of economic buyout like cap-and-trade what is the cost to the US?
  6. What about inflation?
  7. Sure, China is producing goods for the US and EU but do we want that to stop? When? Why? How? Cost?
  8. Does not China, India, Africa, etc., have the right to improve their standards of living?
  9. What do the above points imply about the US standard of living?
  10. How the hell do we pay for this?

Looking ahead over the next 100 years, the US is a minor part of the carbon problem.

Bonus Geopolitical Q&A

Q: What happened when Merkel went along with the Greens and did away with nuclear?
A: Germany imports more coal-based energy from neighboring states and is more dependent on Russia for natural gas.

Q: Is wind and solar ever going to make a serious dent in China’s growing energy demands.
A: No

Q: What happened in France when Macron pushed through a gas tax to support the Green movement?
A: How quick we forget the Yellow-Vest Revolt that went on for months.

I have yet to see AOC, John Kerry, any Mish reader, or anyone else address any of the above questions in detail.

Final Questions to All Those Demanding Government Do Something

What the hell are you doing?

The #1 thing someone can proactively do eliminate their carbon footprint is to stop breathing.

Since that seems a bit impractical, the #2 thing someone can do is not have kids.

Instead, most demand the government do something. What?

Until someone can put a realistic price on this while addressing my questions, forgive me for not agreeing that a total rise in the ocean of 3 inches in the last 20 years is the existential threat of our time.

Politicians Will Not Solve the Problem

Clean Energy

I am a big fan of natural gas and believe it is clean energy. The byproduct of burning natural gas is carbon dioxide and water.

Neither is a pollutant in any way shape or form. Plants even need carbon dioxide to survive.

Coal is another matter.

Burning coal releases SO2 and NOx pollutants that cause Acid Rain, huge respiratory problems and will devastate forests.

If the atmosphere is polluted with sulfur dioxide (SO2) or nitrogen oxides (NOx), rain becomes oxidized by ozone (O3) or hydrogen peroxide (H2O2) to form H2SO4 or HNO3 before falling to the ground. They are known respectively as sulfuric and nitric acid.

Acid rain will dissolve panty hose on the spot.

There is a huge difference between burning coal and burning natural gas.

Anti-Coal, Pro-Natural Gas

For environmental reasons, I am anti-coal but very much in favor of Natural Gas. And that has been my position forever.

I am totally fine with eliminating coal for environmental reasons but to expect China to be 100% wind and solar is nonsense.

There is no reason for Germany to abandon nuclear power and the results have been anything but green.

Libertarian Philosophy

Many of my readers blame me and Libertarians in general. They understand neither.

As noted above I am anti-coal. Why? It pollutes with SO2 and NOx causing acid, respiratory illnesses, and it kills fish.

I have seen too many environmental cleanups. I have never commented on this before but my degree at the University of Illinois was in Environmental Engineering.

I have bashed China’s air and water pollution consistently for decades. I have bashed Germany’s diesel industry consistently too.

Doing nothing about actual poison and doing nothing about CO2 are two very different things.

There is nothing Libertarian about letting companies pollute then walk away in bankruptcy.

One clever reader researched my coal and water pollution stance and noted I said the same things in 2006. Indeed I did.

My position has been consistent.

Don’t Accept 100% of the Climate Change Story and You Get Labeled a Racist

There we numerous global cooling warnings in the 60s and 70s and that is what we were taught in school. I did not believe the hype then, and I do not believe the hype now.

Point any of this out and guess what happens: You Get Labeled a Racist, as I did.

I am grateful that 50 years of sensational headline now look laughable, but they keep coming and coming.

Why should anyone take these models seriously?

No Wonder People Don’t Believe the Hype

How many times did we hear the arctic ice would all be gone by now? That Miami if not all of Florida would be underwater?

Flashback 2010: The glaciers will all disappear by 2020. Now the best estimate is another 80 years.

Flashback 1989: UN Official Says Rising Seas to ‘Obliterate Nations’ by 2000. What a hoot.

Flashback 2009: Gordon Brown UK Chancellor of the Exchequer says “We have fewer than 50 days to save our planet from catastrophe.” Hmm. Have 50 days passed?

Flashback 1969: “Everyone will disappear in a cloud of blue steam in 20 years. The situation will get worse unless we change our behavior.

That’s my favorite.

A Word About Predictions and Urgency

Believe in man-made climate change all you want. There is some truth to it although the models have not been remotely accurate to say the least.

After 50 years of nonsense hype, it’s no wonder anyone with a modicum of common sense is more than a bit skeptical of these dire predictions and the alleged urgency to do something immediately about them.

If after all these now laughable headlines, you still have faith in the predictions, why?

And if you don’t believe the predictions, then do you still want to spend $90 trillion to solve the alleged problem?

-----------------------------------------------------
It is my sincere desire to provide readers of this site with the best unbiased information available, and a forum where it can be discussed openly, as our Founders intended. But it is not easy nor inexpensive to do so, especially when those who wish to prevent us from making the truth known, attack us without mercy on all fronts on a daily basis. So each time you visit the site, I would ask that you consider the value that you receive and have received from The Burning Platform and the community of which you are a vital part. I can't do it all alone, and I need your help and support to keep it alive. Please consider contributing an amount commensurate to the value that you receive from this site and community, or even by becoming a sustaining supporter through periodic contributions. [Burning Platform LLC - PO Box 1520 Kulpsville, PA 19443] or Paypal

-----------------------------------------------------
To donate via Stripe, click here.
-----------------------------------------------------
Use promo code ILMF2, and save up to 66% on all MyPillow purchases. (The Burning Platform benefits when you use this promo code.)
Click to visit the TBP Store for Great TBP Merchandise
Subscribe
Notify of
guest
19 Comments
Saxons Wrath
Saxons Wrath
February 20, 2021 8:32 pm

21 various “news” sources….. how about various JEWS sources….FIFY…propaganda and lies by any other names

Buck Fiden
Buck Fiden
  Saxons Wrath
February 21, 2021 7:34 pm

I see 2 fool’s who can’t face the truth…
LOL, I’m just a messenger, like the biblical prophets hated by their people for telling the word of the Almighty….

Steve
Steve
February 20, 2021 8:44 pm

We have $Trillions to spend on all the horseshit, pie in the sky “Green New Deal”?
Why not spend $millions (billions?) on the tech needed to scrub SO2, NOX from coal and do something with the plant food like grow more crops (oopps CO2).
We could save $trillions and the lying Climate Change scumbags can move on to some other grift.

Georges S
Georges S
  Steve
February 21, 2021 2:25 am

Filters for coal plants already exists, In Germany Merkel had all the coal plants equipped with them then scrapped them anyway for wind and solar power (she had to reignite them last week though)

MrLiberty
MrLiberty
  Steve
February 21, 2021 9:19 am

I remember reading a piece from an environmental group once in which they admitted that blanket government regulations were actually making pollution worse because they imposed one size fits all requirements on industry and allowed for no improvements. Seems a technology had been invented that did an even better job of “scrubbing” but the feds prohibited its use. No doubt its because one of their friends was profiting from the approved technology. Sometimes government sucks so bad that even an environmentalist can see the truth.

Dirtperson Steve
Dirtperson Steve
  Steve
February 22, 2021 9:31 am

The local coal power plant had them before they converted it to natural gas a few years ago. Those scrubbers use water to process the waste out of the stack. What did they do with that water after it was loaded with all the waste stack nasties?

They piped it several miles to be dumped into the Susquehanna River. They even designed the outlet so that it would meet “environmental” guidelines. Instead of one pipe dumping everything there is a fan-shaped series of pipes each dumping a little which keeps the ppm concentration at the exit lower but still dumps the exact same amount of nasties into the river.

The year they upgraded the exit piping because it was getting clogged with nasties fishermen downstream also started noticing more fish with ulcers on them. The ulcer problem seems to have disappeared, or at least isn’t talked about anymore, since they converted to natural gas.

Iska Waran
Iska Waran
February 20, 2021 9:02 pm

That 50 megaton methane blast? That was me. Sorry.

Wilbert Harrison
Wilbert Harrison
February 20, 2021 10:36 pm

and to think-the Pervert chose that fraud Kerry when he probably could have had Greta, and gotten to sniff her whenever he wanted-call it a perk for the powerful.

yahright
yahright
February 20, 2021 11:12 pm

What the new administration is planning is much more worrying than any climate change we may get.
I’m good with a healthy amount of co2. It’s all about controlling people, pushed by idiots.

Just a Medic
Just a Medic
February 20, 2021 11:29 pm

Careful ceding ground to the enemy. Discussing “CO2 emissions” in the context of “climate change” cedes ideaspace needlessly. Their hypothesis that CO2 causes “global warming” is unproven, even untested.

m
m
February 21, 2021 4:18 am

For environmental reasons, I am anti-coal [because “burning coal releases SO2 and NOx pollutants that cause Acid Rain”] but very much in favor of Natural Gas. And that has been my position forever.

That would have been correct about 50 years ago.
Since then we learned how to do Flue-gas desulfurization against SO2 and the mentioned problem is moot.
NOx occurs from Natural Gas flames as well, and there are also affordable techniques to massively reduce those.

very old white guy
very old white guy
February 21, 2021 6:18 am

The main problem with us “humans” is our short life span, during which time we believe that nothing has ever happened that is not happening to us. That anything can be altered in our lifetime and corrected if enough people suffer. And CO2 is not destroying the planet.

Ouirphuqd
Ouirphuqd
  very old white guy
February 21, 2021 8:26 am

Here’s my analogy: Your whole life has been devoted to eating organic healthy, thinking that you will live past 100. In a moment of carelessness you have a fatal accident falling off a ladder. Just think of all the cookies, cake, ice cream and hot dogs you missed out on, not to mention the forbidden beer and bubblegum . The point being, we are so hung up on creating a pristine pipe dream utopia that we actually fail to enjoy life at all!

MrLiberty
MrLiberty
February 21, 2021 9:13 am

The US Department of Defense is one of the top 5 consumers of fossil fuels on the planet. Much of that is being wasted fighting overseas wars of aggression. Anyone who wants to promote a reduction in pollution and fossil fuel use should be calling for all the troops to come home to defend America for a change. Government should get ZERO additional money and power to do anything. A free and competitive marketplace in which pollution was treated as a property crime and not simply protected by government agencies, would be the best mechanism to provide consumers with the products that best meet their energy needs.

Stan Sylvester
Stan Sylvester
February 21, 2021 9:49 am

It’s amazing to watch. The powers that be push climate change. CO2 “footprints” are just to blame you for enjoying driving a car. Now you are wrecking the planet! The real problem is climate control, weather warfare, geoengineering. BIG DIFFERENCE. LBJ bragged about controlling the weather in 1962 during a commencement speech. TX was most likely the latest victim of weather warfare. Secession is a word that the sociopaths in D.C. don’t like to hear. Abe Lincoln sacrificed over 600,000 lives to preserve the precious Union. Today, with patented processes like chemical ice nucleation, no soldiers are needed to quell the dissidents. Many wonderful alternative sites for some reason are not on board with geoengineering. The spraying in the skies overhead are too obvious for most folks to think anything is wrong. To get up to snuff visit geoengineeringwatch.org with Dane Wigington.

Buck Fiden
Buck Fiden
  Stan Sylvester
February 21, 2021 7:38 pm

Abe Lincoln MURDERED over 700,000 Americans to establish the USSA, and destroy States rights for once and all time….
FIFY…

Van
Van
February 21, 2021 10:36 am

I have done quite a bit of research on this. You can noticed a disparity in the reporting between the 70’s and the 00’s, not just the change of topic, but the overall reporting. I believe they might have actually been onto the truth in the 70’s and 80’s; global cooling. Of course this is nothing man made like so called global warming, merely a cycle the Earth goes through at intermittent points. Observe: Older Dryas, Younger Dryas and more recently the Sporer Minimum, Maunder Minimum and Dalton Minimum. At various points throughout history you can see people referring to certain years, every coupe of hundred years, as “Years Without A Summer.” Now here is the clincher; Further studying global cooling and looking back to the Younger Dryas (one of the ice ages) it is evident that a large scale Ice Age is preceded by shorter “minimums” that increase in duration and frequency, we are seeing this now. I do not think any of us here, now (or our great-grandchildren), will see a full blown Ice Age, but we will live through a very harsh minimum. I think the full extent of this minimum will begin to manifest in the next five or so years. My two cents…not adjusted for inflation of course..;)

Georges S
Georges S
  Van
February 21, 2021 11:19 am

There are strong evidence that the Younger Dryas was the results of a meteorite impact. The Older Dryas was ending when the meteorite hit the Earth most likely in the area where the Great Lakes are now located. The impact created an increase of temperature so great that water levels around the world increased by 400 feet (There are evidence of that). But then temperatures lowered tremendously and it took nearly 800 years to return to the levels of the Older Dryas. But you right on the rest. We are now entering a period of solar calm which means another mini-ice age like in 17 to 18th century or before that 14 to 16th century. In Europe during the time of the Celts, temperatures were higher than now despite the facts that hummer and other gas guzzling machine like Kerry’s private jet didn’t exist. In what is now England, grapes were growing up ’til the end of Middle Ages which requires warmer temperatures. Sorry Greta, you’re wrong, History is right