People remember
media hype, not the state of the
actual science. Have you read a summary of climate science from the 1970's? The science was that the
majority of papers predicted warming. Indeed, the warming power of CO2 was confirmed by Eunice Foote in 1856.
Only 10% of papers in the 1970's predicted cooling, and of them, lead authors soon retracted their work. It was all a misunderstanding about how much the sulfur in coal reflected the sunlight away. It's still
valid science, and we might use "Solar Radiation Management" by flying dust up 20km to reflect a tiny amount of sunlight to cool the earth. But the math was complex - and the lead author soon admitted he got it wrong. But the media went CRAZY with it - and did not reflect what the majority of papers were saying. So NO - climate science did NOT as a majority predict cooling in the 1970s! That's just factually incorrect.
What were climate scientists predicting in the 1970s?
Please get back to us that you now know this - as it is a matter of conscience now for you not to repeat this myth again now that you know it is not true.
Indeed, so many predicted warming that movies like Soylent Green showed global warming. The Bell Telephone company reflected the state of the science catastrophic warming way back in 1958!
They do really know. The physics of how CO2 traps heat can be proved in any decent physics lab - not that I'm a physicist but I've asked them and seen videos demonstrating how they do it and read the history of climate science.
Also, it's ALWAYS been climate
science. The
media term used for pop culture shifted from global warming to "climate change" shifted under the George W Bush administration when the speech writer was told to look for a less threatening term, because Dubbya had too many mates in the oil industry and couldn't upset them. So the term "climate change" became fashionable. But global warming is still as good as any
lay person description. But the scientific papers are written within the realm of climate sciences.
Get it? There's the scientific academic terminology, and the popular press.
See - even the popular term "Ice Age" is wrong. It's a glacial period, and we're now in an interglacial period.
Technically, from a true climate science point of view, we're in an Ice Age now. Why? Because there's some ice on the planet! Scientific nomenclatures can be quite different from popular ones - and it has nothing to do with whether or not the scientific enterprise is some kind of scam!
Yes the climate has changed in the DEEP past - and the climate scientists mostly know why. Continental drift, asteroid impacts, volcanism, Milankovitch "wobbles" in the earth's orbit and rotation and tilt, and since the dinosaur era - the sun getting 2% warmer. ALL play an impact!
Climate is global temperatures as measured across decades. Weather is what happens today and tomorrow. Climate impacts the weather much like weighting dice - but is not direct control. Or imagine it this way. Weather is a toddler making waves in the bath - the weather is the waves in the water. Climate change is someone left the tap on. Soon that bath will overflow and maybe drown the toddler!
Someone left the tap on. We keep mining and burning fossil fuels and adding CO2 to the atmosphere. We can measure what CO2 does in a lab. Even Mythbusters have done this! Good luck to any conspiracy theories trying to lie about what CO2 does. This next test can be replicated in any physics lab on the planet!
Do a little maths - and the CO2 is trapping 4 Hiroshima bombs worth of heat every second - but spread out across the entire planet. The basic physics of how CO2 traps heat is known.
Oh no! The world's governments are going to legislate we have to move to local renewable energy that our own nations produce - meaning we have more domestic control over our energy prices! Oh no! We won't be buying gas off the Russians and Middle East any more - people who don't like western democracies very much.
Oh no! The cheapest power we've ever produced in a MORE stable grid! Oh no! Filling up your electric car from solar panels on your roof = free motoring. How terrible!
I believe the bible and believe the Lord will return one day. But I'm Amil - and the theologians I read show a lot of that Anti-Christ language is actually to do with Rome and really ANY dictator that sets itself up against God's people in any age - from Ancient Rome to modern China and North Korea. Not one all-controlling figure - but many. Not a prediction about a future timetable - but a message about general themes and situations for all God's people across all ages. Otherwise we may as well cut Revelation out of our bibles until the last 7 years or whatever.
Yeah, nah. You didn't listen to the John Dickson podcasts or read his article. Nah. I'm not going to listen to someone who cannot recognise what type of
literary genre Genesis is in the first place. You're reading a Shakespeare sonnet as an engineering manual. Stop it.