The media reports on "climate change."
In 1957, the Associated Press matter-of-factly reported that:
. . . Dr. Joseph Kaplan, UCLA professor and chairman of the U.S. Committee for the 1957 International Geophysical Year, has predicted that ocean levels will rise at least 40 feet and inundate vast areas of the earth in the next 50 or 60 years unless atmospheric temperatures can be controlled.
The 54-year-old scientist said the burning of fuels is of such magnitude that discharged gasses are creating a "greenhouse" effect over the earth.
Should the oceans rise by 40 feet, their waters would cover parts of New York City, San Francisco, much of Florida, sections of Tokyo and many other coastal cities.
The solution?
Heat control is the answer to the threat, Dr. Kaplan said. "We're working on a method of controlling man's environment and the temperature of the world," he reported. "We've already, fired rockets into the upper atmosphere and discharged chemicals that affect the temperature of the atmosphere.
"Control by man of the earth's weather and temperature is within the realm of practicality now.
"The end result of our studies (of temperature control) will be more important to the survival of man than atomic energy."
In other words, humans are gods. I mean, even Democrats boast about plans to control the earth’s weather and temperature. Or, liberals are tricknologists. But, in any event, some possible follow-up questions are:
In 2008, do New Yorkers really believe that the ocean levels will soon rise to 40 feet?
Is much of Florida doomed?
How many professors liked to use coke in the 1950s?
Do liberal North Americans have a history of trying to control populations through junk science?
The last question, of course, is the easiest to answer. Still, I’ll let history speak now.
* * *
The Media’s “Climate Change” Narrative 1894-2008
1894: September 6, “The Ice Age In North America . . . But now a change has come upon the forces . . . and the long winter is drawing to a close” (Cambridge City Tribune & Harper’s Magazine)
1912: October 7, “Fifth Ice Age Is On the Way” (Los Angeles Times)
1913: March 23, “How and Why Earth Will End: Scientists Believe Our Universe Will Some Day Plunge Into Sun” (Washington Post, Chicago Tribune)
1920: September 21, “Mac Millian Kills New Ice Age Theory: Earth May Be Entering Its Golden Years (Syracuse Herald)
1923: “Scientists Says Arctic Ice Will Wipe Out Canada” (Chicago Tribune)
1924: September 18, “Mac Millian Reports Signs of New Ice Age” (New York Times)
1926: August 15, “THE sun is sick [say international scientists], and the world is about to enter . . . a new glacier period” (The Zanesville Times Signal – Ohio)
1933: 27 March, “America in Longest Warm Spell Since 1776; Temperature Line Records a 25-Year Rise” (New York Times)
1934: 27 September, “Predicts New Ice Age For America: Savant Says It Will Come in 10,000 Years (International News Service, Herald-Times, PA)
1939: “[The] weather men have no doubt the world at least for the time being is growing warmer” (TIME)
1952: August 10, “Our Changing Climate . . . the world has been getting warmer in the last half century” (New York Times)
1954: “Climate – the Heat May be Off . . . Despite all you may have read, heard or imagined, it’s been growing cooler – not warmer since the Thirties” (Fortune)
1957: April 9, “Control of Temperature Said Vital” (Associated Press, Union-Bulletin)
1958: August 8, “Ice Age Return Is Seen In U.S.” (Portland Oregonian Editor, The Salisbury Times)
1958: September, “The Coming Ice Age” (Harper’s)
1959: February 15, “A Warmer Earth Evident At Poles” (New York Times)
1961: March 9, “Don’t Say We Didn’t Give You Fair Warning: The Ice Age Cometh” (The Ada Weekly News)*
1962: April 13, “Arctic Deals Blow to Ice Age Theories” (New York Times news service)
1969: February 20, “Expert Says Arctic Ocean Will Soon Be Open Sea” (New York Times)
1970: April 22, “Colder Winters Held Dawn of New Ice Age” (Washington Post)
1971: July 9, “U.S. Scientists See New Ice Age Coming” (Washington Post)
1973: April 14, “The Earth Is Cooling, Return of Ice Age Is Feared” (Iowa City Press Citizen)
1974: “It [the New Ice Age] is the root cause of a lot of that unpleasant weather around the world and they warn that it carries the potential for human disasters of unprecedented magnitude” (Fortune)
1974: June 24, “Another Ice Age?” (TIME)
1975: “The Ice Age Cometh” (Science News)
1975: “[T]he world’s climatologists agreed . . . Once the freeze starts, it will be too late” (Douglas Colligan, Science Digest)
1975: April 28, “The Cooling World . . . The drop in food output could begin . . . soon” (Newsweek)
1975: May 21, “Scientists Ponder Why World’s Climate is Changing: A Major Cooling Widely Considered to Be Inevitable” (New York Times)
1975: June, “The threat of a new ice age must now stand alongside nuclear war as a likely source of death . . .” (Nigel Calder, International Wildlife Journal)
1981: March 31, “Long-range forecast: snow, ice for 114,000 years . . . Earth’s current warm period ending . . . new ice age could last 114,000 years say scientists” (AP)
1981: August 24, “Scientists predict melting icecaps next century . . . With a slow growth of fossil fuel use temperatures would go up about 4.5 degrees F . . . with a rapid increase . . . 5 to 8 degrees” (U.P.)
1981: November 25, “Warming of World can involve many gases” (UPI)
1982: “‘Volcano dust may cool Earth 2 years’ . . . Dust from Mexican volcano will produce a cooling effect around the Earth for the next two years, the National Oceanic Administration estimates” (AP)
1983: October 22, “The good news is Canadian winters may moderate . . . A predicted warming . . . will moderate Canada’s bitter waters. Prince Edward Island will likely be cut in half” (CP)
1990: April 16, “Global Warming: Pollutants turn Earth into ecological hothouse” (Syracuse Herald-Journal)
1994: January 31, “The Ice Age Cometh?” (TIME)
2000: April-May, “How to Prevent a Meltdown: Answers to global warming are in the wind” (TIME)
2004: December 26, “Undeniable Global Warming” (Washington Post)
2005: December 27, “Past Hot Times Hold Few Reasons to Relax About New Warming” (New York Times)
2006: January 29, “Debate on Climate Shifts to Issue of Irreparable Change: Some Experts on Global Warming Foresee ‘Tipping Point’ When It Is Too Late To Act” (Washington Post)
2006: July 24, “Global Warming Signed, Sealed, and Delivered Scientists Agree: The Earth . . . warming, and human activities are the principal cause” (Los Angeles Times)
2006, July, “Mostly cooler and wetter than normal this July in Alaska” (Alaska Monthly Summary)
2006: December, “Global Cooling Plan: It’s now clear that climate change threatens to warm the planet but to ice the world economy” (Newsweek: Special Edition)
2007: February 10, “From Bad to Worse: Earth’s Warming to Accelerate” (Science News)
2007: April 9, “Global Warming: What Now? Our feverish planet badly needs a cure” (TIME)
2007: May 28, “The Brooding Omnipresence of Global Warming” (Harper’s)
2007: August 6, “A warmer world creates new iceberg ecology . . . But now marine biologists have a more positive take on the . . . icebergs that have broken free” (TIME)
2008: January 14, “Snow Storm Hits New England: First Major Snow Drops Heavy Snow; Emergencies Declared, Hundreds of Schools Closed” (CBS/AP)
2008: February 11, “China On Ice . . . Blizzards have cost the economy at least 3 billion . . . Snow Crash. Storms have caused widespread damage and disruption throughout the country” (TIME)
* Note: This satirical 1961 piece pokes fun at Harper’s “New Ice Age” story (1960).






























Well, the 60 years since 1954 are almost up. How much have the ocean levels risen? Not anywhere near 40 feet [probably not even close to 40 inches]. Perhaps the good professor meant they would rise 40 feet all at once at the end of 60 years.
Great summary! This is why we've gone from a man provoking a new ice age, to man made global warming, to the all purpose man made "global climate change" (which can be anything one wants it to be) in less than three decades. The only thing missing from today's media-driven hysteria is to blame Bush for all of this.
Oh wait. I forgot that Bush caused Katrina by not signing the Kyoto Treaty (the same one that the Clinton-Gore administration also opposed, but that doesn't count). So, Bush is to blame after all
Never mind.
Phil:
Don't you just love people who take one data point and extrapolate a whole universe?
Sedona: The liberal mind is a wonderous thing.
Global Warming is a new age religion. Don’t confuse it with science. Inconvenient facts like the strong correlation between the Little Ice Age and sun spot cycles, the fact that the Sun is has recently passed its 2000 year sun spot maximum, the fact there is global warming presently on Mars, Jupiter, Saturn, Triton and Pluto and the fact that long term atmospheric CO2 has shown no correlation between warm and cold periods are conveniently ignored.
Climate science is an inexact as anything can be. The same people who cannot give an accurate three day forecast expect us to believe that got it down pat thirty years hence. Doom and gloom sells; you get fame, fortune, grants and PhDs by embracing the Global Warming religion. For a scientist to deny the Global Warming gospel and will end with a proclamation of heretic with their career ruined, tenure denied and grants evaporate.
It seems it is an innate characteristic of man to blame himself for any natural disaster. When the sun caused cooling of the Little Ice Age occurred man’s transgressions were deduced as the cause and sinners were strung up by the thousands.
So many years so little has changed.
I also found out does no good to argue facts with a liberal whose mind is made up because, as has been observed here at IC many times, facts don’t matter. These are "True Believers," and liberalism is a religion to them, as also has been noted.
I had been debating the matter of global warming with a liberal for a number of years. Much in the vein of Phillip Ellis Jackson’s friend Harry [http://www.intellectualconservative.com/2007/the-looney-liberal-chronicles-chapter-8], he is a "True Believer" in Al Gore, Michael Moore, and all the rest of the Hollywood know-it-alls. I kept feeding him articles with facts that question whether global warming is real and if man had anything to do with it. Finally, he made the astounding statement, "I really don't care if there is global warming or not, if this is the flag that must be waved to clean up our filthy environment, then I am for it."
When I read that statement, I jumped back at least ten feet. Who said the environment was "filthy"? He certainly didn’t indicate anywhere in the whole exchange that cleaning it up was his real goal, until he made that statement. To me, it was a complete, off-the-wall non-sequitur. If cleaning up the environment is his goal, fine; he should have been arguing that instead of something that might not even be related. With that, I decided to end that debate.
He also has Bush Derangement Syndrome – everything bad, literally, is Bush’s fault, even Hurricane Katrina. However, I never heard him, or any advocate for the environment for that matter, criticize Bush’s enemy Saddam, even once, for deliberately creating the greatest man-made ecological disaster in the history of the planet, setting fire to the oil fields. Nor does he assign any fault to Saddam for causing the Gulf War.
Yes, Phil, the liberal mind is a wondrous thing indeed.
Commander Bill, I only disagree with the idea that it is innate for man to blame himself. It's a vile trait that is taught by almost all "regular" philosophies and virtually all religions and most non-religious political systems. The foundation is laid and fertile for the gobbledygoop of the climate doomsdayers. Hardly anyone offers the idea that man's ability to solve problems of life and living have been demonstrated admirably. The freer countries are testament to man's need to be free of coercion by the state in order to live.