The Prediction Of A New Ice Age

click to enlarge

Credit for this post must be given to Edward Spalton because he has supplied me with the information.

Says Edward: '1972 was the year when severe frost destroyed all the Soviet Autumn-sown wheat crop. We had a great shortage in 1973.'

In case anyone has a problem reading the image, it is a clip from the Ontario, Canada's Windsor Star dated 9 September, 1972.  It quotes Professor Hubert Lamb, the then director of climate research at the University of East Anglia:

"The full impact of the new Ice Age will not be upon us for another 10,000 years and even then it will not be as severe as the last great glacial period.

"We are past the best of the inter-glacial period which happened between 7,000 and 3,000 years ago.

"Ever since then we have been on a downhill float regarding temperature.  There may be a few upward fluctuation from time to time but these are more than offset by the general downward trend."

He continues by saying, "We are on a definite downhill course for the next two centuries. The last 20 years of this century will be progressively colder.  After that the climate may warm up again but only for a short period of decades."

Professor Lamb didn't use modern 'modelling' computer technology for his prediction, but he studied the science. He developed early theories about the medieval warm period and little ice age and became known as the 'ice man'.

However, according to Edward's friend Philip Foster, these theories were to be Lamb's downfall:

Interesting, however very important to point out that Prof. Hubert  Lamb never changed his view on this and, consequently, was ousted from UEA in a politico-academic coup d'etat by Tom Wigley, Phil Jones et  al. He was disgracefully treated. It was his Medieval Warm Period that the warmistas tried to 'get rid of' as an infamous leaked email shows.

The whole science has been corrupted by greed and a strong desire for power and fame.  

Is it any wonder so many people have disputed the recent claims by Phil Jones and his ilk, whose predictions have been proved to be tainted (to put it kindly)? 

Tweet

... But Earth Abides

 A guest post from Apogee.

I have just been looking at the way the vegetation is growing, isn't it amazing what a little extra CO2 and a lot of water can do for the planet.

When reading WUWT about the savannah the thought occurs that the rise of the CO2 levels on this planet are a natural occurrence and nothing to worry about; in fact we should be happy about it.   And more and more it seems that the planet is cooling slowly -  has been for the last twenty years and this is also part of the cycle of life on this dirt ball.

I wonder if the "scientists" and "politicians"  and the speculators in WWF ,IPCC and all the rest of the professional merchants of panic will ever face any inquiry, public or otherwise,  It will be interesting if it happens but too many of the great and good would be in the dock.

The idea that climate is ever "right" or "wrong" or stays the same is the usual PC crap, climate "IS", it changes as it wishes. 

Where did this idea come from that "we" could change things, look at the size of the planet, I was reminded of this......

I met a traveler from an antique land 
Who said: Two vast and trunkless legs of stone 
Stand in the desert. Near them, on the sand, 
Half sunk, a shattered visage lies, whose frown, 
And wrinkled lip, and sneer of cold command, 
Tell that its sculptor well those passions read 
Which yet survive, stamped on these lifeless things, 
The hand that mocked them, and the heart that fed; 
And on the pedestal these words appear: 
“My name is Ozymandias, king of kings: 
Look on my works, ye Mighty, and despair!” 
Nothing beside remains. Round the decay 
Of that colossal wreck, boundless and bare The lone and level sands stretch far away.

Tweet

A Little Fun With The Climate Catastrophists

A post from Edward Spalton.

As the climate has failed to warm in the last fifteen years, it is interesting to recall how the language of the debate has been manipulated. Initially we were told of imminent, catastrophic, “man-made global warming”. Those who wanted to be gender-neutral and more high-falutin' called it “anthropogenic”.

Then they altered the term to “climate change” whilst retaining the original meaning. Of course, the climate has always changed. Nobody has ever denied that. But the meaning of the term “climate change” was subtly altered to mean global warming – as in the government department for climate change.

As no trend warming was discernible, they hit on “climate disruption”. So any out-of-the-ordinary weather – hot, cold, dry, wet, windy or calm can be blamed on the fractional amount of that life-giving trace gas carbon dioxide, which is attributable to human activity. You may think it's colder but it's really getting warmer.

Present understanding of the scientific record shows that there have been times when carbon dioxide in the atmosphere was much higher than at present and the climate much cooler. Some of today's hottest catastrophists predicted a new ice age from this cause as recently as the Seventies.

The next scare is extinction of species. The seas will become more acid from absorbing carbon dioxide, they say, and this will dissolve the shellfish and corals, which are made of calcium carbonate.

People who remember their chemistry lessons will know that limewater (a solution of calcium hydroxide) turns cloudy when mildly acidic carbon dioxide is bubbled through it. That cloudiness is insoluble calcium carbonate, produced by the reaction – a very common mineral and the main constituent of coral reefs.

If you continue to bubble CO2 through the solution, a strange thing happens. It goes clear again. The insoluble calcium carbonate is attacked by the carbonic acid (CO2 and water) to form calcium bicarbonate which is not only soluble but alkaline, thus de-acidying the water and making the calcium available for metabolism by the corals. This aids new growth and is why coral reefs have never suffered from “too much” carbon dioxide in the past.

O Level Chemistry trumps the increasingly sub prime science of official alarmist climatology.

I am indebted to the Rev Philip Foster MA (Nat Sci and Theol) for reminding me of my chemistry lessons.

Tweet