Flashback from the Washington Times, July 9, 1971, a NASA scientist using a "computer program developed by Dr. James Hansen" predicted an ice age would occur within 50-60 years. According to Hansen's computer model, "they found no need to worry about the carbon dioxide fuel-burning puts in the atmosphere."
One sentence makes this whole article stink like the BS it was. "A new ice age would flood the worlds costal cities - - -. " Ice ages LOWER the sea levels! Hello - anyone home in the brain of the writer?ReplyDelete
It depends how the ice flows stop up the rivers. Permanent ice at the mouth of the Hudson - would near term cause severe flooding of New York. Long term as ice builds on the continents the sea would decline as you have said.Delete
Looks like Hanson will be correct. Solar cycle 24 has peaked at about the same level as Solar cycle 5 famous for being the start of the little ice age, the Pacific and Atlantic ocean are now in their cool cycles as well. We won't even begin to get out of a cold weather slump until 2034.ReplyDelete
Of course I bet Hanson bet the cooling was due to soot and human induced aerosols.
So since he played both sides of the debate - he can not be wrong, Brilliant!
The man is a genius, and never apologized for any of his spectacular failures and unwarranted scaremongeringDelete
The 1970's software Hansen used to claim a runaway CO2 greenhouse effect on Venus predicted an ice age and "no need to worry about CO2" on Earth.
Hansen last version of his Model E GCM has as it's core the same equations he used for his Venus computations, and uses Dr. Wally Bs Co2 equations from the July 1975 journal Science article.Delete
Exactly! This is amazing! Scientists like George Kukla and Leona Woods Libby and even Hansen himself got it right by using models based on previous natural cycles. This means they know this 'co2 is warming the earth' crap is bogus. The establishment is bullshitting everyone because they know this cold spike is going to be a disaster as it will ruin crop production.Delete
Believe what you will. It's not apparent that it's a claim by James Hansen. I studied at uni in the late 1970s, and I left the anti-nuclear movement then because I thought the evidence for global warming was strong them, and we needed nuclear power.ReplyDelete
I believe the 97% consensus
Believe what you will. There is no 97% consensus, that is pure manufactured propaganda. Read Legates et al 2013 for a start.Delete