From Global Cooling to Global Cooling

Back in the 1970s, Time magazine and other major media outlets published a series of articles about the coming ice age. For those of you who have forgotten, or are too young to have experienced this environmental fear campaign, I kid you not. On June 24, 1974, they published an article titled, "Science, Another Ice Age?" By 1977, it was a done deal, as indicated by their cover story, "How to Survive the Coming Ice Age," illustrated here.

But it was also in 1977 that scientific opinion started to shift toward global warming. In early 1978 the New York Times reported that a poll of climate scientists found them evenly divided on whether there would be warming, cooling, or no particular change. But the balance among the handful of top experts had shifted strongly toward the likelihood of warming.

The climate change issue became more politicized in the 1980s, as more and more people became aware of the issue. But not everyone thought more greeenhouse gases, CO2 in particular, were a bad thing. The most comforting ideas came from a respected scientist, Sherwood Idso, who published arguments that greenhouse gas emissions would not warm the Earth or bring any other harm to climate. Better still, by fertilizing crops, the increase of CO2 would bring tremendous benefits. His book, Carbon Dioxide: Friend or Foe? came down entirely on the side of Friend. In his opinion, the increase of CO2 "is something to be encouraged and not suppressed."

The controversy over climate change continued throughout the 1990s until today, culminating in Al Gore's film An Inconvenient Truth. At this point, Gore's position was that the debate was over, that global warming was a fact. This lasted until we found out that some of the researchers cooked some of their books, and not all the data was correct, nor was all the analysis done correctly. In fact, some of the data is missing. This has been referred to as ClimateGate, a huge cover-up.

Then the climate began to show signs of change again, but this time cooling instead of warming. When the Obama administration took over in 2009, global warming was no longer the preferred term; climate change or disruptive climate change became the new descriptive terminology.

But we're now back to where we started. The next event will be global cooling, some predict. As James Delingpole writes:

At its June meeting in Sitges, Spain (unreported and held in camera, as is Bilderberg’s way), some of the world’s most powerful CEOs rubbed shoulders with notable academics and leading politicians. They included: the chairman of Fiat, the Irish Attorney General Paul Gallagher, the US special representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan Richard Holbrooke, Henry Kissinger, Bill Gates, Dick Perle, the Queen of the Netherlands, the editor of the Economist…. Definitely not Z-list, in other words.

The 58th Bilderberg Meeting will be held in Sitges, Spain 3 – 6 June 2010. The Conference will deal mainly with Financial Reform, Security, Cyber Technology, Energy, Pakistan, Afghanistan, World Food Problem, Global Cooling, Social Networking, Medical Science, EU-US relations. [emphasis mine]

Yep, that’s right. Global Cooling.

Which means one of two things.

Either it was a printing error.

Or the global elite is perfectly well aware that global cooling represents a far more serious and imminent threat to the world than global warming, but is so far unwilling to admit it except behind closed doors.

With so many people and governments pushing for de-carbonization, and the taxes and policies that have been and would be put in place, can we really believe which way the climate is going? Is cutting back on carbon dioxide a good thing?

Al Gore's global warming scare may turn out to be the biggest hoax of the century. But I think if we just wait a few decades, it might be back in vogue. In the meantime, my message to my government: You can no longer use global warming as an excuse to steal more of my money.

And by the way, where is Al Gore?