By John Mauer
For those of us who like numbers, picking apart past predictions by experts is sheer fun. In 1975, the world was cooling from peak temperatures in the 1940s. The predictions of climate scientists were cataclysmic: a new ice age was upon us. Sure feels like it today. Have you ever considered melting the arctic ice cap by covering it with black soot?
Several articles, both popular and scientific, were published in the 1970s which showed the global temperatures had peaked and headed downward. I’m going to pick on just one, the Newsweek article on The Cooling World from April 25, 1975, as shown here. Newsweek, of course, still sees nothing wrong with this kind of reporting; the scientists are to blame.
The Cooling World
There are ominous signs that the weather patterns have begun to change dramatically, and that these changes may portend a drastic decline in food production – with serious political implications for just about every nation on earth. The drop in food output could begin quite soon, perhaps only 10 years from now.
The shortage of food was to occur as early as 1985. Remember it? (The main shortage of food today is in third world countries because we are burning biomass.)
If this introduction sounds familiar, it should. The story projects changes in weather patterns derived from climate change. No data is given to substantiate that claim is given. This is eerily similar to the 2007 report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) where severe changes in weather are also predicted, but from global warming, not cooling. (Remember, models aren’t data.)
The evidence in support of these predictions has now begun to accumulate so massively that meteorologists are hard pressed to keep up with it. In England, farmers have seen their growing season decline by about two weeks since 1950, with a resultant over-all loss in grain production estimated at up to 100,000 tons annually. … Last April, in the most devastating outbreak of tornadoes ever recorded, 148 twisters killed more than 300 people and caused half a billion dollars’ worth of damage in thirteen U.S. states.
Meteorologists study the atmosphere and focus on weather processes and forecasting, in contrast with climatology. Here, as elsewhere, the intermixing of the two disciplines is done without distinction.
A survey completed last year by Dr. Murray Mitchell of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration reveals a drop of half a degree in average ground temperatures in the Northern Hemisphere between 1945 and 1968. According to George Kukla of Columbia University, satellite photos indicated a sudden, large increase in Northern Hemisphere snow cover in the winter of 1971-1972. And a study released last month by two NOAA scientists notes that the amount of sunshine reaching the ground in the continental U.S. diminished by 1.3 per cent between 1964 and 1972.
But on to the only significant data quoted in the article: the drop in the measured global temperature. The data appears to come from the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) in Boulder, Colorado, but is referenced from the Met Office Hadley Center in the United Kingdom. They have been keeping world-wide temperature data since 1850.
So what does the same data look like today? A plot of the Newsweek data against the Hadley yearly global temperature data of today shows quite a difference. (The offset of temperature is normalized to 1884.)
Remember, this is the same data, just being reported 35 years later. So ask yourself, would you draw the same conclusion from the Hadley data today that Newsweek drew from it 35 years ago.
Extremes: Meteorologists think that they can predict the short-term results of the return to norm of the last century. … an increase in extremes of local weather such as droughts, floods, extended dry spells, long freezes, delayed monsoons and even local temperature increases
Wow. Just think about that. If global cooling can cause all that, just think what global warming can do. We must be on the cusp of just the right temperature. Or maybe climate science is not all it’s cracked up to be.
Climatologists are pessimistic that political leaders will take any positive action to compensate for climate change, or even to allay its effects. … The longer the planners delay, the more difficult will they find it to cope with climatic change once the results become grim reality.
And climatologists demand that government must act. Where have we heard that chorus before? Maybe we should melt the ice caps as suggested, or stockpile food. Ah, but we can’t stockpile food anymore; we burn biomass for inefficient fuel. And I guess that the polar bears weren’t a concern in those days. Amazing how political bedfellows can change the scientific message.
All in all, junk science is still junk science. The ice man cometh, but NOAA still exists. And reporters still can’t tell the difference.
 Remember Global Cooling?, Newsweek, Oct 23, 2006
 Met Office Hadley Center, there are all sorts of temperature data here. The main combination data set, land and sea, is HadCRUT3 which is gridded data, but yearly and monthly averages are also here. Gridded data is extrapolated data from widely spread measurements.