34 votes

FLASHBACK: Global Cooling -1970's Environmental Hysteria

Back in the 1970's "science" was firm-the earth was undergoing climate change.

The world was definitely getting colder, growing seasons were getting shorter, the cost of heating was getting more expensive- in short we were doomed.

Indeed, according to Newsweek:

"The evidence in support of these predictions has now begun to accumulate so massively that meteorologists are hard-pressed to keep up with it."

Sounds like a crazed Al Gore in reverse.

Seems to me it was all designed to get us to stop using oil, which was projected to run out by the 1990's, lest we freeze to death as this hapless gent on the cover of Time in 1973- "The Big Freeze"

Here are some links to articles in Newsweek and Time from the 1970's including some interesting cover stories and images, warning us of the dangers of GLOBAL COOLING.

Time Article June 1974 "Another Ice Age?" Blurb.

The Cooling World In Newsweek April 28, 1975 Full article:
http://denisdutton.com/newsweek_coolingworld.pdf

This article talks about solutions like covering the polar caps with black soot to melt them!

************************

Cover of Time April 1977

"The Coming Ice Age-51 Things You Can Do to Make A Difference"

http://thecynicaleconomist.com/2009/12/07/the-fiction-of-cli...
(this photo is itself a hoax! See comments below)

*************************

Cover of Time December 1979- "The Cooling of America"
http://www.tias.com/11804/PictPage/3923778011.html

Now the argument goes, stop using oil lest we fry to death.

Powerful interests hype the carbon based global warming hoax so they can institute a multi-trillion dollar carbon credit trading scheme.

Focusing on an organic substance like carbon and hyping it so EVERYONE has to think about their "carbon" footprint is a great control mechanism.

99.9% of us don't do massive dumping of toxic chemicals into the environment. BUT by making us the guilty parties for using carbon, it takes the spot light off the real polluters.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

hehe

i asked a man what they thought of the global warming talk, when it first started coming about, and he said, "back in the 70's i sold everything i owned because of the coming ice age, i'm not going to fall for that bullsh1t again."

I use Blue Wave, but don't expect one of THEIR silly taglines.

Please note

Please note that the "The Coming Ice Age-51 Things You Can Do to Make A Difference" pic has been Photoshopped from Time's April 9, 2007 issue. We don't want to be giving out false info.

http://www.time.com/time/covers/0,16641,20070409,00.html

Thanks-the rest of the articles are verifiable

global cooling articles. You can even find the original copies on ebay

Please subscribe to smaulgld.com

Yep, that's the brainwashing I got in school.

I was told I would almost certainly live to see a mini ice age. Thank goodness global warming came along in time to save from that fate....

My mother was taught that men could never go to the moon because they would die of old age on the trip there.

"Scientific fact" is a slippery little eel.

Love or fear? Chose again with every breath.

Give my regards to your wise mother.

Those planning to go to the moon will most likely die before getting there. If they stay healthy enough to die of old age, I hope they consider it a blessing. None should attempt the voyage w/o a firm understanding of Van Allen Belts. They should study Stanley Kubrick's cinema photography to see with their own eyes photographic tricks that mooned the world.

Three views of the Moon Landing films:

  1. Live!... The pop view. The completely fake films mooned the world & still do.
  2. How Stanley Kubrick faked the Apollo Moon Landings:
    Alchemical Kubrick II
    By Jay Weidner ... Copyright 2009.

    Fake photography, but man did go unseen. Using clandestine top-secret advanced technology...

  3. Shock ! Stanley Kubrick Filmed Fake Moon Footage !! - Proof ! This is one of thousands of documentaries. Separating lies from damn lies is difficult.

    The entire Apollo Moon landing was stage film production off Broadway... Way off Broadway! ... Fake!

1. Live! "Is it live? Or is it Memorex?"

2. No one knows how the powers that be (PTB) convinced Kubrick to direct the Apollo landings. Maybe they had compromised Kubrick in some way. The fact that his brother, Raul Kubrick, was the head of the American Communist Party may have been one of the avenues pursued by the government to get Stanley to cooperate. ...

It looks like Stanley Kubrick faked the moon landings in return for two things. The first was a virtually unlimited budget to make his ultimate science fiction film: 2001: A Space Odyssey, and the second was that he would be able to make any film he wanted, with no oversight from anyone, for the rest of his life.

... The production of 2001: A Space Odyssey parallels the Apollo program. The production started in 1964 and went on to the release of 2001: A Space Odyssey in1968. Meanwhile the Apollo program went from 1964 and culminated with the first moon landings on July 20th 1969. ... The most pressing problem for Kubrick in 1964 was to figure out a way to make the shots on the ground, on the surface of the moon, look real. He had to make the scenes look expansive like it was really done on the moon and not in a studio back lot. ... Eventually Kubrick settled on doing the entire thing with a cinematic technique called Front Screen Projection. It is in the use of this cinematic technique that the fingerprints of Kubrick can be seen all over the Apollo material.

Also it is very interesting to note that Frederick Ordway worked both for NASA and the Apollo program and was Kubrick's top science advisor on 2001: A Space Odyssey.

3. Kubrick cinema was good enough to fool most of the people most of the time. Kubrick was paid handsomely for his film mooning the world with NASA's pilots & scripted film version of Moon missions.

The Russians were pad off with $5 billion affectionately called "agricultural support" as there grain production failed coincidentally during the NASA Apollo program. Imagine the whole continental Russian crop failures, yet none showed up on NASA film voyages. Perhaps even the Russian crop failures were faked too. Scientists knew, even at near the speed of light, radio transmission would take about 2 seconds to send/receive. There was no such delay when NASA nor the President spoke to the Astronauts where ever they were. The Lunar Lander was not made to land on nor take off from the moon. The Lunar Lander was a set prop. As for stars filmed outside Earth orbit? Kubrick edited them out when filming, as they would would not match celestial reality.

Disclaimer: Mark Twain (1835-1910-To be continued) is unlicensed. His river pilot's license went delinquent in 1862. Caution advised. Daily Paul

Good retort!

Indeed, I have never been to the moon and cannot verify that it is possible. I have looked at many photos from the "moon landing" that leave me with serious questions.

Love or fear? Chose again with every breath.

whats interesting is that the moon landings were all 40 years

ago.
they havent happened since. The argument cant be we didn't have the money to do it any more because over the last 40 years we have blowns trillions

Please subscribe to smaulgld.com

Not sure I believe all that BUT

I did hear that Kubrick had access to special NASA technology when he filmed the candle scene in Barry Lyndon without the use of any artificial lighting.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FmSDnPvslnA

Please subscribe to smaulgld.com

Please select one of the above: 1 Live! 2 Fake or 3 All Fake

Those that believe all three are are even harder to believe.

I go w/ nearly all fake.
===============================
... Front screen projection evidence... nails the fraud of the Apollo landings... [There is more] circumstantial evidence that forces these conclusions even more in the direction of Kubrick directing the entire Apollo missions.

In the original release of 2001 there were many credits thanking NASA and many of the aerospace companies that worked with NASA on the moon landings. These credits have since been removed from all subsequent releases of 2001. But for those of us old enough to remember, in the original credits Kubrick thanks a vast array of military and space corporations for their help in the production.
As these are the same corporations that supposedly helped NASA get the astronauts to the moon - one has to wonder what kind of help they gave Stanley and for what price.

In the film 'Wag the Dog' Dustin Hoffman plays a movie producer hired by the CIA to 'fake an event'. His name in the movie is Stanley. In that movie 'Stanley' mysteriously dies after telling everyone that he wants credit for the 'event' that he helped fake.

Stanley Kubrick died a few hours after showing Eyes Wide Shut to the executives at Warner Brothers. It is rumored that they were very upset concerning that film. They wanted Kubrick to re-edit the film but he refused. ... personally was in France when Stanley died and I saw on French television outtakes from the forthcoming Eyes Wide Shut. ... saw several scenes that were never in the finished film.

Warner Brothers has even come out and said that they re-edited the film slightly. To this day they refuse to release a DVD of Stanley Kubrick's cut. Not only is this a direct violation of the agreement that Kubrick had with Warner Brothers but also it means that we will probably never see the un-edited version of this film. One has to wonder what was cut out.
http://sacredmysteries.com/public/263.cfm

Disclaimer: Mark Twain (1835-1910-To be continued) is unlicensed. His river pilot's license went delinquent in 1862. Caution advised. Daily Paul

What made me think of it was my kid came home from school

and told me his science teacher said we would all melt in 20 years and that we are toast because of global warming.
I showed him these materials and sent him back with a "binder" to show the ignorant teacher

Please subscribe to smaulgld.com

CARBONated water is fine

It is mercury in fish and toxins in food that's the problem

Please subscribe to smaulgld.com

Thank You!

As the idealistic environmentalists and the anti nanny state conservatives argue about C02, the very real problem of the PCBs, PBBs, mercury, and the other real pollutants get dumped into the worlds oceans seemingly unnoticed and little reported.

What about the PH factor?

CO2 is absorbed by water... and is raising the PH factor. Fish don't like that.

Ron Paul 2012; Rand Paul 2016

Really interesting links.

Thanks.

Lord Acton, Lord Chief Justice of England, 1875 - "The issue which has swept down the centuries and which will have to be fought sooner or later is the People v. The Banks."

We are causing problems

Aside from the whole carbon trading scam put in place by the elites who want to profit from the "crisis", the truth is that the human species is currently polluting the oceans with millions of tons of garbage and plastic. The pursuit of profits and in some cases the only ability for the poorest of people to feed their families are cutting and destroying millions of acres of ancient forest land around the world. Monsanto has destroyed entire ecosystems in areas the Americans never hear about. Is it causing climate change? It most likely is having some effect but it comes from a multitude of sources and is much more complicated than the surface debate.

Correct

Carbon is not the problem
It's a natural necessary substance
Global warming caused by carbon is a scam for bankers to introduce
Cap and trade

If you are worried about pollution focus on toxic substances in water and on land that makes its way into our drinking water and food

Please subscribe to smaulgld.com

Those are my areas of focus

I am very much focused on that and have studied for years on many items. One in particular that is easy to share is Fluoride. We are being poisoned in this country and the few left around the world that still dump the fertilizer industry tower mist called fluoride into the drinking water. Its very simple;

Industrial Mega-farms need the phosphate fertilizer to grow the monsanto GMO corn. Without it, the yield would be less than half.
The phosphate fertilizer industry provides it.
The toxic waste by-product (hexafluorosalisic acid) is created when hydrochloric acid is applied to phosphate rich ore. The resulting deadly fume is so toxic as a waste product that the EPA strictly forbids the dumping of it into any waterway or land application.
These deadly fumes are instead "scrubbed" by misting towers, pooled, put into tanker trucks and sold to municipal water systems around the country.
The only way they can get rid of it is to dilute it down to an "acceptable" level. This is done by selling it to municipal water systems under the guise of a dental benefit. This is only one of the many toxins destroying our ecosystem. I would love to list more items, but I know this is not the correct forum for these subjects.
Thanks for the comment and opportunity to expand on the subject.

yes that is the real pollution

I've added a short section in the body of the article to cover the point that real pollution is not being addresses as the focus is on the faux culprit - carbon

Please subscribe to smaulgld.com

That's why they renamed it

That's why they renamed it "climate change." Now they got all (two) bases covered.

Funny but they called it climate change then too!

Take a look at the Newsweek article.

Please subscribe to smaulgld.com

Someone did a global cooling video

some of the stuff above shown and set to music
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ttLBqB0qDko

Good set of links under the video

Please subscribe to smaulgld.com

The scientist were so convinced

that the cooling trend was inescapable. But not to worry there is no fabricated crisis ever that the central planners can't handle-Think more taxes or creatively, cap and trade!

Please subscribe to smaulgld.com