Busting scientist’s predictions, time to stop listening to their bullshit

The worldwide consensus of climate doomsayers has been around for a while.  Useful for them to take a look back at the last time they confidently predicted the end of civilisation as we know it:

“1974: “… when metereologists take an average of temperatures around the globe they find the atmosphere has been growing gradually cooler for the past three decades. The trend shows no indication of reversing. Climatological Cassandras are becoming increasingly apprehensive, for the weather aberrations they are studying may be the harbinger of another ice age. Telltale signs are everywhere–from the unexpected persistence and thickness of pack ice int eh waters around Iceland to the southward migration of a warmth-loving creature like the armadillo from the Midwest. When Climatologist George J. Kukla of Columbia University’s Lamont-Doherty Geological Observatory and his wife Helena analyzed satellite weather data fro the Northern Hemisphere, they found that the area of ice and snow cover had suddenly increased by 12% in 1971 and the increase has persisted ever since. Areas of Baffin Island in the Canadia Arctic, for example, were once totally free of any snow in summer; now they are covered year round.”

Later in the article, “Whatever the cause of the cooling trend, its effects could be extremely serious, if not catastrophic. Scientists figure that only a 1% decrease in the amount of sunlight hitting the earth’s surface could tip the climatic balance, and cool the planet enough to send it sliding down the road to another ice age within only a few hundred years.”

Source: “Another Ice Age,” Time Magazine, June 24, 1974.” 

A good few years earlier though, an even more alarming catastrophe loomed:

” In 1894, the Times of London estimated that by 1950 every street in the city would be buried nine feet deep in horse manure. One New York prognosticator of the 1890s concluded that by 1930 the horse droppings would rise to Manhattan’s third-story windows. A public health and sanitation crisis of almost unimaginable dimensions loomed…”

And yet the great global horse-manure crisis was averted. Instead we are being buried under an avalanche of bullshit by the Greenies and the great global warming scam.

BONUS VIDEO: Thomas Dolby’ TedTalk


THANK YOU for being a subscriber. Because of you Whaleoil is going from strength to strength. It is a little known fact that Whaleoil subscribers are better in bed, good looking and highly intelligent. Sometimes all at once! Please Click Here Now to subscribe to an ad-free Whaleoil.

  • Pete George

    I think there’s been a wee bit more research done since 1974.

    When scientists first suggested the world wasn’t flat the deniers had a field day for a millenium or two.

    • Jimmie

      Yup and when scientists are as one eyed now a days as back in medieval times then I would suggest PG that you would be a fool to jump on the AGW band wagon as you have done.

      Back in the 80’s the Ozone holes were going to fry us all to death and all the old fridges and fly spray cans were to blame.

      Hasn’t happened. And for you to cling to the AGW dogma without thinking that scientific doomsday scenarios aren’t linked to pressure for continued public research funding then you are not only a fool but an empty headed fool who cannot think for himself.

      And if you can’t grasp the concept that the reason why the left/socialists have jumped on this bandwagon so much is so they can use the AGW hoax to push for greater taxation then you are really a deluded fool who has problems thinking for himself.

      Get a grip man and get out in the real world.

      • Pete George

        What makes you think I’ve jumped on ‘the AGW bandwagon’ and ‘cling to AGW dogma’? I think you are jumping to extreme conclusions because I ‘poke a stick in here a bit’.

        Are you aware that there have been major reductions in the use of ozone depletion gases in fridges and fly cans since the 80’s? But it doesn’t mean the hole and the problem suddently disappeared, it’s just gone off the media radar.

        “The Antarctic ozone hole is expected to continue for decades. Ozone
        concentrations in the lower stratosphere over Antarctica will increase
        by 5–10% by 2020 and return to pre-1980 levels by about 2060–2075, 10–25
        years later than predicted in earlier assessments..”

        • Jimmie

          Well duh – come on PG you can do better than that. The first polar ozone hole was detected in 1958 – many years before evil fridges and spray cans did their destructive work on the atmosphere (Why do penguins and polar bears need fridges anyway?)

          The ozone holes have been around the poles ever since they have existed and are caused by the lack of sunlight during the polar winters.

          As most folk know (except you) Ozone is created by the sunlight hitting the O2 molecules in the upper atmosphere which causes them to change/excite into the O3 Ozone molecule.

          During the polar winter this sunlight is mostly absent causing the existing ozone to disperse and no new ozone is formed thus forming the appearance of a ‘hole’. Then during the polar summer the ozone hole mostly disappears as the sunlight is present again.

          I mean if the Ozone dogma was to be believed why is there not other holes over major metro areas where the greatest concentration of fridges & flyspray cans were used? Why was a hole detected in 1958 prior to most of these evil fridges being created?

          Think about it please.

          • Ronnie Chow

            One of the elements that make up CFCs is chlorine. Very little chlorine exists naturally in the atmosphere. But it turns out that CFCs are an excellent way of introducing chlorine into the ozone layer. The ultraviolet radiation at this altitude breaks down CFCs, freeing the chlorine. Under the proper conditions, this chlorine has the potential to destroy large amounts of ozone. This has indeed been observed, especially over Antarctica. As a consequence, levels of genetically harmful ultraviolet radiation have increased.

          • Pete George

            I had a think about it.

            “Extremely low total ozone measurements were made at the Antarctic Dumont d’Urville station in 1958. These measurements were derived from spectrographic plates of the blue sky, the moon, and two stars. These Dumont plate data are inconsistent with 1958 Dobson spectrophotometer ozone measurements, inconsistent with present-day Antarctic observations, and inconsistent with meteorological and theoretical information. There is no credible evidence for an ozone hole in 1958.”


            Dr. Paul A. Newman is the Chief Scientist for Atmospheric Sciences at NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center in the Earth Sciences Division.

    • Orange

      Finally, someone not repeating the Columbus myth!

  • Mr_Blobby

    What will happen, will indeed happen. There is not a lot mankind can do about it. The Science, I mean art of predicting anything, will be 50% correct by the law of averages.
    Meanwhile we all know that all this bullshit is a perfect opportunity to TAX and make money for Governments desperate for ever increasing amounts, to buy votes, and stay in power at any cost.

  • Ronnie Chow

    Up , down , turn around , pick a bale of cotton …..

    Change is the only permanence on this planet . Now let’s ram that message home to the teachers , the unionists , and the Rangatira troughing Iwi .

  • cows4me

    It’s our governments that will have to take the lead and kill this bullshit. The scientists are a lost cause, most have their noses firmly stuck in the trough. To challenge global warming is to cut one means of living. It’s all a big scam the politicians want the tax, to tax there has to be a reason, the scientists supply the reason, the politicians grease the scientists palms, it’s a vicious fucking cycle. And on top of this will come the rules and regulations that will further enslave us, all in the name of saving mother Earth. As far as I’m concerned New Zealand politicians are simply traitors and useful idiots happily selling their souls to the devil.

    • Hazards001

      Damn right, the signing of the kyoto accords by the lesbo liarbour greenies was nothing more than another opportunity to insert snout in trough…the ETS is the biggest scam since the moon landings!

    • Patrick

      Your joking? There is not a pollie in NZ that would volunteer to give up tax revenue.

      If they had the gonads the Nats would chuck out the ETS, WFF & free student loans.

      How f’ing likely is that? Not very.

      National have been an absolute let down, many of us had high hopes for John Key, we thought he might do what is required to put NZ on a better path but all he has done is issue a “steady as she goes” order from the helm of the MV Rena as she motors towards the Astrolabe Reef.

      To make matters worse that clown Nick Smith who is responsible for the ETS is supposedly about to be welcomed back into the fold. He has tripped over his own clever clogs that many times that he should be told to f$ck right off & never return.

      • cows4me

        Sadly you are right on all accounts Patrick. By politicians I should have said NEW ONES!

  • Louis

    Global warming is the biggest threat to right wing ideologies ever. Hence why the likes of this blog are determined on attacking it. They’re just scared.

    • onelaw4all

      What would these “ideologies” be scared of, exactly?

      • Louis

        Because dealing with climate change will require regulation, something that seems to go against with the neoliberal agenda.

        • onelaw4all

          Do these regulations magically come into existence at no present or future cost to the taxpayer?

          • Louis

            No there is definitely a cost. Less consumption and higher prices for consumers. But better than the cost of destroying the environment.

          • onelaw4all

            We’ll get right on that when you have any empirical proof of that occurring.
            ‘Till then, you will find most “ideologies” have a problem with theft/swindling.

    • Hazards001

      You fucking idiot, it’s just a con,,the climate has always changed you muppet..warm one or two generations…cool for a few..dinosaurs, ice age..fuck me sideways..which one of them tilted the earth and caused their own destruction? you are clearly a big fan of being taxed for something that can’t be controlled.

      • Louis

        And on what qualification can you say this? There is plenty of evidence that climate change is a real possibility, as I said before opposition to climate change is very political and it seems that there is a conservative belief that nothing will change. It is the biggest threat to their ideologies. Also when people with opposing opinions common on my blog I don’t start swearing at them. Abusing people is a great to be taken seriously and only shows to be that you’re too stupid to write a proper response. This blog is a great fan of hate speech obviously. I hope people like you never get in any position of power. Pitching to the extremes is probably never worthwhile, it’s about pitching to the middle 80% rather than the 10% on either end.

        • Hazards001

          ” There is plenty of evidence that climate change is a real possibility, as I said before opposition to climate change is very political and it seems that there is a conservative belief that nothing will change.”

          Halfwit. I said I totally agree the climate is changing. It always has. That is the conservative belief. Your belief however would appear to be that it(climate change) is solely attributable to humans and that we should tax everyone back to the dark ages. Hence my swearing…because clearly you are a fucking idiot and can’t see what’s been written as you are so blind to your own ideological bullshit. And the funny thing? If we ended up back in some monolithic dark age society I’d survive as would many others here..but i suspect you’d be cap in hand looking for a handout and some food!
          Piss off!

          • Louis

            When did I ever say that it was entirely caused by humans? That’s just what you incorrectly inferred! And given that climate change sceptics are the minority then I’m not sure why you’re swearing at me like I’m some radical. And what is the ideology here? It’s scientific evidence. The ideology is being flexible to scientific evidence. I’m sure I would fear much better in some “monolithic dark age society” because unlike you I would have prepared for it. And I certainly know that you will not be getting in any hand outs from me. You can suffer the consequences of being an abusive idiot. End of discussion.

          • onelaw4all

            “It’s scientific evidence. The ideology is being flexible to scientific evidence.”
            Ok then, feel free to link a study that empirically proves that man has any significant effect on Global temperature/climate.

  • Steve (North Shore)

    My missus got sunburnt yesterday at the Kumeu Classic Car and Hot Rod Festival.
    It was raining and overcast until 1pm. Turns out she got hot and stripped off, and did not use sunblock.
    All of the metros had umbrellas and coats
    Me, I walked around in shorts and singlet, got a bit wet, no sunburn, no sunblock, and I am whiter than the background you see on this page.
    How come?

    • Rodger T

      Shit happens?

  • http://www.skepticalscience.com/ice-age-predictions-in-1970s-intermediate.htm

    “these are media articles, not scientific studies. A survey of peer reviewed scientific papers from 1965 to 1979 show that few papers predicted global cooling (7 in total). Significantly more papers (42 in total) predicted global warming (Peterson 2008).”


    • axeman

      JDT … like the “expert” from (where else?) the Climatic Research Unit at the University of East Anglia, in 2000.

      “According to Dr David Viner, a senior research scientist at the climatic research unit (CRU) of the University of East Anglia,within a few years winter snowfall will become ‘a very rare and exciting event’

      ‘Children just aren’t going to know what snow is,’ he said”


      • Like …?

        You’re comparing an off-the cuff comment to a newspaper by one scientist to an actual presented paper. The result of weeks if not months of work by 3 leading scientists from 3 institutions, an unknown number of under-grads. Carefully researched and considered in wording with drafts and edit cycles.

        Like ?

        I suppose it was communication from Climate Scientist(s), so somewhat alike.

        Why the snarky “(Where else?) the Climate Research Unit”?
        This is the place that collated the HADCRUT climate figures widely touted by deniers to show an absence of warming since 1998.
        I guess they’re only idiots when they disagree with you, but fine people when they agree with you?