How about this article from an 1975 Newsweek:

The Cooling World
(http://www.globalclimate.org/Newsweek.htm)

Robert K

1982 Westfalia water-cooled inline four (brrrr)

--- Brendan Coffey <bmc@THEORPHANAGE.COM> wrote:

> And, frankly, none of this is the point.  Can
> we PROVE global warming is
> happening?  Well, the globe certainly is
> warming.  Can we PROVE that
> hurricanes are getting more severe?  Sort of.
> Can we PROVE that any of
> this is related to human fossil fuel
> consumption and emissions?  Well,
> "prove" is a strong word.
>
> And all of the
>
my-god-created-the-universe-and-it's-only-three-hundred-
> years-old wackjobs jump up and shout, "Hah!  So
> you admit it!  It's only
> a theory!"  Uh, yeah.  So is gravity.
>
> Is every ecological system we know how to
> measure currently in severe
> decline?  Yes.  Are human activities
> significantly destabilizing global
> ecosystems?  Duh.
>
> -bmc
>
> On Thu, 2005-09-22 at 19:26 -0500, Jim Felder
> wrote:
>
> > Wrong. Rush Limbaugh says that
> environmentalists say that, but they
> > don't say that.
> >
> > Jim
> >
> > On Sep 22, 2005, at 7:07 PM,
> turbodieseltrooper wrote:
> >
> > > That's the whole point - environmentalists
> says it's global warming
> > > just
> > > based on the last decade
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "greg crone" <l_levi1@yahoo.com>
> > > To: "turbodieseltrooper"
> <turbodieseltrooper@SBCGLOBAL.NET>
> > > Sent: Thursday, September 22, 2005 10:55 AM
> > > Subject: Re: OT Hurricanes--really an
> accident?
> > >
> > >
> > >> Your're using two sets of numbers
> containing only 50
> > >> units each. The standard deviation makes
> the results
> > >> useless.........Get 10,000 years on both
> sides of the
> > >> tech and non-tech eras and then you have
> something to
> > >> compare.
> > >> What you're doing is akin to flipping a
> coin 5 times
> > >> at night and 5 times in daylight, and
> saying the
> > >> sunlight caused the difference.
> > >>
> > >> --- turbodieseltrooper
> > >> <turbodieseltrooper@SBCGLOBAL.NET> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> >> Global warming is not scientifically
> PROVEN, and
> > >>> even if it is happening,
> > >>> >> so what? We have NO idea why it's
> happening.
> > >>>
> > >>> >Not altogether true. Just like in plague
> times,
> > >>> there were people who knew.
> > >>> >they just didn't have the political
> voice to
> > >>> convince anyone who mattered.
> > >>>
> > >>> The ones who claim to know are rarley
> chalenged.
> > >>> They never admit that they
> > >>> are wrong and when proven wrong, they can
> only
> > >>> resort to name calling.
> > >>>
> > >>> http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/pastdec.shtml
> > >>>
> > >>> This shows the number of hurrican strikes
> to the US,
> > >>> by decade, since 1851.
> > >>> I didn't plot it on a graph, but it does
> show signs
> > >>> of a cycle. The sources
> > >>> of greenhouse gases (ie cars) WERE NON
> existant or
> > >>> small in number (as
> > >>> compared to today) from 1851 to 1910. Now
> compare
> > >>> this to the years 1951 to
> > >>> 2004 which has lower numbers?? Facts
> don't lie. t
> > >>> appears that we are on an
> > >>> upward cycle.
> > >>>
> > >>> > don't think we need to think too much
> beyond
> > >>> simply lowering
> > >>> greenhouse gas output at this point, to
> cool down
> > >>> what we THINK we've essed
> > >>> up while we search for answers in a
> scientific
> > >>> environment unfettered by
> > >>> politics.
> > >>>
> > >>> It is the poltics of Socialism that
> drives the
> > >>> global warming crowd. You
> > >>> only need to look at the Kioto(sp?)
> accord. By it
> > >>> own reasearch, it will do
> > >>> very little, yet it handicaps the US.
> > >>>
> > >>> gunslinger13x
> > >>> allways outnumbered, never outgunned
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
>
__________________________________________________
> > >> Do You Yahoo!?
> > >> Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best
> spam protection around
> > >> http://mail.yahoo.com
> > >
>

__________________________________
Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005
http://mail.yahoo.com