New York Times: Continuing end of last ice-age, not human activity, cause of warming trend

The New York Times Archives | May 15, 1932 | SPECIAL SECTON SUPPLEMENT

[Izzy Dunne]

My heart was full of gladness and wonder - "did the NYT finally get it?" - that thought actually crossed my mind.

Then I read the article date.

< sigh >

[mainepatsfan]

[jveritas]

The ICE AGE and its END through 100% natural activity with zero relation to man activities is the silver bullet that kills any of this Human-related Global Warming BS and lies.

[andyandval]

The New York Times Archives | May 15, 1932 | SPECIAL SECTON SUPPLEMENT

Great find!

[SpaceBar]

The New York Times was instrumental in exposing the Boss Tweed democratic political corruption machine operating within Tammany Hall... but that was quite some time ago.

[cripplecreek]

Professor Edgeworth David of the University of Sydney conservatively estimates that the sea level will rise fifty feet.

LOL most of the rational estimates I've seen say the sea levels will rise about 10 to 15 feet.

[Fred Nerks]

thanks for posting...

The earth must inevitably change its aspect and its climate.

from 1932!

[CJBama]

As I recall, there was a prediction of an Ice age somewhere in the late '60's thru mid-70's as well. So we've had a Warming (30's-40's), Ice Age(60's - 70's), Warming (90's-00's).

At least we'll have the Carbon Tax in place to pay for our increased heating bills when the prediction swings back to Ice Age in about 15 - 20 years.

Am I the only one getting weary of dealing with these people?

[dayglored]

IMO, no responsible scientist would ignore the fact that we're still coming out of an Ice Age, and the Earth is heating up on its own (with the help of the Sun of course). That's the vastly over-riding force behind the warming temperatures.

But that's not the entire story. The NYT article from 1932 speaks of 30,000-40,000 years for the temperature to get back up to where it was long ago. The problem seen by the "global warming" alarmists is that the rate of change in the past 100 years indicates a far faster rise in temperature than was foreseen 75 years ago. The problems foreseen 75 years ago might happen far sooner than 30,000 years at present rates of change. But who knows????

Look, the Earth does what it wants to do, regardless of mankind's activities. We can, and perhaps are, making it happen somewhat sooner than it otherwise would. So maybe we get uncomfortable and wet sooner than otherwise. Thing is, we don't know and can't really tell. There's no "control" alongside this experiment.

Mankind survives by being adaptive. We'll adapt, and the ones that don't, won't make it. That's life.

[doug from upland]

I believe that man does indeed have some impact on the planet. The extent of that impact, however, is probably overblown. It is a good thing to try to lessen emissions and increase gas mileage. Lessening our dependence on foreign oil is in our national interest.

[xcamel]

Tremendous - now someone needs to find the physical paper and re-publish it.

[Mr_Moonlight]

The New York Times Archives | May 15, 1932 | SPECIAL SECTON SUPPLEMENT

I knew it was too good to be true ... (NYT in 2007, that is)

[xcamel]

one really has nothing to do with the other.

[wastedyears]

Cool movie

[mainepatsfan]

They were for global cooling before they were against it.

[mainepatsfan]

It certainly didn't put a bad spin on the glaciers melting.

[stylin19a]

I wonde how much it's rose ( risen ?) since 1932

[Publius6961]

The ICE AGE and its END through 100% natural activity with zero relation to man activities is the silver bullet that should kill any of this Human-related Global Warming BS and lies.

There.
I fixed it.

[jveritas]

Agree and thanks :)