10 Years Left: The Never-Changing Mantra of Ecoloonies

I have found yet another article that shows that Al Gore's sequel to "The Day After Tomorrow" has not been based on consensus among scientists as much as it has been based on a strong desire to get a democrat back into the White House.

Also, I found this flyer from a 1975 Newsweek article (thanks to the Collegiate Patriot) that has some very interesting information. Besides the fact that the loons used to preach about Global Cooling and that nothing they predicted has come to pass you will notice some very interesting choices of words.

"The drop in food output could begin quite soon, perhaps only ten years". Ummm, did anybody see that 1985 article where they admitted they were full of crap? Me neither. Interestingly we note that Al Gore is saying we have about 10 years left (30 years later). What is it with these guys and ten year increments. I'll tell you what it is. It's just short enough that people will get scared, but long enough that they will forget. My question to the loons is, in 10 years after we can no longer stop Global Warming will you then shut up? Probably not.

"In England, farmers have seen their growing season decline by about two weeks since 1950". First off, I thought this wasn't supposed to start happening for another 10 years, and second of all any scientist knows that an anecdote does not data make. Yet this same mistake is being made today by those that are trying to get political power through ecological scaremongering.

"But they are almost unanimous in the view that the trend will reduce agricultural productivity for the rest of the century." Is this the same consensus that we have in the Global Warming debate today? Methinks it is so.