The first cooling period is due to the large presence of sulphate aerosols, which originated from a combination of industrial pollutants released into the atmosphere and natural volcanic emissions.
Heartland’s “Six Reasons To Be A Climate-Change Skeptic” Are Six Demonstrable Falsehoods
Ethan Siegel
52041

Study after study has come out showing that the 1940s to 1970s cannot have cooled because of aerosols. In fact, there is doubt that aerosols produce any cooling. The real reason for the 1940s to 1970s is an effect that climate scientists try to deny exists which is the PDO/AMO El Niño cycle. This 60 year cycle explains more than the cooling of the 1940s to 1970s but explains the vociferity of the 1910–1940 warming when there was virtually no CO2 being produced, the cooling from 1880–1910 which they can’t explain and it explains most of the heating between 1970–2000 as well as the pause from 2000-now. Aerosols do not.

They never imagined that the ocean would exert a multi-decade influence even though they had no data and no reason to make such an assumption. We’ve now noticed a cyclic pattern going back 600 years related to this AMO/PDO ocean cycle. El Niño’s are well documented. The world has changed but climate scientists are spoiled brats who won’t admit they were wrong even when it’s obvious they are wrong.

They cannot explain the current pause without AMO/PDO. Where is the energy going? You see there is a simplification when you use the term “natural variability.” It assumes that it’s just some random thing. The problem is that co2 according to them must be accumulating massive amounts of energy. Where is that energy going? It can’t just randomly appear one day and “catch up.” If it’s gone it’s gone. They don’t explain where it’s gone, how it will come back or why they missed it. The whole thing is a crock in other words.

Show your support

Clapping shows how much you appreciated John the TIB’s story.