AFFILIATIONS: Peterson?NOAA/National Climatic Data
Center, Asheville, North Carolina; Connolley?British Antarctic
Survey, National Environment Research Council, Cambridge,
United Kingdom; Fleck?Albuquerque Journal, Albuquerque, New
Mexico
Correspon din g author: Thomas C. Peterson, NOAA/
National Climatic Data Center, 151 Patton Avenue, Asheville, NC
28803
E-mail: Thomas.C.Peterson@noaa.gov
The abstract for this article can be found in this issue, following the
table of contents.
DOI:10.1175/2008BAMS2370.1
In final form 8 February 2008
?2008 American Meteorological Society
There was no scientific consensus in the 1970s that the Earth was headed into an
imminent ice age. Indeed, the possibility of anthropogenic warming dominated
the peer-reviewed literature even then.
T he Myth. When climate researcher Reid
Bryson stood before the members of the
American Association for the Advancement of
Science in December 1972, his description of the
state of scientists?understanding of climate change
sounded very much like the old story about the
group of blind men trying to describe an elephant.
The integrated enterprise of climate science as we
know it today was in its infancy, with different
groups of scientists feeling blindly around their
piece of the lumbering climate beast. Rigorous
measurements of increasing atmospheric carbon
dioxide were available for the first time, along with
modeling results suggesting that global warming
would be a clear consequence. Meanwhile, newly
created global temperature series showed cooling
since the 1940s, and other scientists were looking
to aerosols to explain the change. The mystery of
waxing and waning ice ages had long entranced
geologists, and a cohesive explanation in terms
of orbital solar forcing was beginning to emerge.
Underlying this discussion was a realization that
climate could change on time scales with the potential
for significant effects on human societies, and
that human activities could trigger such changes
(Bryson 1974).
Bryson laid out the following four questions that
still stand today as being central to the climate science
enterprise:
i) How large must a climate change be to be important?
ii) How fast can the climate change?
iii) What are the causal parameters, and why do they
change?
iv) How sensitive is the climate to small changes in
the causal parameters?
The Myth of the 1970s
Globa l Coo ling Scientific
Consensus
by Thomas C. Peterson, William M. Connolley, and John Fleck
AMERICAN METEOROLOGICAL SOCIETY september 2008 | 1325
Despite active efforts to answer these questions,
the following pervasive myth arose: there was a
consensus among climate scientists of the 1970s that
either global cooling or a full-fledged ice age was
imminent (see the ?Perpetuating the myth? sidebar).
A review of the climate science literature from 1965
to 1979 shows this myth to be false. The myth?s basis
lies in a selective misreading of the texts both by
some members of the media at the time and by some
observers today. In fact, emphasis on greenhouse
warming dominated the scientific literature even
then. The research enterprise that grew in response
to the questions articulated by Bryson and others,
while considering the forces responsible for cooling,
quickly converged on the view that greenhouse
warming was likely to dominate on time scales that
would be significant to human societies (Charney
et al. 1979). However, perhaps more important than
demonstrating that the global cooling myth is wrong,
this review shows the remarkable way in which the
individual threads of climate science of the time?
each group of researchers pursuing their own set of
questions?was quickly woven into the integrated
tapestry that created the basis for climate science as
we know it today.
RE COGNITION OF A PR OBLEM: THE
POTENTIAL FOR WARMING. In 1965, when
U.S. President Lyndon Johnson asked the members of
his President?s Science Advisory Committee (PSAC)
to report on the potential problems of environmental
pollution, climate change was not on the national
agenda. The polluting effects of detergents and
municipal sewage, the chronic problems associated
with urban air pollution, and the risks associated
with pesticides dominated public discourse about
humanity?s impact on the environment. However, in
a 23-page appendix, which today appears prescient,
the committee?s Environmental Pollution Panel laid
out the following stark scenario: emissions of carbon
dioxide from the burning of fossil fuels could rapidly
reshape Earth?s climate (Revelle et al. 1965).
The panel?s members had two new tools at their
disposal that had not been available just a few years
Perpetuating the Myth
The following are examples of modern writers perpetuating
the myth of the 1970s global cooling scientific consensus.
Citing Singer (1998) as their source of information, Singer
and Avery (2007) indicate that the National Academy of
Science (1975) experts exhibited ?hysterical fears? about a
?finite possibility? that a serious worldwide cooling could
befall the Earth, and that Ponte (1976) captured the ?thenprevailing
mood? by contending that the Earth may be on
the brink of an ice age.
Balling (1992) posits,
Could the [cold] winters of the late 1970s be the signal that
we were returning to yet another ice age? According to many
outspoken climate scientists in the late 1970s, the answer was
absolutely yes?and we needed action now to cope with the
coming changes . . . However, some scientists were skeptical,
and they pointed to a future of global warming, not cooling,
resulting from a continued build up of greenhouse gases.
These scientists were in the minority at the time.
According to Horner (2007), the massive funding of
climate change research was prompted by ? ?consensus?
panic over ?global cooling?.? This was ?three decades
ago?when the media were fanning frenzy about global
cooling? (Will 2008) or, as Will (2004) succinctly put it,
?the fashionable panic was about global cooling.? ?So,
before we take global warming as a scientific truth, we
should note that the opposite theory was once scientific
verity? (Bray 1991).
In a narrative, Crichton (2004) put it this way:
?Just think how far we have come!? Henley said. ?Back in
the 1970s, all the climate scientists believed an ice age was
coming. They thought the world was getting colder. But once
the notion of global warming was raised, they immediately
recognized the advantages. Global warming creates a crisis,
a call to action. A crisis needs to be studied, it needs to be
funded . . .?
According to Michaels (2004),
Thirty years ago there was much scientific discussion
among those who believed that humans inf luenced
the . . . reflectivity [which would] cool the earth, more
than . . . increasing carbon dioxide, causing warming. Back
then, the ?coolers? had the upper hand because, indeed, the
planet was cooling . . . But nature quickly shifted gears . . .
Needless to say, the abrupt shift in the climate caused almost
as abrupt a shift in the balance of scientists who predictably
followed the temperature.
Giddens (1999) states,
Yet only about 25 or so years ago, orthodox scientific opinion
was that the world was in a phase of global cooling. Much the
same evidence that was deployed to support the hypothesis
of global cooling is now brought into play to bolster that of
global warming ? heat waves, cold spells, unusual types
of weather.
1326 | september 2008
before. The first up-to-date global temperature reconstructions
had recently become available, allowing
them to consider the twentieth century?s somewhat
confusing temperature trends (Somerville et al. 2007).
More importantly, they had access to carbon dioxide
data that Charles David Keeling and his colleagues
had been collecting since 1957 on Mauna Loa, Hawaii,
and in Antarctica (Pales and Keeling 1965; Brown and
Keeling 1965). The data showed ?clearly and conclusively,?
in the panel?s words, that atmospheric carbon
dioxide was rising as a result of fossil fuel burning.
Human activities, the panel concluded, were sufficient
in scale to impact not just the immediate vicinity
where those activities were taking place. Industrial
activities had become a global, geophysical force to
be recognized and with which to be reckoned. With
estimated recoverable fossil fuel reserves sufficient to
triple atmospheric carbon dioxide, the panel wrote,
?Man is unwittingly conducting a vast geophysical
experiment.? With the emission of just a fraction
thereof, emissions by the year 2000 could be sufficient
to cause ?measurable and perhaps marked? climate
change, the panel concluded (Revelle et al. 1965).
THE GLOBAL TEMPER ATURE RE CORD S:
A COOLING TRE ND. Efforts to accumulate
and organize global temperature records began in
the 1870s (Somerville et al. 2007). The first analysis
to show long-term warming trends was published
in 1938. However, such analyses were not updated
very often. Indeed, the Earth appeared to have been
cooling for more than 2 decades when scientists first
took note of the change in trend in the 1960s. The
seminal work was done by J. Murray Mitchell, who,
in 1963, presented the first up-to-date temperature
reconstruction showing that a global cooling trend
had begun in the 1940s. Mitchell used data from
nearly 200 weather stations, collected by the World
Weather Records project under the auspices of the
World Meteorological Organization, to calculate
latitudinal average temperature. His analysis showed
that global temperatures had increased fairly steadily
from the 1880s, the start of his record, until about
1940, before the start of a steady multidecade cooling
(Mitchell 1963).
By the early 1970s, when Mitchell updated his work
(Mitchell 1972), the notion of a global cooling trend
was widely accepted, albeit poorly understood. The
first satellite records showed increasing snow and ice
cover across the Northern Hemisphere from the late
1960s to the early 1970s. This trend was capped by
unusually severe winters in Asia and parts of North
America in 1972 and 1973 (Kukla and Kukla 1974),
which pushed the issue into the public consciousness
(Gribbin 1975). The new data about global temperatures
came amid growing concerns about world food
supplies, triggering fears that a planetary cooling
trend might threaten humanity?s ability to feed itself
(Thompson 1975). It was not long, however, before
scientists teasing apart the details of Mitchell?s trend
found that it was not necessarily a global phenomenon.
Yes, globally averaged temperatures were cooling,
but this was largely due to changes in the Northern
Hemisphere. A closer examination of Southern
Hemisphere data revealed thermometers heading in
the opposite direction (Damon and Kunen 1976).
New Revelations abo ut the Ice
Ages. While meteorologists were collecting,
analyzing, and trying to explain the temperature
records, a largely separate group of scientists
was attacking the problem from a paleoclimate
perspective, assembling the first detailed
understanding of the Earth?s ice age history. The
fact that parts of the Northern Hemisphere had once
been covered in ice was one of the great realizations
of nineteenth-century geology. Even more remarkable
was the realization that the scars on the landscape
had been left by not one but several ice ages. Climate
clearly was capable of remarkable variability, beyond
anything humanity had experienced in recorded
history.
It was not until the mid?twentieth century that
scientists finally assembled the details of the coming
and going of the last ice ages. The geologists? classic
story had suggested four short ice ages over the
Quaternary, with long warm periods between them.
However, analysis of coral, cores from ice caps and
the ocean floor, along with the application of newly
developed radiometric techniques, forced a radical
reevaluation. Climate was far more variable, with
long ice ages punctuated by short interglacial periods
(Broecker et al. 1968; Emiliani 1972). The new work
went beyond filling in gaps in scientists?knowledge of
the past. It laid the foundation of an explanation for
why ice age cycles occurred. Building on earlier work
(e.g., Adh?mar 1842; Croll 1875), Serbian engineer
and geophysicist Milutin Milankovitch calculated
that highly regular changes in the tilt of Earth?s
axis and the eccentricity of its orbit around the sun
would change the distribution of sunlight hitting the
Earth?s surface, leading to the waxing and waning of
ice ages (Milankovitch 1930). Milankovitch?s work
won few converts, in part because it did not match
geologists?understanding of the history of the ice ages.
However, the new dating of the ice?s ebbs and flows led
AMERICAN METEOROLOGICAL SOCIETY september 2008 | 1327
to new interest in Milankovitch?s ideas (e.g., Ericson
et al. 1964; Damon 1965). ?The often-discredited
hypothesis of Milankovitch must be recognized as the
number-one contender in the climatic sweepstakes,?
Wallace Broecker wrote (Broecker et al. 1968). It took
the rest of the science world a while to catch up with
Broecker, but by the late 1970s they had (Hays et al.
1976; Kerr 1978; Weart 2003).
Because Milankovitch?s astronomical metronome
was predictable over thousands of years, climate
scientists could now begin talking about predicting
the onset of the next ice age. And they did. Members
of the Climate: Long-range Investigation, Mapping
and Prediction (CLIMAP) project lived up to their
project?s name with a ?prediction? of sorts; in the
absence of possible anthropogenic warming, ?the
long-term trend over the next several thousand years
is toward extensive Northern Hemisphere glaciation?
(Hays et al. 1976).
CARBON DIOXIDE . Mid-nineteenth-century
British naturalist John Tyndall was fascinated by the
new emerging evidence of past ice ages, and believed
he had found a possible explanation for such dramatic
changes in Earth?s climate: changes in the composition
of the atmosphere. Some molecules, he realized,
could absorb thermal radiation, and as such could be
the cause for ?all the mutations of climate which the
researches of geologists reveal? (Weart 2003; Tyndall
1861; Somerville et al. 2007). In 1896 Swedish scientist
Svante Arrhenius calculated that a doubling of
atmospheric carbon dioxide would raise global temperatures
5??6?C. However, he figured it would take
3,000 yr of fossil fuel burning to do it (Weart 2003).
Thus continued what would be a century of scientific
debate and uncertainty, both about the effect of such
so-called ?greenhouse gases? and the possibility that
the burning of fossil fuels could contribute substantially
to their concentration (Landsberg 1970). It was
not until the second half of the twentieth century that
scientists finally had the tools to begin measuring the
concentrations of those greenhouse gases in sufficient
detail to begin evaluating their effects.
Using funding available through the International
Geophysical Year, Charles David Keeling was able to
overcome problems of local interference in carbon
dioxide measurements in 1957 by establishing
stations in Antarctica and atop Mauna Loa. By 1965,
his data were sufficient to show an unambiguous
trend. Keeling?s observation also showed that atmospheric
carbon dioxide was increasing far faster than
Arrhenius?s 70-yr-old estimate. That was enough for
members of the U.S. President?s Scientific Advisory
Committee to pronounce the possibility that
increasing carbon dioxide could ?modify the heat
balance of the atmosphere to such an extent that
marked changes in climate, not controllable through
local or even national efforts, could occur? (Revelle
et al. 1965).
The PSAC scientists had a new tool for understanding
the implications?the first preliminary results of
newly developing climate models. The same year the
PSAC report came out, Syukuro Manabe and Richard
Wetherald developed the first true three-dimensional
climate model. The results were raw at the time the
PSAC report was written, but within 2 yr, the first
seminal modeling results from the Geophysical
Fluid Dynamics Laboratory team were published.
Given their simplifying constraints, they found that
a doubling of atmospheric carbon dioxide would raise
global temperature 2?C (Manabe and Wetherald 1967).
Within a decade, the models?sophistication had grown
dramatically, enough for Manabe and Wetherald
to conclude that high latitudes were likely to see
greater warming in a doubled-CO2 world, and that the
intensity of the hydrologic cycle could be expected to
increase significantly (Manabe and Wetherald 1975).
The accumulating evidence of the new carbon dioxide
record and the modeling results was enough for
Wallace Broecker to ask in 1975, ?Are we on the brink
of a pronounced global warming?? Broecker?s answer
was a resounding ?yes? (Broecker 1975).
AER OSOLS. In December 1968, a group of scientists
convened in Dallas, Texas, for a ?Symposium on
Global Effects of Environmental Pollution? (Singer
1970). Reid Bryson showed the panel a remarkable
graph illustrating the correlation between rising levels
of dust in the Caucasus and the rising output of the
Russian economy over the previous three decades.
It was the foundation for an argument leading
from human activities to dust to changing climate.
Atmospheric pollution caused by humans was sufficient,
Bryson argued, to explain the decline in global
temperatures identified earlier in the decade by J.
Murray Mitchell (Bryson and Wendland 1970).
Also on the symposium panel was Mitchell
himself, and he disagreed. Mitchell?s calculations
suggested that particulates added to the atmosphere
were insufficient to explain the cooling seen in his
temperature records. However, he raised the possibility
that, over time, cooling caused by particulates
could overtake warming caused by what he called the
?the CO2 effect? (Mitchell 1970).
In 1971, S. Ichtiaque Rasool and Stephen Schneider
wrote what may be the most misinterpreted and mis-
1328 | september 2008
used paper in the story of global cooling (Rasool and
Schneider 1971). It was the first foray into climate science
for Schneider, who would become famous for his
work on climate change. Rasool and Schneider were
trying to extend the newly developed tool of climate
modeling to include the effects of aerosols, in an
attempt to sort out two potentially conflicting trends?
the warming brought about by increasing carbon
dioxide and the cooling potential of aerosols emitted
into the Earth?s atmosphere by industrial activity.
The answer proposed by Rasool and Schneider
to the questions posed by Bryson and Mitchell?s
disagreement was stark. An increase by a factor of
4 in global aerosol concentrations, ?which cannot
be ruled out as a possibility,? could be enough to
trigger an ice age (Rasool and Schneider 1971). Critics
quickly pointed out flaws in Rasool and Schneider?s
work, including some they acknowledged themselves
(Charlson et al. 1972; Rasool and Schneider 1972).
Refinements, using data on aerosols from volcanic
eruptions, showed that while cooling could result,
the original Rasool and Schneider paper had overestimated
cooling while underestimating the greenhouse
warming contributed by carbon dioxide (Schneider
and Mass 1975; Weart 2003). Adding to the confusion
at the time, other researchers concluded that aerosols
would lead to warming rather than cooling (Reck
1975; Idso and Brazel 1977).
It was James Hansen and his colleagues who found
what seemed to be the right balance between the
two competing forces by modeling the aerosols from
Mount Agung, a volcano that erupted in Bali in 1963.
Hansen and his colleagues fed data from the Agung
eruption into their model, which got the size and
timing of the resulting pulse of global cooling correct.
By 1978, the question of the relative role of aerosol
cooling and greenhouse warming had been sorted
out. Greenhouse warming, the researchers concluded,
had become the dominant forcing (Hansen et al. 1978;
Weart 2003).
MED IA COVER AGE . When the myth of the
1970s global cooling scare arises in contemporary
discussion over climate change, it is most often in the
form of citations not to the scientific literature, but
to news media coverage. That is where U.S. Senator
James Inhofe turned for much of the evidence to
support his argument in a U.S. Senate floor speech in
2003 (Inhofe 2003). Chief among his evidence was a
frequently cited Newsweek story: ?The cooling world?
(Gwynne 1975). The story drew from the latest global
temperature records, and suggested that cooling ?may
portend a drastic decline for food production.? Citing
the Kuklas?work on increasing Northern Hemisphere
snow and ice, and Reid Bryson?s concerns about a
long-term cooling trend, the Newsweek story juxtaposes
the possibility of cooling temperatures and
decreasing food production with rising global populations.
Other articles of the time featured similar
themes (see ?Popular literature of the era? sidebar).
Even cursory review of the news media coverage of
the issue reveals that, just as there was no consensus
at the time among scientists, so was there also no
consensus among journalists. For example, these are
titles from two New York Times articles: ?Scientists
ask why world climate is changing; major cooling may
be ahead? (Sullivan 1975a) and ?Warming trend seen
in climate; two articles counter view that cold period
is due? (Sullivan 1975b). Equally juxtaposed were The
Cooling (Ponte 1976), which was published the year
after Hothouse Earth (Wilcox 1975).
However, the news coverage of the time does
reflect what New York Times science writer Andrew
Revkin calls ?the tyranny of the news peg,? based on
the idea that reporters need a ?peg? on which to hang
a story. Developments that are dramatic or new tend
to draw the news media?s attention, Revkin argues,
rather than the complexity of a nuanced discussion
within the scientific community (Revkin 2005). A
handy peg for climate stories during the 1970s was
the cold weather.
SURVEY OF THE PEER -REV IEWED
LITER ATURE . One way to determine what scientists
think is to ask them. This was actually done
in 1977 following the severe 1976/77 winter in the
eastern United States. ?Collectively,? the 24 eminent
climatologists responding to the survey ?tended
to anticipate a slight global warming rather than
a cooling? (National Defense University Research
Directorate 1978). However, given that an opinion
survey does not capture the full state of the science
of the time, we conducted a rigorous literature review
of the American Meteorological Society?s electronic
archives as well as those of Nature and the scholarly
journal archive Journal Storage (JSTOR). To capture
the relevant topics, we used global temperature, global
warming, and global cooling, as well as a variety of
other less directly relevant search terms. Additionally,
in order to make the survey more complete, even at
the expense of no longer being fully reproducible
by electronic search techniques, many references
mentioned in the papers located by these searches
were evaluated, as were references mentioned in
various history-of-science documents. Because the
time period attributed to the global cooling consen-
AMERICAN METEOROLOGICAL SOCIETY september 2008 | 1329
sus is typically described as the 1970s, the literature
search was limited to the period from 1965 through
1979. While no search can be 100% complete, this
methodology offers a reasonable test of the hypothesis
that there was a scientific consensus in the 1970s
regarding the prospect of imminent global cooling.
Such a consensus would be easily shown by both the
presence of many articles describing global cooling
projections and the absence of articles projecting
global warming.
One measure of the relevance of a paper to a developing
scientific consensus is the number of citations
it receives. For that reason, a citation analysis of the
papers found in our survey was undertaken. Not
all of the citations may be supportive of the paper
in question, but they do help indicate which papers
dominated the thinking of the day. Because the period
assessed ended in 1979 and it takes time for citations
to start appearing, the citation count was extended
through 1983. The gray literature of conference proceedings
were not authoritative enough to be included
in the literature search. However, a few prestigious
reports that may not have been peer reviewed have
been included in this literature survey because they
clearly represent the science of their day.
Our literature survey was limited to those papers
projecting climate change on, or even just discussing
an aspect of climate forcing relevant to, time scales
from decades to a century. While some of these
articles make clear predictions of global surface
temperature change by the year 2000, most of these
articles do not. Many of the articles simply examined
some aspect of climate forcing. However, it was generally
accepted that both CO2 and anthropogenic aerosols
were increasing. Therefore, for example, articles
that estimated temperature increases resulting from
doubling CO2 or temperature decreases resulting
from anthropogenic aerosols would be listed in
POPULAR LITERATURE OF THE ERA
There are too many potential newspaper
articles to adequately assess
and, because they report on current
events, even articles in the same paper
by the same author separated by only
a few months can be quite different.
For example, the following are titles
from two New York Times articles:
?Scientists ask why world climate is
changing; major cooling may be ahead?
(Sullivan 1975a) and ?Warming trend
seen in climate; two articles counter
view that cold period is due? (Sullivan
1975b). The most frequently cited
magazine articles are described below.
While these articles described the past
climate and a distant future of another
ice age, the following is a review only
of their decadal-to-century-scale global
temperature projections.
Science Digest?s 1973 article ?Brace
yourself for another Ice Age? (Colligan
1973) primarily focused on ice ages and
global cooling, with the warning that ?the
end of the present interglacial period is
due ?soon.?? However, it clarified that
??soon? in the context of the world?s
geological time scale could mean anything
from two centuries to 2,000 years, but
not within the lifetime of anyone now
alive.? The article also mentioned that
?scientists seem to think that a little
more carbon dioxide in the atmosphere
could warm things up a good deal.?
Time Magazine (1974) ominously
worried that ?climatological
Cassandras are becoming increasingly
apprehensive, for the weather
aberrations they are studying may
be the harbinger of another ice age.?
However, only one scientist was indicated
by name issuing any sort of projection:
?Some scientists like Donald
Oilman, chief of the National Weather
Service?s long-range-prediction group,
think that the cooling trend may be
only temporary.?
Science News?1975 article ?Climate
change: Chilling possibilities? (Douglas
1975) mainly discussed the new findings
that raised the possibility of ?the
approach of a full-blown 10,000-year ice
age.? However, it also put these results
into perspective with statements such
as ?the cooling trend observed since
1940 is real enough . . . but not enough
is known about the underlying causes
to justify any sort of extrapolation,?
and ?by the turn of the century, enough
carbon dioxide will have been put into
the atmosphere to raise the temperature
of earth half a degree.?
The 1975 Newsweek article
(Gwynne 1975) quotes four scientists
by name and none of them
offered a projection of the future;
three discussed observations of the
recent cooling and one the relationship
between climate and agriculture.
The article did, however, state
that ?seemingly disparate [weather]
incidents represent the advance signs
of fundamental changes in the world?s
weather,? though ?meteorologists
disagree about the cause and extent of
the cooling trend.? The article states
that there was an ?almost unanimous?
view that the cooling trend would
?reduce agricultural productivity for
the rest of the century,? and it even
discussed possible solutions such as
spreading black soot on the Arctic ice
cap.
In 1976, National Geographic
Magazine published an article entitled
?What?s happening to our climate?? In
this article, Matthews (1976) discusses
projections on the relevant time frame
from four different scientists. Reid
Bryson of the University of Wisconsin
believed that the critical factor was
cooling caused by aerosols generated
by an exploding population. If
Willi Dansgaard of the University of
Copenhagen is correct?that western
Europe?s climate lags 250 yr behind
Greenland?s??Europe could be in for
a cooler future,? although he cautions
that man-made atmospheric pollution
?may completely change the picture.?
The ?cooling trend of world climate?
was documented in the 1960s by
1330 | september 2008
Table 1 as warming or cooling articles, respectively.
The neutral category in Table 1 includes papers that
project no change, that discuss both warming and
cooling influences without specifically indicating
which are likely to be dominant, or that state not
enough is known to make a sound prediction. Articles
were not included in the survey if they examined the
climate impacts of factors that did not have a clear
expectation of imminent change, such as increases
in volcanic eruptions or the creation of large fleets
of supersonic aircraft.
The survey identified only 7 articles indicating
cooling compared to 44 indicating warming. Those
seven cooling articles garnered just 12% of the
citations. Graphical representations of this survey are
shown in Fig. 1 for the number of articles and Fig. 2
for the number of citations. Interestingly, only two of
the articles would, according to the current state of
climate science, be considered ?wrong? in the sense of
getting the wrong sign of the response to the forcing
they considered?one cooling (Bryson and Dittberner
1976) and one warming (Idso and Brazel 1977) paper?
and both were immediately challenged (Woronko
1977; Herman et al. 1978). As climate science and the
models progressed over time, the findings of the rest
of the articles were refined and improved, sometimes
significantly, but they were not reversed.
Given that even a cursory examination of Fig. 1
reveals that global cooling was never more than a minor
aspect of the scientific climate change literature of
the era, let alone the scientific consensus, it is worth
examining the ways in which the global cooling myth
persists. One involves the simple misquoting of the
literature. In a 2003 Washington Post op-ed piece,
former Energy Secretary James Schlesinger quoted a
1972 National Science Board report as saying, ?Judging
from the record of the past interglacial ages, the present
time of high temperatures should be drawing to an
J. Murray Mitchell Jr., of the National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
(NOAA). Now, he notes, ?carbon
dioxide pollution may be contributing
to an opposite, or warming,
tendency.? And last, ?it is possible
that we are on the brink of a severaldecade-
long period of rapid warming,?
observes Dr. Wallace S. Broecker
of Columbia University?s Lamont-
Doherty Geological Observatory. ?If
the natural cooling trend bottoms out
. . . global temperature would begin a
dramatic rise . . . this warming would,
by the year 2000, bring average global
temperatures beyond the range experienced
during the past 1,000 years.?
There were also lay books on
climate change, some of which received
rather scathing reviews in the scientific
literature. For example, discussing
The Climatic Threat: What?s Wrong
with our Weather? (Gribbin 1978a),
Wigley (1978) wrote that the average
reader ?cannot possibly know how
incompletely the author reviews the
field he discusses, how uncritical and
selective are his references to the
scientific literature, how much he has
mixed sound well accepted work with
controversial opinion and speculation,
and how often the cautious, tentative
words of others are represented as
established fact.? Note also, ?A casual
reader? of Climates of Hunger: Mankind
and the World?s Changing Weather
(Bryson and Murray 1977) ?will not
get a balanced picture of the current
climatic debate? (Gribbin 1978b).
Kellogg?s (1979) review of Halacy
(1978) that also comments on Calder
(1974), stated that
Halacy, in Ice and Fire? Like
Calder, has chosen to write a book
whose central theme is the prediction
of a global cooling as the beginning
of a new ice age?perhaps occurring
very quickly. . . . Furthermore, even
a non-expert will notice that he has
blurred his timescales cleverly (as
did Nigel Calder, whom he quotes
extensively), giving the impression
that the advent of an ice age could
occur in a matter of a decade or
so?perhaps it will take a century if
we are lucky.
Landsberg (1976) also took Calder?s
book, The Weather Machine, to task,
stating that ?he quotes his favorite
scientists at length, and then covers
himself by a sentence at the end
that there are others with diverging
opinions . . . The amount of halfdigested
meteorology, such as the
potential dust effect in the atmosphere,
is formidable.?
A common feature of the popular
articles and books is the probable
negative impacts of climate variability
on agriculture, which was felt to
be stressed already by population
pressures. The book, The Genesis
Strategy (Schneider 1976) takes this
further and argues for a policy
resilient to any future changes in
climate, though without predicting
either warming or cooling. A more
extreme book, The Cooling (Ponte
1976), predicts that cooling could
lead to billions of deaths by 2050,
but struggles to find any good source
for predictions of such a cooling; it
is also somewhat undermined by its
own preface by Reid Bryson, which
states that ?there are very few pages
that, as a scientist, I could accept
without questions of accuracy, of
precision, or of balance.? On the
other side, the book Hothouse Earth
(Wilcox 1975) has both polar ice caps
melting due to anthropogenic global
warming (Landsberg 1976) and the
1973 Charlton Heston film Soylent
Green ?imagines the Earth of 2022
as a dried-up wasteland where the
greenhouse effect, brought about by
an exponentially growing population
and unchecked industry, has led to
the destruction of the environment?
(Bertram 2006).
AMERICAN METEOROLOGICAL SOCIETY september 2008 | 1331
end . . . leading into the next glacial age? (Schlesinger
2003). The quote repeatedly appeared other places in
the political debate over climate change, including the
floor of the U.S. Senate where Inhofe (2003) followed
up that quote by stating, ?That was the same timeframe
that the global-warming alarmists are concerned about
global warming.? The actual report, however, shows
that the original context, rather than supporting the
global cooling myth, discusses the full state of the science
at the time, as described earlier. The words not
extracted by Schlesinger and Inhofe are highlighted
with italics:
Judging from the record of the past interglacial ages, the
present time of high temperatures should be drawing to
an end, to be followed by a long period of considerably
colder temperatures leading to the next glacial age some
20,000 years from now. However, it is possible, or even
likely, that human interference has already altered the
environment so much that the climatic pattern of the
near future will follow a different path. For instance,
widespread deforestation in recent centuries, especially
in Europe and North America, together with increased
atmospheric opacity due to man-made dust storms and
industrial wastes, should have increased the Earth?s
reflectivity. At the same time increasing concentration
of industrial carbon dioxide in the atmosphere should
lead to a temperature increase by absorption of infrared
radiation from the Earth?s surface. When these human
factors are added to such other natural factors as volcanic
eruptions, changes in solar activity, and resonances
within the hydro-atmosphere, their effect can only be
estimated in terms of direction, not of amount (National
Science Board 1972).
Table 1. Cooling, neutral, and warming papers as defined in the text followed by the number of times they
have been cited up through 1983.
Year Cooling papers Neutral papers Warming papers
1965 Revelle et al. (1965)
1966
1967
McCormick and
Ludwig (1967): 67
Manabe and Weatherald (1967): 306
1968
1969 Sellers (1969): 191
1970 Landsberg (1970): 83
Benton (1970): 0; Report of the Study of Critical Environmental
Problems (1970): 130
1971
Barrett (1971): 14;
Rasool and Schneider
(1971): 144
Mitchell (1971): 81
1972
Hamilton and Seliga
(1972): 12
Charlson et al. (1972): 0; Lowry
(1972): 0; National Science Board
(1972): 0; Rasool and Schneider
(1972): 0
Budyko (1972): 36; Machta (1972): 31;
Mitchell (1972): 36; Sawyer (1972): 8
1973 Sellers (1973): 104
1974
Ch?lek and Coakley
(1974): 38
Bryson (1974): 113; Hobbs et al.
(1974): 22; Weare et al. (1974): 12;
Willett (1974): 0
Federal Council for Science and Technology Interdepartmental
Committee for Atmospheric Sciences (1974): 1; Kellogg and
Schneider (1974): 30; Sellers (1974): 33
1975
National Academy of Sciences
(1975): 0
Broecker (1975): 54; Manabe and Wetherald (1975): 211;
Ramanathan (1975): 63; Reck (1975): 13; Schneider and Mass
(1975): 82; Schneider (1975): 94; Thompson (1975): 49
1976
Bryson and Dittberner
(1976): 31
Shaw (1976): 6
Budyko and Vinnikov (1976): 0; Damon and Kunen (1976): 29;
Mitchell (1976): 50; Wang et al. (1976): 89
1977 Twomey (1977): 19 Bryson and Dittberner (1977): 0
Flohn (1977): 7; Idso and Brazel (1977): 1; Lee and Snell (1977):
8; National Academy of Sciences (1977): 1; Nordhaus (1977): 13;
Panel on Energy and Climate (1977): 78; Woronko (1977): 1
1978
Herman et al. (1978): 0; Mason
(1978a): 0; Miles (1978): 8;
Ramanathan and Coakley (1978):
44; Shutts and Green (1978): 3
Budyko et al. (1978): 0; Cooper (1978): 0; Gilchrist (1978): 5;
Idso and Brazel (1978): 2; Mason (1978b): 0; Mercer: (1978): 48;
Ohring and Adler (1978): 25; Stuiver (1978): 101
1979
Choudhury and Kukla (1979): 4;
Sagan et al. (1979): 25
Berger (1979): 6; Charney et al. (1979): 50; Houghton (1979): 0;
Hoyt (1979): 13; Rotty (1979): 1
1332 | september 2008
Underlying the selective quotation of the past literature
is an example of what political scientist Daniel
Sarewitz calls ?scientization? of political debate: the
selective emphasis on particular scientific ?facts? to
advance a particular set of political values (Sarewitz
2004). In this case, the primary use of the myth is
in the context of attempting to undermine public
belief in and support for the contemporary scientific
consensus about anthropogenic climate change by
appeal to a past ?consensus? on a closely related topic
that is alleged to have been wrong (see ?Perpetuating
the myth? sidebar).
INTEGR ATING CLIMATE SCIENCE IN THE
LATE 1970s. When James D. Hays and colleagues
published their landmark 1976 paper linking variations
in the Earth?s orbit to the ice
ages, they offered the following two
caveats:
Such forecasts must be qualified
in two ways: First, they apply
only to the natural component of
future climatic trends?and not
to anthropogenic effects such as
those due to the burning of fossil
fuels. Second, they describe only
the long-term trends, because
they are linked to orbital variations
with periods of 20,000 years
and longer. Climatic oscillations
at higher frequencies are not predicted
(Hays et al. 1976).
As the various threads of climate
research came together in the late
1970s into a unified field of study?
ice ages, aerosols, greenhouse forcing,
and the global temperature trend?
greenhouse forcing was coming to be
recognized as the dominant term in
the climate change equations for time
scales from decades to centuries.
That was the message from B. John
Mason of the British Meteorological
Office when he stood before members
of the Royal Society in London
on 27 April 1978 to deliver a review
lecture on the state of the science.
Taking his audience through the
details of how the new computer climate
models worked and what they
showed, Mason ticked off the following
now-familiar list of climate variables: variations
in the Earth?s orbit, aerosols, and the rapid increase in
greenhouse gases. The effect of the latter, he said, was
by far the largest, and more detailed study of the issue
?now deserves high priority? (Mason 1978b).
In July 1979 in Woods Hole, Massachusetts, Jule
Charney, one of the pioneers of climate modeling,
brought together a panel of experts under the U.S.
National Research Council to sort out the state of
the science. The panel?s work has become iconic as a
foundation for the enterprise of climate change study
that followed (Somerville et al. 2007). Such reports
are a traditional approach within the United States
for eliciting expert views on scientific questions of
political and public policy importance (Weart 2003).
In this case, the panel concluded that the potential
Fig. 2. The number of citations for the articles shown in Fig. 1 and
listed in Table 1. The citation counts were from the publication date
through 1983 and are graphed on the year the article was published.
The cooling papers received a total of 325 citations, neutral 424, and
warming 2,043.
Fig. 1. The number of papers classified as predicting, implying, or
providing supporting evidence for future global cooling, warming,
and neutral categories as defined in the text and listed in Table 1.
During the period from 1965 through 1979, our literature survey
found 7 cooling, 20 neutral, and 44 warming papers.
AMERICAN METEOROLOGICAL SOCIETY september 2008 | 1333
damage from greenhouse gases was real and should
not be ignored. The potential for cooling, the threat
of aerosols, or the possibility of an ice age shows
up nowhere in the report. Warming from doubled
CO2 of 1.5??4.5?C was possible, the panel reported.
While there were huge uncertainties, Verner Suomi,
chairman of the National Research Council?s Climate
Research Board, wrote in the report?s foreword that he
believed there was enough evidence to support action:
?A wait-and-see policy may mean waiting until it is
too late? (Charney et al. 1979). Clearly, if a national
report in the 1970s advocates urgent action to address
global warming, then the scientific consensus of the
1970s was not global cooling.
ACKNOWLEDG MENTS. We appreciate Byron
Gleason for his detailed review of the article; librarian Mara
Sprain for her invaluable assistance; Andr? Berger, Spencer
Weart, and Neville Nicholls for providing valuable insights
and additional references; Mike Wallace for his cogent
review, which precipitated considerable additional and
much needed work; and two anonymous reviewers whose
comments improved the paper. This project prompted us
to reread many articles by the great climatologists of past
decades such as Mikhail Budyko, Charles David Keeling,
Helmut Landsberg, Syukuro Manabe, B. John Mason,
and J. Murray Mitchell, which made us realize the debt of
gratitude we owe to these pioneers.
REFEREN CES
Adh?mar, J. A., 1842: R?volutions de la Mer: D?luges P?riodiques.
Carilian-Goeury et V. Dalmont, 184 pp.
Balling, R. C., Jr., 1992: The Heated Debate: Greenhouse
Prediction versus Climate Reality. Pacific Research
Institute for Public Policy, 195 pp.
Barrett, E. W., 1971: Depletion of short-wave irradiance
at the ground by particles suspended in the atmosphere.
Sol. Energy, 13, 323?337.
Benton, G. S., 1970: Carbon dioxide and its role in climate
change. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci., 67, 898.
Berger, A., 1979: Spectrum of climatic variations
and their causal mechanisms. Geophys. Surv., 3,
351?402.
Bertram, D., 2006: More than just one inconvenient
truth. The Australian, 14 September. [Available online
at www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,20407484-
5007146,00.html.]
Bray, A. J., 1991: The Ice Age cometh. Policy Review,
No. 58, 82?84.
Broecker, W. S., 1975: Climate change: Are we on the
brink of a pronounced global warming? Science,
189, 460?463.
?, D. L. Thurber, J. Goddard, T.-L. Ku, R. K.
Matthews, and K. J. Mesolella, 1968: Milankovitch
hypothesis supported by precise dating of coral reefs
and deep-sea sediments. Science, 159, 297?300.
Brown, C. W., and C. D. Keeling, 1965: The concentration
of atmospheric carbon dioxide in Antarctica. J.
Geophys. Res., 70, 6077?6085.
Bryson, R. A., 1974: A perspective on climatic change.
Science, 184, 753?760.
?, and W. M. Wendland, 1970: Climatic effects of
atmospheric pollution. Global Effects of Environmental
Pollution, S. F. Singer, Ed., Springer-Verlag/D.
Reidel, 130?138.
?, and G. J. Dittberner, 1976: A non-equilibrium
model of hemispheric mean surface temperature. J.
Atmos. Sci., 33, 2094?2106.
?, and ?, 1977: Reply. J. Atmos. Sci., 34, 1821?1824.
?, and T. J. Murray, 1977: Climates of Hunger: Mankind
and the World?s Changing Weather. American
University Publishers Group, 171 pp.
Budyko, M. I., 1972: The future climate. Eos, Trans.
Amer. Geophys. Union, 53, 868?874.
?, and K. Y. Vinnikov, 1976: Global warming. Sov.
Meteor. Hydrol., 7, 12?20.
?, ?, O. A. Drozdov, and N. A. Yefimova, 1978:
Impending climatic change (in Russian). Izv. Acad.
Sci., USSR, Ser. Geogr., 6, 5?20; English translation:
1979, Sov. Geogr., 7, 395?411.
Calder, N., 1974: The Weather Machine. BBC, 143 pp.
Charlson, R. J., H. Harrison, and G. Witt, 1972: Aerosol
concentrations: Effects on planetary temperatures.
Science, 175, 95?96.
Charney, J. G., and Coauthors, 1979: Carbon Dioxide and
Climate: A Scientific Assessment. National Academy
of Science, 22 pp.
Choudhury, B., and G. Kukla, 1979: Impact of CO2 on
cooling of snow and water surfaces. Nature, 280,
668?671.
Ch?lek, P., and J. A. Coakley Jr., 1974: Aerosols and
climate. Science, 183, 75?77.
Colligan, D., 1973: Brace yourself for another ice age.
Sci. Digest, 73 (2), 57?61.
Cooper, C. F., 1978: What might man-induced climate
change mean? Foreign Affairs, 56, 500?520.
Crichton, M., 2004: State of Fear. Avon Books, 672 pp.
Croll, J., 1875: Climate and Time in Their Geological
Relations. Appleton, 186 pp.
Damon, P. E., 1965: Pleistocene time scales. Science,
148, 1037?1039.
?, and S. M. Kunen, 1976: Global cooling? Science,
193, 447?453.
Douglas, J. H., 1975: Climate changes: Chilling possibilities.
Science News, 107, 138?140.
1334 | september 2008
Emiliani, C., 1972: Quaternary paleotemperatures
and the duration of the high-temperature intervals.
Science, 178, 398?401.
Ericson, D. B., M. Ewing, and G. Wollin, 1964: The
Pleistocene Epoch in deep-sea sediments. Science,
146, 723?732.
Federal Council for Science and Technology, Interdepartmental
Committee for Atmospheric Sciences,
1974: Report of the Ad Hoc Panel on the Present
Interglacial. 22 pp.
Flohn, H., 1977: Climate and energy: A scenario to a 21st
century problem. Climatic Change, 1, 5?20.
Giddins, A., 1999: Runaway World. BBC Reith Lectures.
[Available online at
http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/static/events/reith_99/week2/week2.htm.]
Gilchrist, A., 1978: Numerical simulation of climate and
climatic change. Nature, 276, 342?245.
Gribbin, J., 1975: Cause and effects of global cooling.
Nature, 254, 14.
?, 1978a: The Climatic Threat: What?s Wrong with
Our Weather? Fontana, 206 pp.
?, 1978b: Climatic shifts. Nature, 271, 785.
Gwynne, P., 1975: The cooling world. Newsweek, 28
April.
Halacy, D. S., 1978: Ice or Fire? Surviving Climatic
Change. Harper and Row, 212 pp.
Hamilton, W. L., and T. A. Seliga, 1972: Atmospheric
turbidity and surface temperature on the polar ice
sheets. Nature, 235, 320?322.
Hansen, J. E., W.-C. Wang, and A. A. Lacis, 1978: Mount
Agung eruption provides test of a global climatic
perturbation. Science, 199, 1065?1068, doi:10.1126/
science.199.4333.1065.
Hays, J. D., J. Imbrie, and N. J. Shackleton, 1976: Variations
in the Earth?s orbit: Pacemaker of the ice ages.
Science, 194, 1121?1132.
Herman, B. M., S. A. Twomey, and D. O. Staley, 1978:
Atmospheric dust: Climatological consequences.
Science, 201, 378.
Hobbs, P. V., H. Harrison, and E. Robinson, 1974: Atmospheric
effects of pollutants. Science, 183, 909?915.
Horner, C. C., 2007: The Politically Incorrect Guide to
Global Warming and Environmentalism. Regnery
Publishing, 350 pp.
Houghton, J. T., 1979: Greenhouse effects of some atmospheric
constituents. Philos. Trans. Roy. Soc. London,
Math. Phys. Sci., 290A, 515?521.
Hoyt, D. V., 1979: An empirical determination of the
heating of the Earth by the carbon dioxide greenhouse
effect. Nature, 282, 388?390.
Idso, S. B., and A. J. Brazel, 1977: Planetary radiation
balance as a function of atmospheric dust: Climatological
consequences. Science, 198, 731?733.
?, and ?, 1978: Atmospheric dust: Climatological
consequences. Science, 201, 378?379.
Inhofe, J., cited 2003: Science of climate change.
Congressional Record, No. 149, S10012?S10023.
[Available online at wais.access.gpo.gov.]
Kellogg, W. W., 1979: Prediction of a global cooling.
Nature, 280, 615.
?, and S. H. Schneider, 1974: Climate stabilization:
For better or for worse? Science, 186, 1163?1172.
Kerr, R. A., 1978: Climate control: How large a role for
orbital variations? Science, 201, 144?146.
Kukla, G. J., and H. J. Kukla, 1974: Increased surface albedo
in the Northern Hemisphere. Science, 183, 709?714.
Landsberg, H. E., 1970: Man-made climatic changes.
Science, 170, 1265?1274.
?, 1976: Whence global climate: Hot or cold? An essay
review. Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc., 57, 441?443.
Lee, P. S., and F. M. Snell, 1977: An annual zonally averaged
global climate model with diffuse cloudiness
feedback. J. Atmos. Sci., 34, 847?853.
Lowry, W. P., 1972: Atmospheric pollution and global
climatic change. Ecology, 53, 908?914.
Machta, L., 1972: Mauna Loa and global trends in air
quality. Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc., 53, 402?420.
Manabe, S., and R. T. Weatherald, 1967: Thermal equilibrium
of the atmosphere with a given distribution
of relative humidity. J. Atmos. Sci., 24, 241?259.
?, and ?, 1975: The effects of doubling the CO2
concentration on the climate of a general circulation
model. J. Atmos. Sci., 32, 3?15.
Mason, B. J., 1978a: The World Climate Programme.
Nature, 276, 339?342.
?, 1978b: Review lecture: Recent advances in the
numerical prediction of weather and climate. Proc.
Roy. Soc. London, Math. Phys. Sci., 363A, 297?333.
Mathews, S. W., 1976: What?s happening to our climate?
Natl. Geogr. Mag., 150, 576?615.
McCormick, R. A., and J. H. Ludwig, 1967: Climate
modification by atmospheric aerosols. Science, 156,
1358?1359.
Mercer, J. H., 1978: West Antarctic ice sheet and CO2
greenhouse effect: A threat of disaster. Nature, 271,
321?325.
Michaels, P. J., 2004: Meltdown: The Predictable Distortion
of Global Warming by Scientists, Politicians, and
the Media. Cato Institute, 271 pp.
Milankovitch, M., 1930: Mathematische Klimalehre und
Astronomische Theorie der Klimaschwankungen.
Vol. 1, Part A, Handbuch der Klimatologie, W. Koppen
and R. Geiger, Eds., Gebruder Borntrager, 176 pp.
Miles, M. K., 1978: Predicting temperature trend in
the Northern Hemisphere to the year 2000. Nature,
276, 356.
AMERICAN METEOROLOGICAL SOCIETY september 2008 | 1335
Mitchell, J. M., Jr., 1963: On the world-wide pattern of
secular temperature change. Changes of Climate:
Proceedings of the Rome Symposium Organized by
UNESCO and the World Meteorological Organization,
UNESCO, 161?181.
?, 1970: A preliminary evaluation of atmospheric
pollution as a cause of the global temperature fluctuation
of the past century. Global Effects of Environmental
Pollution, S. F. Singer, Ed., Springer-Verlag/D.
Reidel, 139?155.
?, 1971: The effects of atmospheric aerosols on climate
with special reference to temperature near the
Earth?s surface. J. Appl. Meteor., 10, 703?714.
?, 1972: The natural breakdown of the present interglacial
and its possible intervention by human
activities. Quart. Res., 2, 436?445.
?, 1976: An overview of climatic variability and its
causal mechanisms. Quat. Res., 6, 481?494.
National Academy of Sciences, 1975: Understanding
Climatic Change. U.S. Committee for the Global
Atmospheric Research Program, National Academy
Press, 239 pp.
?, 1977: Climate, Climatic Change, and Water Supply.
Panel on Water and Climate of the National Research
Council, 132 pp.
National Defence University, Research Directorate, 1978:
Climate Change to the Year 2000: A Survey of Expert
Opinion. U.S. Government Printing Office, 109 pp.
National Science Board, 1972: Patterns and Perspectives
in Environmental Science. National Science Foundation,
426 pp.
Nordhaus, W. D., 1977: Economic growth and climate:
The carbon dioxide problem. Amer. Econ. Rev., 67,
341?346.
Ohring, G., and S. Adler, 1978: Some experiments with
a zonally averaged climate model. J. Atmos. Sci., 35,
186?205.
Pales, J. C., and C. D. Keeling, 1965: The concentration
of atmospheric carbon dioxide in Hawaii. J. Geophys.
Res., 70, 6053?6076.
Panel on Energy and Climate, 1977: Energy and Climate.
National Research Council, National Academy of
Sciences, 158 pp.
Ponte, L., 1976: The Cooling. Prentice-Hall, 306 pp.
Ramanathan, V., 1975: Greenhouse effect due to chloroflurocarbons:
Climatic implications. Science, 190,
50?52.
?, and J. A. Coakley Jr., 1978: Climate modeling
through radiative convective models. Rev. Geophys.
Space Phys., 16, 465?489.
Rasool, S. I., and S. H. Schneider, 1971: Atmospheric
carbon dioxide and aerosols: Effects of large increases
on global climate. Science, 173, 138?141.
?, and ?, 1972: Aerosol concentrations: Effect on
planetary temperatures. Science, 175, 96.
Reck, R. A., 1975: Aerosols and polar temperature
change. Science, 188, 728?730.
Report of the Study of Critical Environmental Problems,
1970: Man?s Impact on the Global Environment.
Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press,
319 pp.
Revelle, R., W. Broecker, H. Craig, C. D. Kneeling, and
J. Smagorinsky, 1965: Restoring the Quality of Our
Environment: Report of the Environmental Pollution
Panel. President?s Science Advisory Committee, The
White House, 317 pp.
Revkin, A. C., 2005: The daily planet: Why the media
stumble over the environment. A Field Guide for Science
Writers, D. Blum, M. Knudson, and R. M. Henig,
Eds., Oxford University Press, 222?228.
Rotty, R. M., 1979: Atmospheric CO2 consequences of
heavy dependence on coal. Environ. Health Perspect.,
33, 273?283.
Sagan, C., O. B. Toon, and J. B. Pollack, 1979: Anthropogenic
albedo changes and the Earth?s climate.
Science, 206, 1363?1368.
Sarewitz, D., 2004: How science makes environmental
controversies worse. Environ. Sci. Policy, 7,
385?403.
Sawyer, J. S., 1972: Man-made carbon dioxide and the
?greenhouse? effect. Nature, 239, 23?26.
Schlesinger, J., 2003: Climate change: The science isn?t
settled. Washington Post, 7 July, A17.
Schneider, S. H., 1975: On the carbon dioxide?climate
confusion. J. Atmos. Sci., 32, 2060?2066.
?, 1976: The Genesis Strategy: Climate and Global
Survival. Plenum Press, 419 pp.
?, and C. Mass, 1975: Volcanic dust, sunspots, and
temperature trends. Science, 190, 741?746.
Sellers, W. D., 1969: A global climatic model based on
the energy balance of the earth?atmosphere system.
J. Appl. Meteor., 8, 392?400.
?, 1973: A new global climatic model. J. Appl. Meteor.,
12, 241?254.
?, 1974: A reassessment of the effect of CO2 variation
on a simple global climatic model. J. Appl. Meteor.,
13, 831?833.
Shaw, G. E., 1976: Properties of the background global
aerosol and their effects on climate. Science, 192,
1334?1336.
Shutts, G. J., and J. S. A. Green, 1978: Mechanisms and
models of climatic change. Nature, 276, 339?342.
Singer, S. F., Ed., 1970: Global Effects of Environmental
Pollution. Springer-Verlag/D. Reidel, 218 pp.
?, 1998: Scientists add to heat over global warming.
Washington Times, 5 May.
1336 | september 2008
?, and D. T. Avery, 2007: Unstoppable Global
Warming Every 1,500 Years. Rowman and Littlefield,
260 pp.
Somerville, R., H. Le Treut, U. Cubasch, Y. Ding,
C. Mauritzen, A. Mokssit, T. Peterson, and M.
Prather, 2007: Historical overview of climate change.
Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis,
S. Solomon et al., Eds., Cambridge University Press,
93?127.
Stuiver, M., 1978: Atmospheric carbon dioxide and
carbon reservoir changes. Science, 199, 253?258.
Sullivan, W., 1975a: Scientists ask why world climate is
changing; major cooling may be ahead. New York
Times, 21 May.
?, 1975b: Warming trend seen in climate; two articles
counter view that cold period is due. New York Times,
14 August.
Thompson, L. M., 1975: Weather variability, climate
change, and grain production. Science, 188, 535?541.
Time Magazine, 1974: Another ice age? 24 June.
[Available online at
www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,944914,00.html.]
Twomey, S., 1977: The influence of pollution on the
shortwave albedo of clouds. J. Atmos. Sci., 34,
1149?1152.
Tyndall, J., 1861: On the absorption and radiation of
heat by gases and vapours, and on the physical connection.
Philos. Mag., 22, 277?302.
Wang, W. C., Y. L. Yung, A. A. Lacis, T. Mo, and
J. E. Hansen, 1976: Greenhouse effects due to manmade
perturbations of trace gases. Science, 194,
685?690.
Weare, B. C., R. L. Temkin, and F. M. Snell, 1974:
Aerosols and climate: Some further considerations.
Science, 186, 827?828.
Weart, S., cited 2003: The Discovery of Global Warming.
[Available online at www.aip.org/history/climate.]
Wigley, T. M. L., 1978: Climatic change. Nature, 272,
788.
Wilcox, H. A., 1975: Hothouse Earth. Praeger Publishers,
181 pp.
Will, G. F., 2004: Global warming? Hot air. Washington
Post, 23 December.
?, 2008: March of the polar bears. Washington Post,
22 May.
Willett, H. C., 1974: Do recent climatic fluctuations portend
an imminent ice age? Geofis. Int., 14, 265?302.
Woronko, S. F., 1977: Comments on ?A non-equilibrium
model of hemispheric mean surface temperature.? J.
Atmos. Sci., 34, 1820?1821.
AMERICAN METEOROLOGICAL SOCIETY september 2008 | 1337
