@SeasonedRP and @destraht's point is that the elites went along with a narrative because it was convenient for them to take more control over people long before there was enough evidence that their models were right.
And my main thesis remains, it wasn't a fucking narrative, the particulates and aerosols actually were visibly blocking out the sun as seen by everyone with eyes and memory of how the air quality goes over the years where they live, and a measured multi-decadal cooling trend across large areas started to emerge despite the constantly rising CO2.
@SeasonedRP The idea peaked by the 60s in academia, though in typical fashion Pop Culture kept bringing it up in lay articles in a distribution curve lagging academic press by more than a decade. By the 1980s, the talk of provoking an ice age was not that it would come due to pollution, but in the form of nuclear winter.
I'd like to hear exactly WHAT show Carl Sagan "did about it," and when. I don't believe his predictions on a global cooling event match the general claim we're discussing, nor do they fit your timeline.
You also dismissed that aerosols and particulates were a cooling problem without evidence, when I provided before and after pictures of this pollution blocking light across a distance of mere city blocks.
@MentORPHEUS Scientific American says by about 1980 they realized temps were warming and not cooling. If it were early 70s, I wouldn't remember it and it probably wouldn't have been in the curriculum for kids that young. I didn't grow up in an area on the cutting edge of such things, so you might have been learning things different from what I was learning.
@MentORPHEUS Wiki says mid 70s and there was a Newsweek article in 75. That sounds about right, as it would take a bit for that info to get in school curricula. Nuclear winter was the early 80s scare. The Wiki article does downplay the hysteria and acts like everyone knew all along that temps were actually rising, which is not how I remember it being presented.
@MentORPHEUS I learned about it social studies class in elementary school in 5th or 6th grade, which would have been 78 or 79, and I don't remember it being past tense. Seems like Carl Sagan did a show about it too. Regardless, the notion that there was going to be an ice age due to human activities but then, within the course of a few years, some brave regulators and activist groups saved the planet, sounds more like a plot of a comic book than anything that could actually happen.
@SeasonedRP Not sure about you, but I can REMEMBER news, current events, and pop culture back to the early-mid 70s. By the late 70s, it was spoken of in the past tense. "They USED TO say we were going to cause another ice age..." The mainstream environmental movement had long since "moved on" and threat of causing a new ice age was no longer on their radar. The big environmental issues of the later 70s were leaded gas which finally got banned (with immediate measurable results and short + long term benefits), deforestation was a distant second, but at least in Southern California, water was the most talked about issue in environmentalism.
Biggest focal point was the LA Aqueduct drawing so much water from the Owens Valley that Mono Lake dropped to the point where a land bridge developed to the island where a majority of 1000+ miles of the Pacific Coast's seagull population bred over winter, allowing predators to decimate their population despite a shitty fence built. One of my memories from earliest childhood was every year watching an atmospheric river of seagulls migrating over where we lived, where they turned inland from the coast. For weeks, it was a constant stream of seagulls flying by, in groups and formations but making a constant unending stream 20 seagulls wide from horizon to horizon. Then one year they stopped, and never in the decades since have I seen this migration big enough to notice at all. That and the snail darter, whose giant habitat's salinity became unlivable to them due to the majority of the flow of a multi-river system's delta getting diverted by humans.
Grade school kids would egg on the people ahead of them at the drinking fountain with a bitchy, "Save some for the fish, maaan!" Save the forests and save water were the second and first biggest environmental issues throughout the mid-late 70s. These were talked about ALL THE TIME when "the environment" came up in discussion.
"There's GOING to be an ice age!" was on NOBODY'S lips in the mid to late 70s and beyond. That is my direct memory, growing up in a fairly affluent and environmentally conscious area where this stuff got talked about.Read More
@MentORPHEUS No, it did not peter out in the early 70s and wasn't a real problem that was solved. The propaganda for it was extensive in the late 1970s and early 1980s then disappeared because the facts didn't support it. It was a money making scheme like climate change is now.
I used to have a long list of sources for that dating from the 1940s (when it first started to pop up in the scientific literature), through the 1980s when everyone went silent because it was clear that it wasn't going to happen. This wasn't just articles from "Scientific American" or National Geographic," either: most of them were from peer-reviewed publications and science textbooks. Sadly, I deleted the damn thing and don't have it any more, along with the details of the guy most responsible for purging the internet of those sources.
All those sources predate the internet, and the only place they were compiled was on Wikipedia. The guy (don't remember his name), was a "super editor" and he simply deleted thousands of references and banned hundreds of researchers to make it seem like the consensus never existed.
The disinformation effort has been so effective that even people who lived through the Imminent Ice Age hysteria question their memories.
The lists that were purged from wikipedia might yet still exist. Check out infogalactic.com to see if those sources are still listed there.Read More
@slutmagazine Currently, inflation in Japan is 2.5%, which is high for that country (despite the 2% target). BoJ policy has been ultra loose for years. What happens is that the yen printed are invested in other countries with higher interest rates; they don't all slosh around in the Japanese economy. And for whatever reason, the historically high current inflation in Japan hasn't made its way to wages yet, so overall inflation doesn't look bad compared to other countries. Also, the large elderly/small younger people population make up in Japan tends to be deflationary. The BoJ is in a difficult spot. Debt is something like 250% of GDP with negative interest rates. If rates go up, and many think they should, so do interest payments on debt.
What are you studying in college/university that you lack the time to explore other topics of interest?