And actually, some of the misconceptions around "rain follows the plow" are widely recognized within the scope of Global Warming and Climate Change, with a different understanding that was commonly attributed.
So in a sense, you could say they were believers in Global Warming, but didn't understand the consequences.
misconceptions around "rain follows the plow" are widely recognized within the scope of Global Warming and Climate Change, with a different understanding that was commonly attributed.
So in a sense, you could say they were believers in Global Warming, but didn't understand the consequences.
Simply put, the greenies weren't very organized at that time. Once they got organized they at first tried to scare us with an imminent ice age. Then in the late 70s they changed that to GW. To them it really makes no difference, they feel they can scare the masses either way. Their PR is that good.
Joseph Goebbels,
“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.”
The Dust Bowl is something alarmists would love to erase from the history books. Unfortunately they can't so they are left with saying that it wasn't global and it was weather. A tornado in Oklahoma on the other hand is proof positive of GLOBAL CLIMATE change.
The duist bowl was caused by a redistribution of heat energy not from global warming. global warming refers to an increase of tropospheric energy. the dust bowls merely redistributed that energy. Granted there will be a redistribution of energy as more energy enters the system but the dust bowl, at least the drought associated with it, was most likely caused by a southerly meandering jet stream. Not from a drastic change in the outbound or inbound energy of the system.
Because the dust bowl warming wasn't "global". It was local.
It clearly was hot in the west. And, in fact, I don't know why.
But I do know that it was not a world wide phenomena.
The pragmatic people of the 1930's were not as presumptuous , arrogant or gullible as people are today .
The idea that we had any control over natural forces & acts of god was so ridiculous that the dust bowl comedian Will Rogers always got some his biggest laughs with the joke, "everybody talks about the weather but no one does anything about it"
Order the media to stop reporting on Global warming and it will no longer exist within a year.
It doesn't fit the mantra of man made "global warming"
Actually, denialists love to claim that 1934 was the warmest year in history. Actually, it is no longer in the top 50 globally, but it was one of the warmest years in the US.
http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/gistemp...
Poor agricultural practices made it worse, but the drought was the cause. When Wall Street crashed, industrial activity took a nose dive and the aerosols dropped with it, but the carbon dioxide remained in the air. 1934 was warm compared with earlier decades, globally.
http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/gistemp...
Ian
Jello^tm
I see that the straw men are out in full force.
People? Are you talking about "Environmental Climate Clowns" (Alarmist-Climate-Scientists) that think they know how the climate works (... or know how to provoke the media into portraying humans as catastrophe-driven-holocaust-denying capitalists?)?
local weather is not global climate
We were not producing much CO2 then, but I am sure they would like to.
