Inhofe's NYT refs

Someone has kindly sent me the NYT articles that Inhofe references. Lets have a look... but before we do, there are plenty more out there if you care to look...

1895. The headline ("Geologists Think the World May be Frozen Up Again") is as described, though Inhofe fails to note it appeared on page 6 - hardly headline stuff. And the article itself points out that this is probably a periodic phenomenon rather than a trend, citing previous instances.

1933. Appears on page 1! Inhofe quote "America in Longest Warm Spell Since 1776; Temperature Line Records a 25-year Rise" which is correct (but, obviously enough, is not a prediction...). Curiously enough the article starts off by saying that the next ice age is clearly going to be a long way off, if the weather charts are anything to go by. It doesn't say why people are expecting the ice age. And much of the (short) article is devoted to how wiggly temperatures have been.

1952 (on page E8). Inhofe says Then in 1952, the New York Times was back on the global warming bandwagon declaring that the "trump card" of global warming "has been the melting glaciers." Reading the article, its clear this is about the work of Hans W. Ahlmann (who I don't know anything about... wiki knows he was the president of the IGU) and its his trump card. And the article is indeed pretty alarmist "Dr Ahlmann, a close student of this matter, now tells us that the world temperature seems to be levelling off". Wooo... serious stuff. But: "Probably it will take 30 or 40 years to make certain". A good guess as it happens.

1974 (not 1975... Inhofe is confusing it with Newsweek, perhaps). Inhofe, failing to notice that it appears on page 35 (continued on page 66...), says trumpeting fear of a coming ice age read: "Climate Changes Endanger World's Food Output.". However... its mostly about *changes*... not necessarily cooling. I don't see anything about ice ages in it. Unusually, this article actually quotes a scientific report (not one I have: an IFIAS one in Bonn): There is a growing consensus that the change [what change?] will persist for several decades and that the current food-production systems of man cannot easily adjust. It is also expected that the climate will become more variable [why?]. It notes a trend of cooler temperatures since 1940s; quotes Reid "human volcano" Bryson as thinking they will continue. But in fact the take-home message appears to be the need to be ready to adapt to *change*, without being certain of what change, on the grounds that population has increased so pressures are greater and the system more fragile.

Overall, a predictably poor score from Inhofe. To point out the obvious, these are hardly comparable to the certain predictions of warming you see commonly nowadays in the papers.