Quote Originally Posted by skepticalmike View Post
There is one paragraph in this article that interests me and I went to Judith Curry's blog to learn more about it. I have also consulted other sources for information. The first half of the 20th

century is a bit of a conundrum. I will post another message or 2 when I get a better understanding. This is the paragraph:

Between 1910 and 1940, the planet warmed during a climatic episode that resembles our own, down to the degree. The warming can’t be blamed on industry, she argues, because back then, most of the carbon-dioxide emissions from burning fossil fuels were small. In fact, Curry says, “almost half of the warming observed in the twentieth century came about in the first half of the century, before carbon-dioxide emissions became large.” Natural factors thus had to be the cause. None of the climate models used by scientists now working for the United Nations can explain this older trend. Nor can these models explain why the climate suddenly cooled between 1950 and 1970, giving rise to widespread warnings about the onset of a new ice age. I recall magazine covers of the late 1960s or early 1970s depicting the planet in the grip of an annihilating deep freeze. According to a group of scientists, we faced an apocalyptic environmental scenario—but the opposite of the current one

Natural factors were part of the cause. Even Judith Curry acknowledges that so the author is stretching the truth to claim that only natural factors can account for global warming in the first half

of the 20th century. Some analysis have shown that approximately 50% of the warming was due to anthropogenic causes. There are also questions about the accuracy of the observations and

Judith Curry picks a relative minimum point (1910) to begin the time period under analysis and ends the analysis when there was an anomalous spike in temperature. That produced a 1.2

degree F. temperature increase which could overstate the temperature rise.
Some computer models of the climate have reproduced the early 20th century fairly well. Some of the cooling during the middle of the 20th century has been attributed to stratospheric

aerosols caused by increased air pollution following economic recovery after world War II. Magazine covers predicting a "coming ice age or a deep freeze" was not representative of the opinions

of the climate science community during the 1970's.

Sea level rise has been accelerating, contrary to what was stated in that article

What myth or myths has Judith Curry busted? The author never states what the myths are. She has raised questions about climate science but it isn't clear to me that she has debunked

anything.

The consensus myth. There are no doubt some scientists who analyze the first half of the 20th century the way Curry does and, as you point out, some who do not. Let's accept that as true and then conclude from that observation that the modern climate consensus is myth.