As you can see during the post world war II economic boom, the earths temperature was decreasing. Under the global warming theorists views, earth temperatures should have increased during this time due to the increased abundance of C02 in the atmosphere.
No. You're being willfully ignorant here and pretending that CO2 is the only driver of climate when scientists know that it's not. It's also no secret that there was a downturn in temp during the post-war boom, nor is that downturn a mystery. It's been widely known for some time that it was due to sulfate aerosols- which was the reason that a few scientists in the 1970s predicted continued cooling. After we started scrubbing them from factory emissions and switching to low-sulfur fuels, their influence went away and the warming trend dominated.
Then during the economic down turn in the Carter years, the earths tempature began to increase even though C02 gas should have been less abundant due to the economic downturn.
The climate does not respond instantaneously to any changes, especially to very short-term trends. You would not expect to see a 4 year trend in emissions have a noticeable effect on such a noisy dataset. Even if we completely stopped emitting all CO2 today the climate would continue to get warmer for several decades. That's such an important concept that it has its own term- climate inertia.
In the 70's we were in trouble because of the oncoming ice age which never happened.
Look at the actual peer-reviewed literature and see what scientists were saying in the 1970s. There were a whopping 6 academic papers projecting cooling and 35 projecting warming. 5 of those cooling papers based their projection on assumptions that sulfate aerosols (the cause of the not-so-mysterious post-war downward trend) would continue to be produced in abundance.
So what's all of this talk about not trusting the mass media portrayal of issues and researching them yourself?
I said before the earths temperature has been decreasing since the late 90's. Below is a graph to show you this.
The graph has nothing to do with showing global temperature trends. It's a graph of the Pacific Decadal Oscillation which is basically the switch between warm and cool surface waters in the N. Pacific. It's sort of like El Nino, but longer lasting and affecting larger parts of the ocean. It can affect climate, but there is no indication as of yet that it has any directed response from climate change (i.e. that can be used as a thermometer).
The global temperature has not been decreasing since the late 1990s. There is no statistically significant trend in the data, so you can't say ANYTHING meaningful about what the temperature has done since then. However, even if you cherrypick the anomalously hot year of 1998 as your starting point (so all other points are lower), GISS shows an upward trend. HadCRUT shows virtually no change, and UAH gives a slight downward trend. If you look at the most recent 10 years for all 3 datasets you get an increasing trend (still not statistically significant),
