"If we were to employ the hopelessly flawed methodology of divining the relative degree of scientific “consensus” by counting the number of papers that agree with one position or another (just as blogger John Cook and colleagues did with their 2013 paper “Quantifying the Consensus…” that yielded a predetermined result of 97% via categorical manipulation), the 220 “cooling” papers published between 1965-’79 could represent an 83.3% global cooling consensusfor the era (220/264 papers), versus only a 16.7% consensus for anthropogenic global warming (44/264 papers)."
Flashback 1974: ’60 theories have been advanced to explain the global cooling’ - In the 1970’s scientists were predicting a new ice age, and had 60 theories to explain it.: Ukiah Daily Journal 0 November 20, 1974 - "The cooling trend heralds the start of another ice age, of a duration that could last from 200 years to several millenia...Sixty theories have been advanced, he said, to explain the global cooling period."
Climate Depot’s Marc Morano accused NOAA of twisting the facts to “make it appear the invisible hand of ‘global warming’ has a role in almost every weather event."
Heidi Cullen's involvement came as a red flag for Georgia Tech climate scientist Judith A. Curry, who also raised questions about releasing the study before a peer review. “This study involves several scientists from NOAA, along with a scientist that works for an advocacy group,” said Ms. Curry in an email. “NOAA has a team in Boulder, Colorado (led by Marty Hoerling) that typically conducts quite sensible analyses of such extreme events. So I don’t know why NOAA issued such a press release about a new publication without checking with this other team at NOAA.”