Categories
Cultural responses United States of America

 November 17, 1961 – we enter the Twilight Zone

Sixty four years ago, on this day, November 17th, 1961, the Twilight Zone got ecological…

Nov 17 1961 – “The Midnight Sun” is episode 75 of the American television anthology series The Twilight Zone, first shown in November, 1961.

Opening narration

The word that Mrs. Bronson is unable to put into the hot, still, sodden air is ‘doomed,’ because the people you’ve just seen have been handed a death sentence. One month ago, the Earth suddenly changed its elliptical orbit and in doing so began to follow a path which gradually, moment by moment, day by day, took it closer to the Sun. And all of man’s little devices to stir up the air are now no longer luxuries—they happen to be pitiful and panicky keys to survival. The time is five minutes to twelve, midnight. There is no more darkness. The place is New York City and this is the eve of the end, because even at midnight it’s high noon, the hottest day in history, and you’re about to spend it in the Twilight Zone. Whether explicitly nuclear or otherwise, the apocalypse was never far away [in the Twilight Zone]. “The Midnight Sun” was telecast on the day the U.S. consolidated its drive for “push-button warfare” with the first successful launching of a Minuteman missile from an underground silo.  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Midnight_Sun_(The_Twilight_Zone)

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 317ppm. As of 2025, when this post was published, it is 430ppm. This matters because the more carbon dioxide in the air, the more heat gets trapped. The more heat, the more extreme weather events. You can make it more complicated than that if you want, but really, it’s not. Fwiw, I have a tattoo of the Keeling Curve on my left forearm.

The broader context was that it was the early 1960s – fears of nuclear war, of war by weather modification etc was in the air (not gonna apologise).  See this from LBJ, who by this time was Kennedy’s Vice-President.

What I think we can learn from this – science fiction tries to tackle this stuff. The best sci-fi is “good for thinking with.”

What happened next – the Cuban Missile Crisis etc. And the emissions, they kept climbing.

What do you think? Does this pass the ‘so what?’ threshold? Have I got facts wrong? Interpretation wrong? Please do comment on this post, unless you are a denialist, obvs.

Also on this day: 

November 17, 1869 – Suez Canal opens – All Our Yesterdays

November 17, 1968 -The Observer covers carbon dioxide pollution… – All Our Yesterdays

November 17, 1968 – UK national newspaper flags carbon dioxide danger…

November 17, 1978 – British Wind Energy Association launches – 

November 17, 1980 – International meeting about carbon dioxide build up.

November 17, 1994 – “When consumption is no longer sustainable”… – 

November 17, 2018 – XR occupy five bridges in London

 November 17, 2023 – two degrees warmer, for the first time… – All Our Yesterdays

Categories
Uncategorized

November 6, 1961 – “Air Over Cities” pollution conference begins 

On this day 64 years ago…

In 1961, the U.S Public Health service hosted a symposium on “Air Over Cities.”171 Like many meetings of its type, its primary focus was urban air pollution, widely recognized as a threat to public health. Carbon dioxide frequently appeared in these discussions. Helmut Landsberg, Director of the Office of Climatology for the US Weather Bureau, included it in a table labelled “Concentration of Some Air Pollutants in the Atmosphere of urban areas.” Carbon dioxide was the first pollutant listed, followed by carbon monoxide, oxides of nitrogen, sulfur dioxide, aldehydes, chlorides, and 167 Id. at 108. 168 Id. at 177. 169 Id. at 303. 170 Id. at 320. 171 US PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE, SEC TECH. REP. A62-5, SYMPOSIUM: AIR OVER CITIES (1961) [hereinafter 1961 PHS SYMPOSIUM]. 55 others.172 

James Lodge of NCAR also highlighted CO2, noting that it was “generally agreed that the concentration of this compound in the earth’s atmosphere has increased since the turn of the century….”173 Lodge agreed that more research was needed, particularly to improve measurement techniques.174 Wendell Hewson also attended this meeting and argued for more research to better understand “the possible influence on our climate of increased CO2 in the atmosphere resulting from our combustion of fossil fuels.”175

Oreskes et al 2025 page 54-5

Climate-Change-and-the-Clean-Air-Act-of-1970.pdf

NOVEMBER 6-7 1961

Document Display | NEPIS | US EPA

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 317ppm. As of 2025, when this post was published, it is 430ppm. This matters because the more carbon dioxide in the air, the more heat gets trapped. The more heat, the more extreme weather events. You can make it more complicated than that if you want, but really, it’s not. Fwiw, I have a tattoo of the Keeling Curve on my left forearm.


The broader context was that industrialisation brings smogs (a word only coined in about 1906). This was known from the early 19th century (and the burning of coal as an air pollution problem goes back hundreds of years – Fumifugium, much?).

The specific context was the first air pollution conference had happened in 1958 – and Chauncy Leake had raised the carbon dioxide issue…

What I think we can learn from this is that carbon dioxide as a problem was understood fairly well by the early 1960s…

What happened next – in 1963 the Conservation Foundation held an important meeting. In 1965 the President’s Science Advisory Council released a report (see yesterday’s post!).  And it still took another two decades to break through the inertia and resistance…

What do you think? Does this pass the ‘so what?’ threshold? Have I got facts wrong? Interpretation wrong? Please do comment on this post, unless you are a denialist, obvs.

Also on this day: 

November 6, 1988 – Australian cartoonist nails response to #climate change

November 6, 1989 – Noordwijk conference – “alright, we will keep talking”

November 6, 1990 – Second World Climate Conference underway

November 6, 2001 – Howard plays the jobs-card vs Kyoto in Hunter Valley – All Our Yesterdays

November 6, 2009 – Kevin Rudd playing politics with the climate

Categories
Activism Media United Kingdom

October 9, 1961 – “Doomed,” says the Daily Mirror

Sixty four years ago, on this day, October 9th, 1961, the Daily Mirror crusaded, about other animals besides the hairless murder apes

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 317ppm. As of 2025, when this post was published, it is 425ppm. This matters because the more carbon dioxide in the air, the more heat gets trapped. The more heat, the more extreme weather events. You can make it more complicated than that if you want, but really, it’s not. Fwiw, I have a tattoo of the Keeling Curve on my left forearm.

The broader context was that nature documentaries were having to start noticing there was trouble ahead.

What I think we can learn from this is that we knew what we were doing, by commission or omission. Oh well.

What happened next – it has gotten to the point where most of the mammalian biomass on this planet is hairless murder apes and their pets and livestock. We’re so screwed.

What do you think? Does this pass the ‘so what?’ threshold? Have I got facts wrong? Interpretation wrong? Please do comment on this post, unless you are a denialist, obvs.

Also on this day: 

October 9, 1979 – Hermann Flohn warns Irish of “possible consequences of a man-made warming” 

Categories
Italy United Nations

October 2, 1961- UNESCO conference on “climatic variations” begins

Sixty four years ago, on this day, October 2nd, 1961,

beginning of UNESCO conference – “Rome (October 2-7 1961), arranged by UNESCO and the World Meteorological Organization, to restrict the interest to climatic variations which have occurred since the latest glaciation, with particular attention to the period of the meteorological record. The reason behind this decision was no doubt the wish to talk about something which might conceivably have relevance to the nature and trends of the arid lands of to-day–relevance on the scale of economic planning, say, for a hundred years. (Sutcliffe, Nature No. 4808 December 23, 1139-40.”

And there was discussion of carbon dioxide build-up, as per this published in the Derry Standard.

“These warm years, with their economic implications, have led to a number of theories, notably one that man is changing the weather by burning fossil fuels and releasing millions of tons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere.

Unfortunately for the theoreticians, this rising temperature curve levelled off around 1940 and has now dipped.”

Behrman, D. 1961. Science Notes. The Derry Standard, November 21, p7

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 317ppm. As of 2025, when this post was published, it is 425ppm. This matters because the more carbon dioxide in the air, the more heat gets trapped. The more heat, the more extreme weather events. You can make it more complicated than that if you want, but really, it’s not. Fwiw, I have a tattoo of the Keeling Curve on my left forearm.

The broader context was that the International Geophysical year had got everyone thinking about the planet (its purpose) and what humans might be doing/might be able to do (make the deserts bloom etc). There had even been a UN resolution on weather modification and space.

The specific context was that some were beginning to talk about Carbon Dioxide – there had been the New York Academy of Science meeting in January 1961. 

What I think we can learn from this is that we used to believe we could make a better world…

What happened next – Ritchie-Calder got more and more interested in carbon dioxide. He tried to alert people in 1963, and then seems to have put it on the backburner for a few years, before launching a second campaign in 1968…

What do you think? Does this pass the ‘so what?’ threshold? Have I got facts wrong? Interpretation wrong? Please do comment on this post, unless you are a denialist, obvs.

Also on this day: 

 October 2, 1927/64 – Svante Arrhenius and Guy Callendar die.

October 2, 1942 – Spaceflight!!

October 2, 1994 – twenty years of boredom, for trying to change the system from within (Phillip Toyne becomes civil servant) 

October 2, 2014 – Low emission technologies on their way, says Minerals Council of Australia

Categories
United Kingdom United States of America

June 10, 1961 – Nature report on “Solar Variations, Climatic Change and Related Geophysical Problems”

Sixty four years ago, on this day, June 10th, 1961 the UK scientific publication Nature runs an article by climatologist Gordon Manley about the recent symposium in New York…

It became abundantly clear how large a number of investigators are patiently accumulating evidence of the amplitude, character, effects and especially the dating of climatic fluctuations all over the world. Speculations regarding the causes abound; supporters of each of the popular theories-solar variation, atmospheric turbidity, carbon dioxide, ozone, variations in the Earth’s orbital elements-find their several gods alternately set up and cast down. Workers in one field find themselves unable to judge the validity of the evidence from other disciplines;

MANLEY, G. Solar Variations, Climatic Change and Related Geophysical Problems. Nature 190, 967–968 (1961). https://doi.org/10.1038/190967a0

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 317ppm. As of 2025 it is 430ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The broader context was that the modern argument that carbon dioxide build-up would heat the planet had been given a huge boost in 1953 by Canadian physicist Gilbert Plass.  The International Geophysical Year (1957-8) had added a bit to the interest.  

The specific context was the New York Academy of Sciences had held a big symposium, and Plass, Herman Flohn and others were present. Manley was there too…The international linkages were there….

What I think we can learn from this

As human beings – we have had so many warnings for so long. The problem is not our brains, it’s our spines.

As “active citizens” is that the problem is not our brains, it’s our spines.

Academics might like to ponder – growing spines.

What happened next  By 1963 the Conservation Foundation held a meeting just on carbon dioxide, proposed by the Yale biologist  G Evelyn Hutchinson, though ironically he was unable to attend due to illness.  The carbon dioxide build-up issue also began to work its way through the Presidents Science Advisory Council (LINK).

What do you think? Does this pass the ‘so what?’ threshold? Have I got facts wrong? Interpretation wrong? Please do comment on this post, unless you are a denialist, obvs.

You can see the chronological list of All Our Yesterdays “on this day” posts here.

What do you think? Does this pass the ‘so what?’ threshold? Have I got facts wrong? Interpretation wrong? Please do comment on this post, unless you are a denialist, obvs.

If you want to get involved, let me know.

If you want to invite me on your podcast, that would boost my ego and probably improve the currently pitiful hit-rate on this site (the two are not-unrelated).

Also on this day: 

June 10, 1986 – scientist tells US senators “global warming is inevitable. It is only a question of the magnitude and the timing.” – All Our Yesterdays

Categories
United Nations Weather modification

December 20, 1961 – UNGA resolution on outer space and weather modification

Sixty three years ago, on this day, December 20th, 1961 the United Nations General Assembly agreed the following

The General Assembly,

Noting with gratification the marked progress for meteorological science and technology opened up by the advances in outer space,

Convinced of the world-wide benefits to be derived from international co-operation in weather research and analysis,

1. Recommends to all Member States and to the World Meteorological Organization and other appropriate specialized agencies the early and comprehensive study, in the light of developments in outer space, of measures;

(a) To advance the state of atmospheric science and technology so as to provide greater knowledge of basic physical forces affecting climate and the possibility of large-scale weather modification;

(b) To develop existing weather forecasting capabilities and to help Member States make effective use of such capabilities through regional meteorological centres;

1961 UN GA resolution abt outer space and also weather modification (see Zilman 2009)

https://www.unoosa.org/oosa/en/ourwork/spacelaw/treaties/resolutions/res_16_1721.html

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 318ppm. As of 2024 it is 425ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was that the Soviet Union and the Americans had been hurling lumps of metal and even living objects such as chimpanzees and cosmonauts into space. And it was clear that both sides were interested in the military applications. The United Nations General Assembly, therefore passed this resolution that was partly about space and also partly about the weather and climate, giving the WMO a bigger remit to investigate – well, you saw what it said.

What we learn is that questions around weather modification – inadvertent and intentional – go back a very loooong way; 63 years in this case.

What happened next. The World Meteorological Organisation got going with GARP – the Global Atmospheric Research Programme. And by 1965-66 people were beginning to look at carbon dioxide and say “you know, we may actually have a problem “

What do you think? Does this pass the ‘so what?’ threshold? Have I got facts wrong? Interpretation wrong? Please do comment on this post, unless you are a denialist, obvs.

Also on this day: 

December 20, 1983 – Documentary on “the Climate Crisis” shown

December 20, 2007 – UK opposition leader David Cameron gives clean coal speech in Beijing…

Categories
Cultural responses Denmark

November 23, 1961 – “The Day the Earth Caught Fire” (in Denmark)

Sixty two years ago, on this day, November 23, 1961, a British film about the earth getting hotter and hotter had its Danish premiere

1961 Launch of The Day the Earth Caught Fire (in Denmark)

Trailer –

Full movie here!

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 317ppm. As of 2023 it is 419ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was that in the mid 1950s somebody had spotted that senior US politician Estes Kefauver had spoken of the perceived danger that multiple nuclear explosions could tip the earth off its balance and thought “that’s a good idea for a science fiction story.” It was filmed and released and is perhaps the first is part of the whole examples of climate anxiety films.

What we can learn from this is the film is an entirely enjoyable eco thriller before the name and would make an excellent starting point for a green group that was trying to attract people. Maybe.

What happened next

By the late 1960s people were beginning to talk about carbon dioxide build-up as The Threat.

What do you think? Does this pass the ‘so what?’ threshold? Have I got facts wrong? Interpretation wrong? Please do comment on this post, unless you are a denialist, obvs.

Categories
Energy United Nations

August 21, 1961 – The UN holds a “new sources of energy” conference.

Sixty two years ago, on this day, August 21, 1961, a United Nations conference on new sources of energy began.

21-31 August 1961 UN conference on new sources of energy (see Ritchie-Calder, Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, Dec 1961) 

Also his comments on 1975 30 August Science show. (interviewed by Robyn Williams)

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 331ppm. As of 2023 it is 423ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was that new sources of energy especially for countries without their own supplies of oil, coal and gas were going to be needed if the world were going to “develop”. There was also the point that fossil fuel supplies were not going to last forever. Climate change was not an issue, at least not one that was publicly discussed and I doubt it got much traction anywhere, because the science was simply not mature enough or well enough known.

What I think we can learn from this is that questions about energy justice have been around for a very long time and we never quite manage to crack it, really.

What happened next, by 1968 environmental problems were obvious enough that Sweden was successful in getting the UN to agree to hold a conference. And one of the topics was what we now call “climate change.”

What do you think? Does this pass the ‘so what?’ threshold? Have I got facts wrong? Interpretation wrong? Please do comment on this post, unless you are a denialist, obvs.

References

https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/3833582?ln=en

Categories
United States of America

January 30, 1961 – New York Times reports world is cooling

Sixty two years ago, on this day, January 30 1961, in a story that would later be used by incoherent denialists, Walter Sullivan, New York Times science reporter, reported that the world was… cooling.,

You see this clip on various denialist websites.  You don’t see this below, from the same article.

This was in the context of a symposium in New York, attended by Hermann Flohn and Gilbert Plass, among others…

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 317ppm. As of 2023 it is 419. .

The context was that global temperatures had been rising over the last 50 plus years (Guy Callendar had been one of many to spot this – his contribution had been to say it was down to carbon dioxide build-up). However, from about 1940, the amount of dust/smog/sulphur had increased the reflectiveness of the atmosphere, meaning some of the sun’s heat didn’t hit the Earth.  So temperatures started falling…

What I think we can learn from this

The signal did not properly emerge from the noise until the 1970s (though the reason – smog/suplhur was well understood)

Denialists cherry-pick like mad, then project that onto people who… advocate for 19th century physics.

What happened next

The carbon dioxide kept accumulating. Sullivan kept covering it, forming good relationships with working scientists like Stephen Schneider (they met late 1972) and James Hansen.

What do you think? Does this pass the ‘so what?’ threshold? Have I got facts wrong? Interpretation wrong?  Do comment on this post.