Categories
United States of America

June 5, 1963  – JFK says yes to SST

62 years ago, on this day, June 5th, 1963, the administration of US President John F Kennedy,

“ announced a large-scale cooperative program between industry and government to build a commercial passenger aircraft that would travel faster than the speed of sound…. Over the course of the 1960s, however, Kennedy-era military-industrial aerospace projects fell out of favor with an increasingly skeptical public, and support for the SST waned.”

(Howe, 2014:45)

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 319ppm. As of 2025 it is 4xxppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The broader context was the Cold War had almost gotten rather hot in October the previous year, and the generals wanted as many toys as they could get their hands on.

The specific context was the dreams of limitless power were still so very powerful – it would take defeat in Vietnam and a lot of “impact science” (not yet named so) for that to change – and really, it still hasn’t (Mars colonies, anyone?).

What I think we can learn from this is that while Kennedy was at the same time doing a certain amount of hand-wringing about “Conservation” things like SST, a Boeing dream in part, had a lot of weight. Politicians and their testeria eh?

What happened next  The SST – with its sonic boom and ozone implications became a VERY hot potato.  Eventually Congress imposed a moratorium (this was after Boeing had realised their blueprints were non-starters, and Concorde was having test flights). The Congress moratorium so enraged right-wingers that the Heritage Foundation (Project 2025 guys) got set up…

xxx

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: 

June 5, 1993 and 2011- let’s have a march for #climate… It will make us feel good. – All Our Yesterdays

Categories
Agriculture United States of America

May 15, 1963 – JFK gets told “Yeah, Rachel Carson was Right”

Sixty two years ago, on this day, May 15th, 1963,

Not long after the New Yorker series appeared, President John F. Kennedy announced the formation of a special governmental group to investigate use and control of pesticides, under the direction of the President’s Science Advisory Committee (PSAC). On May 15, 1963, the committee’s report, Pesticides Use and Control, confirmed every point highlighted in Silent Spring.

MacDonald, G. 1998. Environment: The evolution of a concept. IIASA

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 319ppm. As of 2025 it is 430ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was that Rachel Carson had written a book that no publisher was interested in. The New Yorker serialised it and the shit properly hit the fan. The pesticide manufacturers and chemical companies came out swinging of course – all the techniques that would later be standard – smears, strawmanning and the rest of it. Kennedy asked his science guys to look at it…

What I think we can learn from this. We should all stage annual am-dram productions of Henry Ibsen’s “An Enemy of the People” to remind ourselves of what happens if you alert folks to dangers that will interfere with capital accumulation (in a few hands).

What happened next Carson died of breast cancer in 1964. In terms of people with the biggest impact in the 20th century who isn’t a homicidal maniac, she’s pretty high up the league table.

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

President’s Advisory Committee on Pesticides, 1963

Also on this day: 

May 15, 1932 – great deluge forecast by science, reports New York Times… – All Our Yesterdays

May 15, 1950 – Getting Warmer? Asks Time Magazine… – All Our Yesterdays

May 15, 1972 – Clean Air Conference in Melbourne – All Our Yesterdays

May 15, 2006 – Australian Prime Minister John Howard spouting “nuclear to fix climate” nonsense

May 15, 2010 – another pointless overnight vigil.

Categories
Cultural responses United Kingdom

November 23, 1963 – Doctor Who begins

Sixty years years ago, on this day, November 23, 1963, the BBC science fiction programme Doctor Who sixty years ago

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 319ppm. As of 2023 it is 419ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was that the BBC wanted to make an “educational” show, with some humans from the present visiting earth’s past and the audience being informed about x, y and z. No bug-eyed monsters. From the earliest days Doctor Who was concerned with environment – in the second story about the Daleks, we learned that there has been a nuclear war, the atmosphere is poisoned and they will all die of radiation if they’re not careful. In the second season there’s a thinly veiled warning about DDT (Planet of the Giants). Throughout the show, long before “The Green Death” and “Invasion of the Dinosaurs” environmental concerns were getting a look in.

What I think we can learn from this

Someone should write an article about this. Only to have it knocked about by sadistic reviewers in love with their anonymous power.

What happened next

Doctor Who kept going and going and going, for better or worse, and has become deeply embedded in institutionalised in the “symbolic reservoir.”

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
United Kingdom

November 13, 1963 –  Ritchie Calder warns of trouble ahead because of carbon dioxide…

On this day, 60 years ago, November 13, 1963, the peace campaigner, journalist and science communicator (including as first editor of New Scientist)  Ritchie Calder gave a clear warning about the build-up of carbon dioxide, at a meeting of the Town and Country Planning Association  in London.

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 319ppm. As of 2023 it is 419ppm, but check here for daily measures

The context was that Ritchie-Calder had been aware of the issue – at the latest – by early 1954, when he wrote about the issue for a national newspaper. By 1963, the first meeting entirely devoted to carbon dioxide build-up had already taken place in Washington DC. Calder was almost certainly aware of this…

What we can learn.  

We knew. We knew. We knew.

What happened next

Five years and two weeks later, Ritchie-Calder again referenced carbon dioxide build-up, in his “Hell on Earth” Presidential Address to the Conservation Society.

Seriously, long before Stockholm, long before Thatcher, we knew…

Categories
United States of America Weather modification

November 11, 1963 – “Is man upsetting the weather?”

Sixty years ago, on this day, November 11, 1963, the magazine US News and World Report runs a story on weather and climate.

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 319ppm. As of 2023 it is 419ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was that through the 1950s concern about weather and weather change has grown. The US had started seriously spending money on weather modification experiments..

In 1963, in March in New York, the Conservation Foundation had held a one day meeting about carbon dioxide build up and its possible consequences. So the changes in the atmosphere, the weather, these were all grist for journalists ’mill. And you could quickly cobble together a new story based on old clippings, and maybe phoning up a couple of scientists who would be happy to be quoted, because as long as you’ve got the quote right, it would make them feel important. And keep their names in the papers. Universities would be mostly happy about this. And so the weekly ravening beast that was US News and World Report continued to be fed. Am I too cynical?

What I think we can learn from this

To really understand an individual document, you have to understand the social and political context of when it was written. This is a banal statement, but one that periodically needs repeating.

What happened next

The stories kept coming. By the late 60s carbon dioxide got named a lot more. But everything still got framed around. “We don’t know what will happen because maybe dust.” That didn’t begin to change until the late 1970s.

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
Academia Science Scientists United States of America

March 12, 1963 – first ever carbon dioxide build-up conference

Sixty years ago, on this day, March 12, 1963, in New York

 “Dr. Keeling was concerned enough about rising carbon dioxide levels to participate in a panel by the Conservation Foundation on March 12, 1963 “Implications of Rising Carbon Dioxide Content of the Atmosphere”, the report issued being among the first to speculate that anthropogenic global warming could be dangerous to the Earth’s biological and environmental systems. It includes on page 6: “many life forms would be annihilated” [in the tropics] if emissions continued unchecked in the upcoming centuries. They also projected that carbon dioxide emissions could raise the average surface temperature of the earth by as much as 4°C during the next century (1963-2063)”

Source

Probably the first gathering of scientists and policymakers devoted specifically and explicitly to carbon dioxide buildup in the atmosphere.

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 319ppm. As of 2023 it is 419ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was

The Conservation Foundation had been set up in New York in 1948

The International Geophysical Year was now 5 years in the past, a lot of data had been collected. In January of 1961, there had been a five day scientific conference organised by the American Meteorological Society and the New York Academy of Sciences with plenty of people talking about carbon dioxide buildup, and alongside that there had been other scientific efforts. So the Conservation Foundation, which had been aware of CO2 buildup as a potential problem for a while, held a gathering, the first ever carbon dioxide build up conference

What I think we can learn from this

Well, these sorts of events are fascinating for the legacy they leave. And for several years –  really till the end of the 1960s – the publication about this meeting was cited whenever in writing about carbon dioxide buildup for years, and it only really fell away entirely after the 1971 study on the man’s impact on climate. 

It also seems to have been the “last gasp” in climate science for Gilbert Plass whose statements and work from 1953 had been so important for the growth of acceptance of the carbon dioxide theory.

And in all probability, it was where Lewis Herbert aka Murray Bookchin got his facts for the section in his book written in 1964 and published in early 1965, called Crisis in our Cities, which will be discussed soon.

And the reason I say this is that the event was in New York, Bookchin was in New York and it’s impossible to imagine that he wasn’t aware of the Conservation Foundation’s activities. Bookchin’s politics were not of the technocrats. But just because he didn’t agree with the funders does not mean he’d have ignored what was happening under their auspices.

What happened next

Plass dropped out. 

Roger Revelle and Charles Keeling kept doing what they were doing. 

And the closing statement – well, it came to pass…

Categories
United Nations

February 4, 1963 – A UN conference on technology for “less developed areas” starts

Sixty years ago, on this day, February 4 1963,  a UN conference on technology for less developed areas, starts in Geneva

“United Nations Conference on the Application of Science and Technology for the Benefit of the Less Developed Areas”

https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/1485045?ln=en

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 319ppm. As of 2023 it is 419ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was

The United Nations was still regarded as a serious player, and “development” for the newly decolonized countries was a hot topic, whereas climate change caused by the buildup of carbon dioxide was most explicitly not. This was due to relatively easy to understand reasons – the idea of heating the world because of industrial gases was new (if you don’t count Arrhenius and Callendar), we just didn’t have good enough measurements. Meanwhile, cold winters were still very much a thing (and the cooling effect of dust and sulphur very much in play.)

What I think we can learn from this

We endlessly talk about what the world needs to be doing, but it takes longer than you think. We end up doing something different, usually less than we originally wanted. 

What happened next

The attempt to “develop” has industrialised the world, but largely in the interests of the super-rich and the rich, (which probably includes you and definitely includes me, looking at things globally).

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