As winter gets ready to crank up over the coming weeks – which, I must confess, given our Weatherbell.com cold winter forecast and the affect on our clients who heeded our advice, I have no qualms about – I thought I would bring back a golden oldie to counter the revisionist history that is being pushed in the climate debate today. The same outlet that is now actively touting man-made global warming (which one isn’t?) was not singing the same tune in the 1970s, and this Time magazine cover from April 9, 1977 proves it.

In the spirit of rallying individuals to counter a common threat, notice the sub-headline: “51 Things You Can Do to Make a Difference.” (Emphasis added.) This is not unlike the activism being advocated during World War II (victory gardens, collecting cans, etc). In a way, it’s a noble appeal to the individual, which I have no problem with, except it makes about as much sense as all the noble appeals today to counter global warming.

There is always that appeal to the individual. Isn’t that interesting? But there is a problem when the collective decides to force the individual to do whatever the collective wants.

Another fascinating link: the idea of uniting mankind behind a common cause (climate) in the name of building peace – something that was first put forth by Woodrow Wilson who, in some circles, is the father of the progressive movement here in the United States. It is very interesting that this appeal was made at a time when another energy crisis was developing, which prompted the sitting president, Jimmy Carter, to propose conservation legislation, including a windfall profits tax on oil. That, of course, collapsed when the price of oil tanked several years later. Apparently, there are cycles in the economy and climate (who would have thought?) – neither of which the president at the time seemed to have a handle on. (The reader can fill in their own ideas on the situation today.) But part of the reason for the “crisis” is similar to today: dependance on an outside source for our energy lifeline and the climate. In that case it was a very real demand because of all the cold – the same cold that prompted people to claim an ice age was imminent. That they deny it today, speaks volumes, when, like past climate events, all one needs to do is look to see that there is nothing new under the sun. This time though, it’s climate hysteria that is causing the impact on the market, as it limits what the nation can actually produce. One of the other ways is to simply manipulate data; to try to get rid of the evidence – a scientific version of book burning.

So here we are – another climate crisis, this time replete with hysteria over warming that is perfectly within the realm of what nature is supposed to do, much like the hysteria about cold was. But with it comes more demands to do things to curb the climate, etc. It’s noble to try and unite mankind in a peaceful cause by appealing to the individual. I would like to think that is the true motive here: good old fashioned American ingenuity and drive to conquer a global problem for the betterment of mankind. But what happens when the problem 40 years ago was opposite of what it is now, yet under the same overall heading? And what if the attempt at conquering the problem was based on a motive that had nothing to do with actual facts? The reader is left to decide. But the fact that cold and warmth are being blamed on the same thing is simply a case of someone covering all their bases and claiming all their answers are correct, even though that can’t possibly be the case.

In the end, what has happened before will happen again. There is nothing new under the sun. That goes for trying to manipulate people as well as the weather and climate. All one needs to do is look at what has actually happened and the whole agenda is clear to see.

Joe Bastardi is chief forecaster at WeatherBELL Analytics, a meteorological consulting firm.