5935 Shares

Who out there remembers when scientists told us the 'ice age' was going to return? [circa late 70's]

Who out there remembers when scientists told us the 'ice age' was going to return? [circa late 70's] Topic: Circa research
July 20, 2019 / By Haley
Question: Does anyone see the parallels between the current global warming and previous ice age theories? Maybe scientists really don't know much about the Earth and this is just a way to keep research funds flowing in? The 'newest' attempt at maintaining a level of credibility for the 'global warming' scientist is to attempt to link the two theories, sure seems like there are just guessing (or have $$ or politcal agendas?!?). Let me know what you think.
Best Answer

Best Answers: Who out there remembers when scientists told us the 'ice age' was going to return? [circa late 70's]

Dolina Dolina | 4 days ago
Well, I wasn't born then but it could still happen. Technically we are well overdue for one, so one should arive soonish. However "soon" an be in 10 years or a million years. Besides, scientist base these estiments on past record and the planet's cycles change with time. If it is global warming you're alluding at it could well bring about an ice age. Strange but true (or at least possible). If large ice masses were to melt , vast quantities of cold water will flow into the ocean's bringing their overall temperature (and the planet's temperature right along with it) way down. That could be enough to flip the climate into a cold faze.
👍 196 | 👎 4
Did you like the answer? Who out there remembers when scientists told us the 'ice age' was going to return? [circa late 70's] Share with your friends

We found more questions related to the topic: Circa research


Dolina Originally Answered: Why am I being told there is a Delay inn Processing my Tax Return?
The IRS takes as long as it takes. When you call, the assistor looks at your account, verifies identity and attempts to tell you what they see. If there are delays in processing, or if the return has been forwarded to exams, they won't be able to tell you much of anything. I'm glad to hear your father got the refund as the surviving spouse for his and your late mother's tax return. That is irrelevant to your post. So, you filed your return, asking for Direct Deposit. You do not state if you filed electronically or by mail. (I'm guessing it was by mail.) You filed March 8th. (Boy, I had to read carefully to find the facts here.) That was 6 months ago. Unless you requested the First Time Home Buyer Credit, 6 months *is* a long time. When you filed your return, what was it like? Did you file alone or did you have any dependents? Was your income from a W-2 or from self-employment? Did you include your W-2 to get credit for the taxes withheld? Did you claim any credits? What was your refund coming from? For the record, simple returns with a W-2 generally do not get delayed in processing unless a) the W-2 was handwritten or b) the amount of withholding was unusually high. Even then, they call the employer and verify the W-2's being correct. After June 30th, they can look at the W-2 filed by the employer. Self-employment tax returns are usually not a problem (they may get flagged for audit) unless they qualify you for EIC. The First Time Homebuyer credit is causing huge delays and too many variations to discuss. If your return was sent to Exams, that can take 6-9 months. If it wasn't sent to Exams and they just got to it, they may be sending you a letter asking for more information. There are some other credits that cause problems on some tax returns and too many variations to discuss here. You mention "felons in California"--so was this the FTHBC? The IRS got thousands of fraudulent requests (all made to look like there weren't from felons) and are having to verify each one to avoid paying out money to the wrong person. For example, 167 people applied for the credit using documents showing they'd all bought the SAME house. Edit. According to other posts, from his retirement and SSA benefits, the poster has had nearly $10,000 withheld for taxes. This has created his HUGE refund. It's not publized, but the IRS has a fraud filter when withholding is a large percentage of a single informational statement. (Thus tripping people up who tried to use withholding instead of making quarterly estimated tax payments.) When this filter is hit, the return is pulled to verify the withholding against the source documents. You'd think this would be fast and easy since the RRB and SSA are also government entities, but no. This is a manual step. Thanks to FTHBC and other goodies, the poster is most likely waiting on the availability of a human being to verify this and he's stuck behind millions of other returns that also need to be looked at.

Carlyn Carlyn
Yes, I remember, and as I recall one of the leading theories was based on the observation that the polar ice caps were already shrinking. Apparently, if the ice caps melted enough to raise the oceans and flood large areas of the major continents, it would change the amount of sunlight being reflected back into space and possibly trigger a new ice age. Strange as it may seem, global warming and a new ice age are not mutually exclusive at all.
👍 80 | 👎 -2

Ange Ange
The "ICE AGE" they are talking about isn't going to happen for 30-40 Thousand years. That is what they have always said. Global warming IS happening NOW! Some years may be worse or better than others but the general trend is getting worse. Worse Hurricane's, Worse flooding, Worse droughts and the list goes on. The "ICE AGE" will come sometime in the far distant future, there just wont be any Humans or animals left to see it if global warming can't be stopped.
👍 77 | 👎 -8

Wilf Wilf
sure they were claiming the glaciers were starting to be and we were heading in the direction of yet another ice age contained in the 80s. in reality i became merely telling a freind that some human beings were turn flopping because the 1800s ice age international warming. I considered a teach on the historic previous channell about it. And it pronounced that the ny circumstances has turn flopped each and every 2 many years or so on them matters. and that i'm almost 50 so I bear in mind the 80s somewhat nicely.
👍 74 | 👎 -14

Schuyler Schuyler
I don't remember that but they are still saying stuff like that. It is a pendulum and they say the before the ice age happened last time, there was a period of global warming prior. And have you notice how different the climates are in the US compared to 15, 20 years ago. I think it is kind or wild and intriguing.
👍 71 | 👎 -20

Schuyler Originally Answered: I am submitting my tax return (late). Must I report income from my parents (my only income)? If so, how?
Some of this advice is sound, but as a lawyer, let me qualify it. To clarify, as suggested above you are not too old to be a dependent if you are a family member you have less than $3300 in income AND your parents are providing MORE THAN HALF of your support. It is important that you understand all of these conditions: If you have no income but are living on your savings, or other monies previously given to you (e.g., inheritance) or from another source (e.g., alimony), you were NOT a dependent. But if you meet the above definition according to all criteria, you WERE a dependent, and the case for you is closed. Your parents were (or are, if they did not take it) entitled to a deduction on their tax returns. Just because they gave you money does not mean it is "income." It can be, by law, a "gift" or "support," and that brings different consequences for them, not you. Keep in mind that income has a very specific definition, one created by law. It is not "wrong" to report no income if you had none, that is, if you "earned" no money or received no profits or return on investments or sales. But here's where it gets messy. If you were NOT a dependent for the reasons I said above, money given to you would be considered a gift (money or property given to anyone, including relatives, who are not dependents). And if your parents did NOT claim you as a dependent, when estate taxes come if there ever were an audit, they or their heirs might have some explaining to do as to what the money given to you was at the time. By law, the IRC taxes the GIVER of gifts, not the recipients, (because gifts and estates could be used to divert and shelter income, or to discourage work through giving gifts). Certain gifts (prizes and awards from lotteries and contests) or bonuses from employers are swept into the definition of income, but not gifts in general. The tax instructions make this clear. Therefore, it is your PARENTS who should be monitoring and reporting how much money they are giving you, much as a grantor on a trust reports expenses paid from the trust as a trust and estate tax. The IRC has a limit in 2006 of $12,000 a year that can be given to you as a gift. For "loans" with "no interest" (money you expect to pay back), the IRS classifies such loans as below-market loans, and, depending on the amount, your parents may have to pay foregone interest as income they otherwise would have earned but are sheltering in the forms of gifts to you. The IRS has many publications on this, specifically Publication 950 for gifts. Go to IRS.gov to retrieve it. The bottom line is that if you were a dependent in 2006, the money to you was not a "gift" and you should accept that you were their dependent, and technically they could adjust their taxes accordingly (and arguably should for recordkeeping purposes). But if you TRULY had no income BUT you were living on other funds for half or more of your expenses, you were NOT their dependent and that money was a gift. Hope that makes sense.

If you have your own answer to the question circa research, then you can write your own version, using the form below for an extended answer.