Neanderthals and Global Warming

[TNforPaul45]

Just thought everyone would like this little nugget from Wikipedia:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/10th_millennium_BC



10th millennium BC:

"...The world population was likely below 5 million people,[citation needed] most of whom were hunter-gatherer communities scattered over all continents except Antarctica and Zealandia. The Würm glaciation ended, and the beginning interglacial, which endures to this day, allowed the re-settlement of northern regions. The most recent glacial ended circa 10,000 BC, and the world entered a period of global warming."

And:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Last_glacial_period



Last glacial period

"...The maximum extent of glaciation was approximately 18,000 years ago...

And lets not forget the Dansgaard-Oeschger event(s):

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dansgaard-Oeschger_event



"...Dansgaard-Oeschger events are rapid climate fluctuations that occurred 25 times during the last glacial period...In the Northern Hemisphere, they take the form of rapid warming episodes, typically in a matter of decades, each followed by gradual cooling over a longer period. For example, about 11,500 years ago, averaged annual temperatures on the Greenland icepack warmed by around 8°C over 40 years, in three steps of five years (see [2], Stewart, chapter 13) - 5°C change over 30-40 yrs more common."


And their causes?



"The processes behind the timing and amplitude of these events (as recorded in ice cores) are still unclear. The pattern in the Southern Hemisphere is different, with slow warming and much smaller temperature fluctuations. Indeed, the Vostok ice core was drilled before the Greenland cores, and the existence of Dansgaard-Oeschger events was not widely recognised until the Greenland (GRIP/GISP2) cores were done; after which there was some reexamination of the Vostok core to see if these events had somehow been "missed".[verification needed]

A closeup near 40 kyr BP, showing reproducibility between cores
The events appear to reflect changes in the North Atlantic ocean circulation, perhaps triggered by an influx of fresh water.[4]
The events may be caused by an amplification of solar forcings, or by a cause internal to the earth system - either a "binge-purge" cycle of ice sheets accumulating so much mass they become unstable, as postulated for Heinrich events, or an oscillation in deep ocean currents (Maslin et al.. 2001, p25)."



So...these rapid climate fluctuations are not caused by irresponsible people and SUV's that jump to life and kill little kids while polluting the atmosphere, and its not caused by productive society?

My oh My. They call us "Global Warming Deniers" and we then should call them "Global Freezing Deniers" or just plain crazy.

Sorry but I just had to do an enviro-rant.

Oh and don't forget the ever important "Temperature History of the Earth" as seen in this graph. Looks like we have been freezing our butts off for the last 40 Million Years. The Earth has always had warming cycles and "Snowball" cycles.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paleoclimatology

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/f5/All_palaeotemps.png/800px-All_palaeotemps.png

Do not ever let anyone tell you any differently. The recent warming of the last 2000 years as seen in that ever famous "Hockey Stick" graph is the most insignificant little blip of warming of the planet in its history. We have a HOT planet, an LIVING planet, where life flourishes, and is not controlled through population measures and taxation and restrictions on living itself.

[Heimdallr]

If the temperature is increasing at the moment, and it is not man-made, what is causing it?

[TNforPaul45]

If the temperature is increasing at the moment, and it is not man-made, what is causing it?

Look at the last graph Heimdallr, it shows you the answer and the point to the whole discussion, the earth itself is causing rises and falls in temperatures. We have a living, cyclic planet (in the sense that it is not a static, closed off system, not in the sense that it is actually alive itself). We have an extremely small, insignificant amount of influence over our planet's temperatures.

There have been times when there was NO ice on the Earth, and times when the ENTIRE earth was covered in ice.

Buckle up, we are simply along for the ride.

[Heimdallr]

Look at the last graph Heimdallr, it shows you the answer and the point to the whole discussion, the earth itself is causing rises and falls in temperatures. We have a living, cyclic planet (in the sense that it is not a static, closed off system, not in the sense that it is actually alive itself). We have an extremely small, insignificant amount of influence over our planet's temperatures.

There have been times when there was NO ice on the Earth, and times when the ENTIRE earth was covered in ice.

Buckle up, we are simply along for the ride.

If there are fluctuations in temperatures, there has to be a cause of these fluctuations, be it the Sun, volcanoes, etc. Why are global temperatures rising?

[Travlyr]

It is tough to know if the global temperature is rising or falling. Personally, I find it disingenuous for the scientific community to claim that they can accurately predict future global temperatures when they cannot accurately predict next month's temperature.

In 1815, Mount Tambora erupted causing cooling.
http://www.earlham.edu/~ethribe/web/tambora.htm

[Heimdallr]

It is tough to know if the global temperature is rising or falling. Personally, I find it disingenuous for the scientific community to claim that they can accurately predict future global temperatures when they cannot accurately predict next month's temperature.

In 1815, Mount Tambora erupted causing cooling.
http://www.earlham.edu/~ethribe/web/tambora.htm

True, true, but there's a big difference between climate and weather. Short-term weather is much more unpredictable, climate can actually be easier. Plus, the current trend has been a sharp increase in temperatures, and something has to cause it.

[Travlyr]

True, true, but there's a big difference between climate and weather. Short-term weather is much more unpredictable, climate can actually be easier. Plus, the current trend has been a sharp increase in temperatures, and something has to cause it.
While attempting to recognize future trends is a worthwhile task, predicting the future is impossible. Passing legislation, taxation, or making policy decisions based on false information is insane.

Can you provide links for this claim of warming? It is my understanding that, in many places, the trend is cooler.

[Heimdallr]

While attempting to recognize future trends is a worthwhile task, predicting the future is impossible. Passing legislation, taxation, or making policy decisions based on false information is insane.

Can you provide links for this claim of warming? It is my understanding that, in many places, the trend is cooler.

Nope, just looking at the chart. I haven't really studied the whole GW debate.

TN said that the "earth itself" causes these fluctuations (i.e. natural temperature shifts), and I just wanted some specific causes.

[TNforPaul45]

Heimdallr, see the second paragraph of my third "quote" section up there, and you will see a sampling of the theories that scientists have for the global temperature fluctuations over the ages.

What causes water to go through its various changes? Or populations of animals to bloom then die off? Or a person to age from young to old then die? Cycles. The climate patterns of the earth are based on cycles, patterns, repetitions. Magma boils to the surface of the earths crust, sits as land for some time, erodes, then is pulled under due to subduction, melted, and starts the process all over again.

Cycles.

This is what I meant by "the Earth itself" causes them, because the Earth is an open-energy system. Solar energy comes in, position of the earth in space moderates this, when that energy arrives also has an effect, greater in some periods and less in others. The earth swings back and forth from totally cold to totally hot, with "climatary momentum" rising, peaking, then falling off, allowing for a change of states.

Those who currently advocate Human caused recent global warming make a mistake of Species ego - they think we are currently powerful enough to influence the planet's climate cycles, to even it out. When in fact, this ability on the part of our species is something that we do not currently possess but is something that we HOPE to possess someday. It will be a sign of great advancement when we can Terraform planetary bodies (including ours).

[TNforPaul45]

Shameful self-bump //////

[Brooklyn Red Leg]

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/f5/All_palaeotemps.png/800px-All_palaeotemps.png

Yea, this chart is bullshit since the last 1k years uses the falsified Mann 'hockey stick' to show that current temps are higher than The Medieval Warm Period.

[awake]

Here is the biggest smelly fish in my mind on the data and predictive ability of the climate models;

If human action is one of the primary the driving variables in the model, and human action is unpredictable both short and long run, then the models and predictions are bunk in every shape and form. If the models can properly predict human action, then there should be a near uncontrollable stampede to use this human action prediction model to out guess the stock market for untold fortunes... Since that isn't happening you can safely assume that model evidence is complete BS.

Individual daily weather measurements are the base of the climate data, to say they are unrelated is BS.

If the natural disasters of today are evidence of global warming from industrial development, what of the disasters 200+ years ago?

Why only focus on oil lobby funded skeptics, what about government fed climate science; directly and indirectly? The money doesn't even compare...

Every goddamn apocalyptic prediction from these types has been wrong.

Why is the admission that the climate changes a non sequiter for automatic government interventions on a massive scale? Humanity has historically survived all adaption by individual arrangements through the market process...

Why are Democrats Climate alarmists and Republicans deniers?


Why? Because it is precisely the perfect vehicle for the ruling classes to secure their existence upon the backs of the producing classes the world over. It is a magic bandwagon where if you wink and mention the mantra 'man is warming the planet', you can get on board the looter ville express. Scientists are human, and corruptible by government funding... Science can be bought and produced for political purposes. Don't kid yourself that the mantle of science is un-reproachable.

So whats my theory? My theory is if you blurt out a theory you need to prove it; not a consensus, not most scientist agree, not correlations, and most of all not "scientists" acting as media propagandists for increasing research funding to themselves...

[TNforPaul45]

Yea, this chart is bullshit since the last 1k years uses the falsified Mann 'hockey stick' to show that current temps are higher than The Medieval Warm Period.

True, it does show that last little tick up, and I mentioned that above. But my focus was on the rest of the chart back behind that, showing that our planet's temperatures have fluctuated wildy, as best as our science can tell, in the past, far before man ever was an influence upon the environment, and thus my point that we are an insignificantly small, miserably weak influence upon global climate trends.

As far as I can tell in the debate, the rest of the chart's data is not in dispute in the scientific community, not as much as the last 1000 years worth of data is.

[Dr.3D]

Even Columbia University has a pretty good explanation as to the carbon cycle.
http://www.columbia.edu/~vjd1/carbon.htm

It shows pretty well how it is a self balancing system and any addition of CO2 to the system would cause it to correct itself pretty quickly.

[TNforPaul45]

Here is the biggest smelly fish in my mind on the data and predictive ability of the climate models;

If human action is one of the primary the driving variables in the model, and human action is unpredictable both short and long run, then the models and predictions are bunk in every shape and form. If the models can properly predict human action, then there should be a near uncontrollable stampede to use this human action prediction model to out guess the stock market for untold fortunes... Since that isn't happening you can safely assume that model evidence is complete BS.

Individual daily weather measurements are the base of the climate data, to say they are unrelated is BS.

If the natural disasters of today are evidence of global warming from industrial development, what of the disasters 200+ years ago?

Why only focus on oil lobby funded skeptics, what about government fed climate science; directly and indirectly? The money doesn't even compare...

Every goddamn apocalyptic prediction from these types has been wrong.

Why is the admission that the climate changes a non sequiter for automatic government interventions on a massive scale? Humanity has historically survived all adaption by individual arrangements through the market process...

Why are Democrats Climate alarmists and Republicans deniers?


Why? Because it is precisely the perfect vehicle for the ruling classes to secure their existence upon the backs of the producing classes the world over. It is a magic bandwagon where if you wink and mention the mantra 'man is warming the planet', you can get on board the looter ville express. Scientist are human, and corruptible by government funding... Science can be bought and produced for political purposes. Don't kid yourself that the mantle of science is un-reproachable.

+rep. Well said.

[Aratus]

cro-magnon is a population explosion.
neanderthal does not exponentially expand.
the ice age is a line of demarcation...