More ice loss from Greenland

[CrusaderFrank]

In other words people have been at least as smart as Old Rocks and Obama for over 200,000 years, but supposedly it's only 100 years ago we "invented electricity"?

 

[westwall]

Very interesting article, and good graphs. Note that Mann actually has the MWP warmer than most others.

The Greenland cores reflect the warmer period during the MWP, but the period was not nearly as warm as it is today. The southern Hemisphere records show a more rapid and higher warming about three hundred years prior to the MWP.

Determining the Climate Record - Influence of Dramatic Climate Shifts on European Civilizations: The Rise and Fall of the Vikings and the Little Ice Age

I hate to report this but your article quotes Mann and as we now know his data is crap. Thus the article itself is crap. For that matter ANY report that quotes Mann is useless, you might as well just toss them in the recycle bin. They are no longer relevant or believable.

That's the problem with academic fraud. Once a fraudster allways a fraudster. That's why U Penn is selling their souls to try and prevent the avalanche of academic investigations that will follow. Their problem is it has allready started. It just takes time to get the ball rolling. Now that the evidence of the Muir Russell "investigation" are known
in Phil Jone's case I will not be surprised when Parliament launches a serious investigation into the CRU's perfidy. The US has allready pulled it's funding which is going to cost P.J. around 200K a year.

The avalanche is moving.

 

[westwall]

How so? If there were enough melting to create farmland in Greenland, it would be more than offset by losses when Middle America returns to being an inland sea.

You need to read some history there konrad. The last time Greenland was arable there was no effect in Middle America. In fact there was no effect anywhere on the planet. You know basing your beliefs on movies like 2012 (what an amazing piece of crap that was!) is going rot your brain!

At no time in human history was Greenland ever to be considered arable. Even at the best of times, the Greenland colonies could not survive without imports from Europe. When the ice returned to the sea lanes, the colonies died.

Remember when I warned you about making statements that were unsuportable? Remember when I schooled you on the difference between a scientist and a person who reads textbooks for fun?

Well here's another object lesson for you old fraud. If you are going to make a statement you had better be able to back it up. And I don't mean via wiki..... Wiki get's more people into more trouble than any other website on the planet.

So to begin...

Viking Colonization in Canada Terry Long’s Portfolio

http://www.collectionscanada.gc.ca/obj/s4/f2/dsk2/ftp04/mq22551.pdf

Rudy Brueggemann's Greenlandic Vikings image gallery

Vikings in Greenland

WBUR Dispatches : Greenland | Land of Ice and Snow

Greenland Vikings

These are just a few of the scholarly reports that are available to any person who wishes to learn.

450 farms existing for 500 years is not too bad I mean what the hell, that's TWICE AS LONG AS THE U.S. HAS BEEN AROUND YOU IDIOT! The most likely cause of the colonies failure was a return of the cold and ice. Estimates for the total number of Vikings is between 5,000 and 8,000 and they were prosperous enough to launch their OWN expeditions to the North American continent. For comparison the Viking population in Iceland at the time has been estimated at between 30,000 and 50,000, and the population in Norway at around 100,000.

You are WRONG, WRONG, WRONG, pull your head out of your ass and actually learn something!!!!!!!!!!

 

[konradv]

You need to read some history there konrad. The last time Greenland was arable there was no effect in Middle America. In fact there was no effect anywhere on the planet. You know basing your beliefs on movies like 2012 (what an amazing piece of crap that was!) is going rot your brain!

You have absolutely no believable info on when Greenland was arable. There were no humans at the time! The short time the Vikings clung to the coast isn't my idea of an arable land.

Where the fuck do you got its name? From the vast fields of snow that the Vikings found when they got there?

LOL!!! You're joking, right? You don't really know the history, you're just throwing out random BS hoping something works. Eric the Red called it Greenland because nobody would have come, if he called it More-Ice-Than-Iceland.

 

[westwall]

You have absolutely no believable info on when Greenland was arable. There were no humans at the time! The short time the Vikings clung to the coast isn't my idea of an arable land.

Where the fuck do you got its name? From the vast fields of snow that the Vikings found when they got there?

LOL!!! You're joking, right? You don't really know the history, you're just throwing out random BS hoping something works. Eric the Red called it Greenland because nobody would have come, if he called it More-Ice-Than-Iceland.

Try reading some of the above links you fool. 5,000 to 8,000 colonists existing quite nicely for 500 years is pretty damn successful. They did better than most countries throughout history.

There you go embarrassing yourself again.

 

[westwall]

What, no snappy comebacks fromt the educationally challenged? Why am I not surprised.

 

[Old Rocks]

You need to read some history there konrad. The last time Greenland was arable there was no effect in Middle America. In fact there was no effect anywhere on the planet. You know basing your beliefs on movies like 2012 (what an amazing piece of crap that was!) is going rot your brain!

At no time in human history was Greenland ever to be considered arable. Even at the best of times, the Greenland colonies could not survive without imports from Europe. When the ice returned to the sea lanes, the colonies died.

Remember when I warned you about making statements that were unsuportable? Remember when I schooled you on the difference between a scientist and a person who reads textbooks for fun?

Well here's another object lesson for you old fraud. If you are going to make a statement you had better be able to back it up. And I don't mean via wiki..... Wiki get's more people into more trouble than any other website on the planet.

So to begin...

Viking Colonization in Canada Terry Long’s Portfolio

http://www.collectionscanada.gc.ca/obj/s4/f2/dsk2/ftp04/mq22551.pdf

Rudy Brueggemann's Greenlandic Vikings image gallery

Vikings in Greenland

WBUR Dispatches : Greenland | Land of Ice and Snow

Greenland Vikings

These are just a few of the scholarly reports that are available to any person who wishes to learn.

450 farms existing for 500 years is not too bad I mean what the hell, that's TWICE AS LONG AS THE U.S. HAS BEEN AROUND YOU IDIOT! The most likely cause of the colonies failure was a return of the cold and ice. Estimates for the total number of Vikings is between 5,000 and 8,000 and they were prosperous enough to launch their OWN expeditions to the North American continent. For comparison the Viking population in Iceland at the time has been estimated at between 30,000 and 50,000, and the population in Norway at around 100,000.

You are WRONG, WRONG, WRONG, pull your head out of your ass and actually learn something!!!!!!!!!!

Slight exageration there on your number of vikings in Greenland. And they lost touch with Europe because they could not build their own boats with what was available to them.


WBUR Dispatches : Greenland | Land of Ice and Snow

There were about 2,500 inhabitants in Greenland's two Viking outposts. For more than 400 years they lived primarily on meat and milk from sheep, goats, and cows. For wood and iron implements, they traded polar bear and caribou skins and walrus hides and tusks. They launched at least one expedition to North America, landing in modern-day Newfoundland and setting up a short-lived colony. However, for a variety of reasons, probably including the devastation of the Plague in Europe and a waning interest in Greenland's luxury products, the settlements lost touch with the old country.

 

[Old Rocks]

You need to read some history there konrad. The last time Greenland was arable there was no effect in Middle America. In fact there was no effect anywhere on the planet. You know basing your beliefs on movies like 2012 (what an amazing piece of crap that was!) is going rot your brain!

At no time in human history was Greenland ever to be considered arable. Even at the best of times, the Greenland colonies could not survive without imports from Europe. When the ice returned to the sea lanes, the colonies died.

Remember when I warned you about making statements that were unsuportable? Remember when I schooled you on the difference between a scientist and a person who reads textbooks for fun?

Well here's another object lesson for you old fraud. If you are going to make a statement you had better be able to back it up. And I don't mean via wiki..... Wiki get's more people into more trouble than any other website on the planet.

So to begin...

Viking Colonization in Canada Terry Long’s Portfolio

http://www.collectionscanada.gc.ca/obj/s4/f2/dsk2/ftp04/mq22551.pdf

Rudy Brueggemann's Greenlandic Vikings image gallery

Vikings in Greenland

WBUR Dispatches : Greenland | Land of Ice and Snow

Greenland Vikings

These are just a few of the scholarly reports that are available to any person who wishes to learn.

450 farms existing for 500 years is not too bad I mean what the hell, that's TWICE AS LONG AS THE U.S. HAS BEEN AROUND YOU IDIOT! The most likely cause of the colonies failure was a return of the cold and ice. Estimates for the total number of Vikings is between 5,000 and 8,000 and they were prosperous enough to launch their OWN expeditions to the North American continent. For comparison the Viking population in Iceland at the time has been estimated at between 30,000 and 50,000, and the population in Norway at around 100,000.

You are WRONG, WRONG, WRONG, pull your head out of your ass and actually learn something!!!!!!!!!!

Thank you for posting this. Just had time to skim the first few pages, looks like a good respectable paper.

http://www.collectionscanada.gc.ca/obj/s4/f2/dsk2/ftp04/mq22551.pdf

The type of questions which can be asked of the GUS archaeobotanical
material differs from those asked of many Norse age famis both ourside and
inside Greenland. This is due to the plant resourccs avaiiable to the Norse,
extensive site excavation, sarnpling techniques applied and excellent
preservation of the archacobotanical material. Norse Greenlandic plant use
differed from Norse plant use in other regions of the North Atlantic due to the
cold Greenlandic climate and the limited diversity of plants which grow there.

 

[westwall]

At no time in human history was Greenland ever to be considered arable. Even at the best of times, the Greenland colonies could not survive without imports from Europe. When the ice returned to the sea lanes, the colonies died.

Remember when I warned you about making statements that were unsuportable? Remember when I schooled you on the difference between a scientist and a person who reads textbooks for fun?

Well here's another object lesson for you old fraud. If you are going to make a statement you had better be able to back it up. And I don't mean via wiki..... Wiki get's more people into more trouble than any other website on the planet.

So to begin...

Viking Colonization in Canada Terry Long’s Portfolio

http://www.collectionscanada.gc.ca/obj/s4/f2/dsk2/ftp04/mq22551.pdf

Rudy Brueggemann's Greenlandic Vikings image gallery

Vikings in Greenland

WBUR Dispatches : Greenland | Land of Ice and Snow

Greenland Vikings

These are just a few of the scholarly reports that are available to any person who wishes to learn.

450 farms existing for 500 years is not too bad I mean what the hell, that's TWICE AS LONG AS THE U.S. HAS BEEN AROUND YOU IDIOT! The most likely cause of the colonies failure was a return of the cold and ice. Estimates for the total number of Vikings is between 5,000 and 8,000 and they were prosperous enough to launch their OWN expeditions to the North American continent. For comparison the Viking population in Iceland at the time has been estimated at between 30,000 and 50,000, and the population in Norway at around 100,000.

You are WRONG, WRONG, WRONG, pull your head out of your ass and actually learn something!!!!!!!!!!

Thank you for posting this. Just had time to skim the first few pages, looks like a good respectable paper.

http://www.collectionscanada.gc.ca/obj/s4/f2/dsk2/ftp04/mq22551.pdf

The type of questions which can be asked of the GUS archaeobotanical
material differs from those asked of many Norse age famis both ourside and
inside Greenland. This is due to the plant resourccs avaiiable to the Norse,
extensive site excavation, sarnpling techniques applied and excellent
preservation of the archacobotanical material. Norse Greenlandic plant use
differed from Norse plant use in other regions of the North Atlantic due to the
cold Greenlandic climate and the limited diversity of plants which grow there.

You're welcome. I noticed you ignored this part of the report

"Greenland was discovered and settled by Eirik Thorvaldsen (Eirik the
Red) and his followers in the later years of the tenth century A.D. Thc Norse
Greenlanders prospered as farmers and hunters and interacted with the
larger Scandinavian culture and the European economic and political
community from AD 1000 to 1500 (Figure 1). By ca. A.D. 1500 Greenland was
abandoned by the Norse."

And this

"Settlement of southwestern Greénland. which has corne to be known as
the Eastern Settlernent. continued until eventually it included a cathedral. a
Benedictine convent, an Augustinian monastery. twelve parish churches and
between 190 to 220 farms of varying sizes (Jones 1986, 1987: Krogh 1967:
Vebæk 1991b)."

And this

"The Western Settlement appears to have
also prospered eventually growing to about 90 farms and 4 churches, the most
important being Sandnes (Jones 1987).
Three more emigrations to Greenland occurred between A.D. 986 and
1000. as word spread about the good living conditions along the Coast of
Greenland. The Norse population of Greenland at its height is thought to have
ranged from a conservative estimate of about 2,350 people (Lynnerup 1996) to
about 6.000 (Jones 1987: Krogh 1967: McGovem 1985. 1991; N~rlund 1936). The
first two centuries of expansion saw the smaller and more remote valleys
behind the fjord heads settied, as well as a Middle Settlement which includes
the modern municipalities of Ivigtut and part of Frederikshab (Albrethsen
and Keller 1986: Gad 1970. Settlement probably followed both ri
chronologicril and socially dictated pattern (Christensen-Bojsen 1991a) where
the first settler with the highest status obtained the best lands and later
arrivals or those of lower status were relegated to smaller, less ideal
allotments."

Population estimates have grown ever larger as more archaological research is done. You will notice that almost all of these cites are from the early 1990's.

You also missed this little snippet which runs contrary to yours and other Warmers assertions that Greenland was helpless without help from Norway and Iceland

"Greenland. like its motherland. Iceland. came under the rule of
Norway in AD. 1261 (Magnusson and Palsson 1965), but this political
agreement by no means led to security of trade and contact with Europe for
Norse Greenland. Included in the agreement which subordinated Greenland
to the Norwegian crown were conditions that the Crown was to send two ships
a year to Greenland. There is no record of any ships much less two a year
reaching or departing for Greenland from Norway after A.D. 1367 (Gad 1970).
One of the reasons for the reduction of trade may have been the Black Death
which started in Norway in A.D. 1349 (Kelicr 1991)."

I find it rather difficult to believe that 2 longships a year would have supported even the lowest possible estimate of population.

And just to reinforce the fact that they were quite able to support themselves we have this

"In addition to strict rules governing trade. the opening of continental
trade routes, such as the one to Africa for elephant ivory, made the once
valuable Greenlandic walrus ivory no longer worth the treacherous voyage to
Greerilarid (Jones 1987). Not onIy was the ivory trade taken away from
Greenland but the previously highly valued homespun (cloch) that came off
the Norse wonien's looms was replaced by cloth from England and the
Netherlrinds. Also during this time the Russians were dominating the fur
trade (Norlund 1936) reducing the demand for Greenlandic fur and hides."

So you see it was about trade and not support that the longships travelled to Greenland. And eventually easier sources for their products were found.

As far as how they farmed we have this

"Norse farming was based on cattle, sheep, goats. horses, dogs and pigs
(Vebæk 199Ia). Cattie were the most imponant animal in tenns of status but
sheep and goats were relied on for daily subsistence. More attention had to be
paid to cows not only because of their vaiue as a status symbol but also because
cows are more reliant on humans for food than the other anirnals. Cows
needcd to be wintered in a byre. thus structures and fodder are required. A
cow eats roughly 3.200 to 3.300 kg of hay annuaily (Christensen-Bojsen 1991a:
Hansen 1991). In addition. cattle need roughly 7 to 8 litres of water a day
(Rasmussen 1989. 1993). The resources needrd to supply the estimated 1.000 to
2000 cattle, suggested for the Vatnaverfi district (Jacobsen 1987). would
amount to betwecn 4.200.000 kg to 8.800.000 ke of fodder and 2,555,000 to
5,840,000 litres of water annualy or 1 1.507 to 24.1 IO kg of fodder and 7,000 to
16.000 litres of water daily. In general cattle required more than sheep.
Although not held in high esteem. sheep and gorits. (here collectively
referred ro as caprines unless information is specificaily directcd at onIy one
of the species) were important for the economy of the farnistead. This is
rittested by the quantity of weaving implement and caprine dung that have
been found in Norse sites by excavators (Gad 1970). The caprines from the
Western Settlement were not culled at a young age but were left to grow to
maturity. the assumption bcing that the anirnals were more imponant for
their secondary products, milk and wool in the case of sheep. than for their
meat (McGovern 1984.
valuable domestic and
as in Iceland. sheep
1992). Homespun, woven from spun wool, was a
export item. If sheep dropping werè collected for fuel,
provided another valuable secondary product"

So once again they were self sufficient.

And while imported grains could indeed not be grown to adulthood, there were local grains that could according to the Speculum Regale. The only real problem seems to have been a lack of beer. The Speculum Regale also notes "that the pastures is
good, and that there are large and fine farms in Greenland." and "The earth yields good and fragrant grass" (Jones 1986:84).

So once again a classic example of olfraud cherry picking of reports to further a particular theory instead of presenting all of the facts. And the fact remains that unlike your assertions that

"At no time in human history was Greenland ever to be considered arable. Even at the best of times, the Greenland colonies could not survive without imports from Europe. When the ice returned to the sea lanes, the colonies died."

In fact Greenland was able to prosper quite well for 500 years and carried on a PROFITABLE trade with the homeland (to make money, not for survival) for at least 300 of those years. So your assertions are demonstrably and proveably FALSE.

When the MWP ended was the end of the Norse colonies. Then and only then was the land no longer able to support the thousands of colonists as the cold returned.

 

[westwall]

At no time in human history was Greenland ever to be considered arable. Even at the best of times, the Greenland colonies could not survive without imports from Europe. When the ice returned to the sea lanes, the colonies died.

Remember when I warned you about making statements that were unsuportable? Remember when I schooled you on the difference between a scientist and a person who reads textbooks for fun?

Well here's another object lesson for you old fraud. If you are going to make a statement you had better be able to back it up. And I don't mean via wiki..... Wiki get's more people into more trouble than any other website on the planet.

So to begin...

Viking Colonization in Canada Terry Long’s Portfolio

http://www.collectionscanada.gc.ca/obj/s4/f2/dsk2/ftp04/mq22551.pdf

Rudy Brueggemann's Greenlandic Vikings image gallery

Vikings in Greenland

WBUR Dispatches : Greenland | Land of Ice and Snow

Greenland Vikings

These are just a few of the scholarly reports that are available to any person who wishes to learn.

450 farms existing for 500 years is not too bad I mean what the hell, that's TWICE AS LONG AS THE U.S. HAS BEEN AROUND YOU IDIOT! The most likely cause of the colonies failure was a return of the cold and ice. Estimates for the total number of Vikings is between 5,000 and 8,000 and they were prosperous enough to launch their OWN expeditions to the North American continent. For comparison the Viking population in Iceland at the time has been estimated at between 30,000 and 50,000, and the population in Norway at around 100,000.

You are WRONG, WRONG, WRONG, pull your head out of your ass and actually learn something!!!!!!!!!!

Slight exageration there on your number of vikings in Greenland. And they lost touch with Europe because they could not build their own boats with what was available to them.


WBUR Dispatches : Greenland | Land of Ice and Snow

There were about 2,500 inhabitants in Greenland's two Viking outposts. For more than 400 years they lived primarily on meat and milk from sheep, goats, and cows. For wood and iron implements, they traded polar bear and caribou skins and walrus hides and tusks. They launched at least one expedition to North America, landing in modern-day Newfoundland and setting up a short-lived colony. However, for a variety of reasons, probably including the devastation of the Plague in Europe and a waning interest in Greenland's luxury products, the settlements lost touch with the old country.

Yet more cherrypicking I see, you forgot to add this paragraph.

The last known record of the Greenland Vikings was in 1408, when a traveler reported a wedding there. Several centuries later, in 1721, Hans Egede, a Norwegian-born missionary sought out the colonies. To his surprise, they were gone, a mystery that remains unsolved to this day. Researchers and history buffs have offered many possible explanations for the disappearance of the Greenland Vikings, including raids by Inuit or European pirates, assimilation into Inuit communities and starvation. Many modern archeologists believe that climate change played a role. Recent studies of ice cores from Greenland show that the 15th century, when the colonies probably died out, was a period of climate deterioration across the Atlantic. But these researchers say their explanation must be more nuanced than simply that it got cold and they died. For starters, that wouldn't explain why the Inuit survived these lean years.

You'll notice I posted the whole paragraph and even the GW supporting NPR has to admit (though they don't want too so they couch it with a question) that the most logical explanation for the disappearance of the colonies was a return of a cold climate. Of course
the reason the Inuit survived is because they sailed away to more hospitiable climes but the NPR folks can't seem to figure out the logical side of things.

 

[concept]

Remember when I warned you about making statements that were unsuportable? Remember when I schooled you on the difference between a scientist and a person who reads textbooks for fun?

Well here's another object lesson for you old fraud. If you are going to make a statement you had better be able to back it up. And I don't mean via wiki..... Wiki get's more people into more trouble than any other website on the planet.

So to begin...

Viking Colonization in Canada Terry Long’s Portfolio

http://www.collectionscanada.gc.ca/obj/s4/f2/dsk2/ftp04/mq22551.pdf

Rudy Brueggemann's Greenlandic Vikings image gallery

Vikings in Greenland

WBUR Dispatches : Greenland | Land of Ice and Snow

Greenland Vikings

These are just a few of the scholarly reports that are available to any person who wishes to learn.

450 farms existing for 500 years is not too bad I mean what the hell, that's TWICE AS LONG AS THE U.S. HAS BEEN AROUND YOU IDIOT! The most likely cause of the colonies failure was a return of the cold and ice. Estimates for the total number of Vikings is between 5,000 and 8,000 and they were prosperous enough to launch their OWN expeditions to the North American continent. For comparison the Viking population in Iceland at the time has been estimated at between 30,000 and 50,000, and the population in Norway at around 100,000.

You are WRONG, WRONG, WRONG, pull your head out of your ass and actually learn something!!!!!!!!!!

Slight exageration there on your number of vikings in Greenland. And they lost touch with Europe because they could not build their own boats with what was available to them.


WBUR Dispatches : Greenland | Land of Ice and Snow

There were about 2,500 inhabitants in Greenland's two Viking outposts. For more than 400 years they lived primarily on meat and milk from sheep, goats, and cows. For wood and iron implements, they traded polar bear and caribou skins and walrus hides and tusks. They launched at least one expedition to North America, landing in modern-day Newfoundland and setting up a short-lived colony. However, for a variety of reasons, probably including the devastation of the Plague in Europe and a waning interest in Greenland's luxury products, the settlements lost touch with the old country.

Yet more cherrypicking I see, you forgot to add this paragraph.

The last known record of the Greenland Vikings was in 1408, when a traveler reported a wedding there. Several centuries later, in 1721, Hans Egede, a Norwegian-born missionary sought out the colonies. To his surprise, they were gone, a mystery that remains unsolved to this day. Researchers and history buffs have offered many possible explanations for the disappearance of the Greenland Vikings, including raids by Inuit or European pirates, assimilation into Inuit communities and starvation. Many modern archeologists believe that climate change played a role. Recent studies of ice cores from Greenland show that the 15th century, when the colonies probably died out, was a period of climate deterioration across the Atlantic. But these researchers say their explanation must be more nuanced than simply that it got cold and they died. For starters, that wouldn't explain why the Inuit survived these lean years.

You'll notice I posted the whole paragraph and even the GW supporting NPR has to admit (though they don't want too so they couch it with a question) that the most logical explanation for the disappearance of the colonies was a return of a cold climate. Of course
the reason the Inuit survived is because they sailed away to more hospitiable climes but the NPR folks can't seem to figure out the logical side of things.

Sucks for the the warmerers when someone actually reads their crap and debunks it immediately.

 

[Old Rocks]

This is hardly a successful colony. This is a marginal living at best, at worst, as happened as soon as there was a little cooling, the colony died.

http://www.collectionscanada.gc.ca/obj/s4/f2/dsk2/ftp04/mq22551.pdf

Previous studies indicate that it was impossible for ccreal crops to be
grown to maturity in Greenland (Hansen 1991). This explains why the C
Spec.i{lunr Regale States that the people of Greenland did not know of bread
(Bruun 1913: Hansen 199 1: Krogh 1967). Domestic aninids nlay have been the
beneficiaries of attempts to grow grain for human consurnption. The often
cited single grain of corn pollen [Corn being an inclusive Europena terrn for
Ho rdc u ni ibarley). A \*en a( oats). Triricitni (wheat) and Srcalc (rye) J froni
Thjodhid's church supports the Spccrtlitnl Rcgalc's reference to attempts to
grow grain (Krogh 1967). The inability to grow cereal crops successfully,
such as barIey which needs 1,050 annual effective temperature sum (ETS) of
degree days at 5°C. left the Norse without bread and beer. For a plant species
to coniplete a Iife cycle its ETS rnust exceed a critical level. The ETS is
calculated by subtracting "the plant's threshold temperature from the mean
daily temperature and summing up over the year" (Hansen 1991:U).

 

[Old Rocks]

Remember when I warned you about making statements that were unsuportable? Remember when I schooled you on the difference between a scientist and a person who reads textbooks for fun?

Well here's another object lesson for you old fraud. If you are going to make a statement you had better be able to back it up. And I don't mean via wiki..... Wiki get's more people into more trouble than any other website on the planet.

So to begin...

Viking Colonization in Canada Terry Long’s Portfolio

http://www.collectionscanada.gc.ca/obj/s4/f2/dsk2/ftp04/mq22551.pdf

Rudy Brueggemann's Greenlandic Vikings image gallery

Vikings in Greenland

WBUR Dispatches : Greenland | Land of Ice and Snow

Greenland Vikings

These are just a few of the scholarly reports that are available to any person who wishes to learn.

450 farms existing for 500 years is not too bad I mean what the hell, that's TWICE AS LONG AS THE U.S. HAS BEEN AROUND YOU IDIOT! The most likely cause of the colonies failure was a return of the cold and ice. Estimates for the total number of Vikings is between 5,000 and 8,000 and they were prosperous enough to launch their OWN expeditions to the North American continent. For comparison the Viking population in Iceland at the time has been estimated at between 30,000 and 50,000, and the population in Norway at around 100,000.

You are WRONG, WRONG, WRONG, pull your head out of your ass and actually learn something!!!!!!!!!!

Slight exageration there on your number of vikings in Greenland. And they lost touch with Europe because they could not build their own boats with what was available to them.


WBUR Dispatches : Greenland | Land of Ice and Snow

There were about 2,500 inhabitants in Greenland's two Viking outposts. For more than 400 years they lived primarily on meat and milk from sheep, goats, and cows. For wood and iron implements, they traded polar bear and caribou skins and walrus hides and tusks. They launched at least one expedition to North America, landing in modern-day Newfoundland and setting up a short-lived colony. However, for a variety of reasons, probably including the devastation of the Plague in Europe and a waning interest in Greenland's luxury products, the settlements lost touch with the old country.

Yet more cherrypicking I see, you forgot to add this paragraph.

The last known record of the Greenland Vikings was in 1408, when a traveler reported a wedding there. Several centuries later, in 1721, Hans Egede, a Norwegian-born missionary sought out the colonies. To his surprise, they were gone, a mystery that remains unsolved to this day. Researchers and history buffs have offered many possible explanations for the disappearance of the Greenland Vikings, including raids by Inuit or European pirates, assimilation into Inuit communities and starvation. Many modern archeologists believe that climate change played a role. Recent studies of ice cores from Greenland show that the 15th century, when the colonies probably died out, was a period of climate deterioration across the Atlantic. But these researchers say their explanation must be more nuanced than simply that it got cold and they died. For starters, that wouldn't explain why the Inuit survived these lean years.

You'll notice I posted the whole paragraph and even the GW supporting NPR has to admit (though they don't want too so they couch it with a question) that the most logical explanation for the disappearance of the colonies was a return of a cold climate. Of course
the reason the Inuit survived is because they sailed away to more hospitiable climes but the NPR folks can't seem to figure out the logical side of things.

They most certainly did not sail away to warmer climes. They stayed and prospered because they had the technology to exploit the land and sea. The Norse refused to learn from them, and died for their ignorance. Diamond Jared's "Collapse" has a very good account of the fate of the Viking colonies in Greenland.

 

[westwall]

This is hardly a successful colony. This is a marginal living at best, at worst, as happened as soon as there was a little cooling, the colony died.

http://www.collectionscanada.gc.ca/obj/s4/f2/dsk2/ftp04/mq22551.pdf

Previous studies indicate that it was impossible for ccreal crops to be
grown to maturity in Greenland (Hansen 1991). This explains why the C
Spec.i{lunr Regale States that the people of Greenland did not know of bread
(Bruun 1913: Hansen 199 1: Krogh 1967). Domestic aninids nlay have been the
beneficiaries of attempts to grow grain for human consurnption. The often
cited single grain of corn pollen [Corn being an inclusive Europena terrn for
Ho rdc u ni ibarley). A \*en a( oats). Triricitni (wheat) and Srcalc (rye) J froni
Thjodhid's church supports the Spccrtlitnl Rcgalc's reference to attempts to
grow grain (Krogh 1967). The inability to grow cereal crops successfully,
such as barIey which needs 1,050 annual effective temperature sum (ETS) of
degree days at 5°C. left the Norse without bread and beer. For a plant species
to coniplete a Iife cycle its ETS rnust exceed a critical level. The ETS is
calculated by subtracting "the plant's threshold temperature from the mean
daily temperature and summing up over the year" (Hansen 1991:U).

The lack of imported grains denied them bread and beer. Maybe. The local grains may have been able to replace them. We still don't know. Regardless the Inuit have been able to do quite well with neither for thousands of years so your contention that because the Vikings couldn't have beer and bread their colonies were marginal is ridiculous.

And as we all know high carb diets are bad for you so the Vikings in Greenland were probably healthier than their counterparts in Iceland and Norway. They certainly didn't get into drunken brawls as often!

So, marginal colony? Absolutely not. ALL evidence points to the exact opposite. Yet again you resort to the cherry picking of data to support your erroneous ideas.

 

[westwall]

Slight exageration there on your number of vikings in Greenland. And they lost touch with Europe because they could not build their own boats with what was available to them.


WBUR Dispatches : Greenland | Land of Ice and Snow

There were about 2,500 inhabitants in Greenland's two Viking outposts. For more than 400 years they lived primarily on meat and milk from sheep, goats, and cows. For wood and iron implements, they traded polar bear and caribou skins and walrus hides and tusks. They launched at least one expedition to North America, landing in modern-day Newfoundland and setting up a short-lived colony. However, for a variety of reasons, probably including the devastation of the Plague in Europe and a waning interest in Greenland's luxury products, the settlements lost touch with the old country.

Yet more cherrypicking I see, you forgot to add this paragraph.

The last known record of the Greenland Vikings was in 1408, when a traveler reported a wedding there. Several centuries later, in 1721, Hans Egede, a Norwegian-born missionary sought out the colonies. To his surprise, they were gone, a mystery that remains unsolved to this day. Researchers and history buffs have offered many possible explanations for the disappearance of the Greenland Vikings, including raids by Inuit or European pirates, assimilation into Inuit communities and starvation. Many modern archeologists believe that climate change played a role. Recent studies of ice cores from Greenland show that the 15th century, when the colonies probably died out, was a period of climate deterioration across the Atlantic. But these researchers say their explanation must be more nuanced than simply that it got cold and they died. For starters, that wouldn't explain why the Inuit survived these lean years.

You'll notice I posted the whole paragraph and even the GW supporting NPR has to admit (though they don't want too so they couch it with a question) that the most logical explanation for the disappearance of the colonies was a return of a cold climate. Of course
the reason the Inuit survived is because they sailed away to more hospitiable climes but the NPR folks can't seem to figure out the logical side of things.

They most certainly did not sail away to warmer climes. They stayed and prospered because they had the technology to exploit the land and sea. The Norse refused to learn from them, and died for their ignorance. Diamond Jared's "Collapse" has a very good account of the fate of the Viking colonies in Greenland.

Once again you are wrong.

Greenland - Facts and history - Official Greenland Travel Guide

Midway down you will find this fact

"Greenland has been populated by small groups of people, migrating several times across the sea ice from northern Canada. The first time was about 2500 BC."

Translation=when the climate gets cold they sail away.

You really do need to read something other than warmist centric sites that spew false information and make up history to suit their ridiculous ideas.

 

[konradv]

This is hardly a successful colony. This is a marginal living at best, at worst, as happened as soon as there was a little cooling, the colony died.

http://www.collectionscanada.gc.ca/obj/s4/f2/dsk2/ftp04/mq22551.pdf

Previous studies indicate that it was impossible for ccreal crops to be
grown to maturity in Greenland (Hansen 1991). This explains why the C
Spec.i{lunr Regale States that the people of Greenland did not know of bread
(Bruun 1913: Hansen 199 1: Krogh 1967). Domestic aninids nlay have been the
beneficiaries of attempts to grow grain for human consurnption. The often
cited single grain of corn pollen [Corn being an inclusive Europena terrn for
Ho rdc u ni ibarley). A \*en a( oats). Triricitni (wheat) and Srcalc (rye) J froni
Thjodhid's church supports the Spccrtlitnl Rcgalc's reference to attempts to
grow grain (Krogh 1967). The inability to grow cereal crops successfully,
such as barIey which needs 1,050 annual effective temperature sum (ETS) of
degree days at 5°C. left the Norse without bread and beer. For a plant species
to coniplete a Iife cycle its ETS rnust exceed a critical level. The ETS is
calculated by subtracting "the plant's threshold temperature from the mean
daily temperature and summing up over the year" (Hansen 1991:U).

The lack of imported grains denied them bread and beer. Maybe. The local grains may have been able to replace them. We still don't know. Regardless the Inuit have been able to do quite well with neither for thousands of years so your contention that because the Vikings couldn't have beer and bread their colonies were marginal is ridiculous. And as we all know high carb diets are bad for you so the Vikings in Greenland were probably healthier than their counterparts in Iceland and Norway. They certainly didn't get into drunken brawls as often!

So, marginal colony? Absolutely not. ALL evidence points to the exact opposite. Yet again you resort to the cherry picking of data to support your erroneous ideas.

That would only make sense, if they adopted the Inuit lifestyle, which they didn't. There apparently was some racism involved, because according to a History Channel show on the Vikings, the translation of their name for the native population was, Ugly Little People. There's no evidence that they had much contact, traded or learned from the Inuit. If they had, the colony might have survived.

 

[westwall]

This is hardly a successful colony. This is a marginal living at best, at worst, as happened as soon as there was a little cooling, the colony died.

http://www.collectionscanada.gc.ca/obj/s4/f2/dsk2/ftp04/mq22551.pdf

Previous studies indicate that it was impossible for ccreal crops to be
grown to maturity in Greenland (Hansen 1991). This explains why the C
Spec.i{lunr Regale States that the people of Greenland did not know of bread
(Bruun 1913: Hansen 199 1: Krogh 1967). Domestic aninids nlay have been the
beneficiaries of attempts to grow grain for human consurnption. The often
cited single grain of corn pollen [Corn being an inclusive Europena terrn for
Ho rdc u ni ibarley). A \*en a( oats). Triricitni (wheat) and Srcalc (rye) J froni
Thjodhid's church supports the Spccrtlitnl Rcgalc's reference to attempts to
grow grain (Krogh 1967). The inability to grow cereal crops successfully,
such as barIey which needs 1,050 annual effective temperature sum (ETS) of
degree days at 5°C. left the Norse without bread and beer. For a plant species
to coniplete a Iife cycle its ETS rnust exceed a critical level. The ETS is
calculated by subtracting "the plant's threshold temperature from the mean
daily temperature and summing up over the year" (Hansen 1991:U).

The lack of imported grains denied them bread and beer. Maybe. The local grains may have been able to replace them. We still don't know. Regardless the Inuit have been able to do quite well with neither for thousands of years so your contention that because the Vikings couldn't have beer and bread their colonies were marginal is ridiculous. And as we all know high carb diets are bad for you so the Vikings in Greenland were probably healthier than their counterparts in Iceland and Norway. They certainly didn't get into drunken brawls as often!

So, marginal colony? Absolutely not. ALL evidence points to the exact opposite. Yet again you resort to the cherry picking of data to support your erroneous ideas.

That would only make sense, if they adopted the Inuit lifestyle, which they didn't. There apparently was some racism involved, because according to a History Channel show on the Vikings, the translation of their name for the native population was, Ugly Little People. There's no evidence that they had much contact, traded or learned from the Inuit. If they had, the colony might have survived.

You neglect to mention one theory for the dissappearance is they may have just intermingled with the Inuit. However, when the cold returned no society could exist there, that's why the Inuit don't stay there when it gets cold...or did you choose to ignore that little snippet of information too?

Regardless both yours and old frauds contention that the Greenland colony was marginal is outright untrue. The GW alarmists must rewrite history to furhter their lie that the MWP was not as warm as the current time when we KNOW, with over 100 peer reviewed papers confirming it, that the MWP was both warmer and global in extent.

GW alarmists are simply incapable of being honest as evidenced by their continuing attempts to destroy the historical record. Yet another reason to despise their complete lack of scientific ethics.

 

[konradv]

If you read my post carefully, westy, you'll see I DO discount that theory. How can you say we're rewriting history, when you've said that Greenland had lots of arable land at the time? Even in the best of times only a small strip on the coast was arable. I don't consider that lots, when you look at the size of the island and the fact that even in Viking times the central portion was an ice sheet, as it is today.

 

[Douger]

The fun is going to be when the melting ice exposes long lost cities

Built by whom? The men from your hollow moon?

No. The NoNewNookie.

 

[westwall]

If you read my post carefully, westy, you'll see I DO discount that theory. How can you say we're rewriting history, when you've said that Greenland had lots of arable land at the time? Even in the best of times only a small strip on the coast was arable. I don't consider that lots, when you look at the size of the island and the fact that even in Viking times the central portion was an ice sheet, as it is today.

Ah yes isn't that interesting. You finally figured out one of the salient points there konrad, good for you. Yes the ice sheet still existed even though it was 5 degrees warmer than the temps today. And surprise surprise it still existed after 500 YEARS OF WARMTH Heavens to murgatroid! Yes the coast of southern Greenland was habitable......uhhhh.......... kind of like how the coasts of Norway and Iceland are habitable....today. Try looking at a map of the world someday.

And when the whole Viking population numbered less than 130,000 then a population of 5,000 is significant, though as I stated earlier the more research done the larger the upper estimate for the population becomes, now the lower estimate is pegged at the 5K mark and could now be as high as 13K. So if the number is closer to the upper estimate there was 10% of the entire Viking population living in Greenland. That is not an insignificant
population group at all.

Then toss in the fact thet they did quite well on their own for 500 years and while you may think that it is not a big deal, I can quite easily say to you to the 25 GENERATIONS of families who did indeed live there would disagree with you. And after all it's not what you think anyway, it's what the world thinks and the world will agree with me, and them.