The LIA....is cooler better?

[SSDD]

Here is a pretty good book that I would recommend to both skeptics and believers alike. It is written by Brian Fagan, an admitted true believer in AGW, even though practically every word of his book serves to disprove his belief.

He begins his book in the Medieval warm period when vikings were farming in greenland...farms in areas that, even with modern technology could not be farmed today. He touches on actual recorded european historical events such as the french trying to put trade agreements that would ban fine english wines from the country due to the hardship the glut of fine english wines were placing on french wine producers.

He discusses farming in europe noting that crops were being grown at altitudes which, again, even with modern methods are not possible today.

There are a host of historical documents that chronicle the decent into the little ice age and he covers many of them very well, discussing the advance of ice fields and glaciers that we are so terrified will melt today...discussing the damage those advances caused, and the death and hardship that came with the cold that prompted those advances.

Read the book and ask yourself, if you don't already know, whether warm is better than cold.

Fagan freely admits that science has no idea what caused the Medieval warm period and freely admits that it was warmer than the present and admits as well that science has no firm idea of what brought on the LIA but manages to blame modern warming entirely on CO2. He seems not to grasp the contradiction between reality and his belief. Warming to a greater extent than the present happened while CO2 was low but yet, the lesser modern warming must be caused by CO2.

And don't forget that the people who enjoyed the benefits of the Medieval warm period were still cooler than those who lived during the even warmer and more prosperous (for some) Roman warm period when many of the ice fields which eventually became glaciers didn't even exist.

Tell me warmer wackos...what do you believe the optimum temperature for life on planet earth is?

 

[Crick]

Here is a pretty good book that I would recommend to both skeptics and believers alike. It is written by Brian Fagan, an admitted true believer in AGW, even though practically every word of his book serves to disprove his belief.

Which tells us that either the book or your review is worthless.

 

[Crick]

From Amazon

Editorial Reviews
Amazon.com Review
"Climate change is the ignored player on the historical stage," writes archeologist Brian Fagan. But it shouldn't be, not if we know what's good for us. We can't judge what future climate change will mean unless we know something about its effects in the past: "those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it." And Fagan's story of the last thousand years, centered on the "Little Ice Age," reminds us of what we could end up repeating: flood, fire, and famine--acts of God exacerbated by acts of man.
For all that he takes a broad--a very broad--view of European history, Fagan's writing is laced with human faces, fascinating anecdotes, and a gift for the telling detail that makes history live, very much in the style of Barbara Tuchman's A Distant Mirror. When Fagan talks about the voyages of Basque fishermen to American shores (probably landing before Columbus sailed), he puts in the taste of dried cod and the terrifying suddenness of fogs on the Grand Banks. The Great Fire of London, what it was like when the Dutch dikes broke, the Irish Potato Famine, the year without a summer, ice fairs on the Thames, and volcanoes in the South Pacific--Fagan makes history a ripping yarn in which we are all actors, on a stage that has always been changing. --Mary Ellen Curtin --This text refers to an out of print or unavailable edition of this title.

From Publishers Weekly
The role of climatic change in human history remains open to question, due in large part to scant data. Fagan, professor of archeology at UC Santa Barbara, contributes substantively to the increasingly urgent debate. Contending with the dearth of accurate weather records from a few parts of the world, for little over a century Fagan (Floods, Famines, and Emperors: El Ni?o and the Fate of Civilizations) draws discerning connections between an amazing array of disparate sources: ice cores, tree rings, archeological digs, tithing records that show dates of wine harvests, cloud types depicted in portraits and landscapes over time. He details human adaptation to meteorologic events for example, the way the Dutch, in the face of rising sea levels, engineered sea walls and thus increased their farmland by a third between the late 16th and early 19th centuries. Explanations of phenomena like the North Atlantic Oscillation (which "governs... the rain that falls on Europe") lucidly advance Fagan's conviction that, though science cannot decide if the current 150-year warming trend (with one slight interruption) is part of a normal cycle, we should err on the side of caution. His study of the potential for widespread famine further bolsters his nonpartisan argument for a serious consideration of rapid climatic shifts. But Fagan doesn't proffer a sociopolitical polemic. He notes that we lack the political will to effect change, but refrains from speculating on future environmental policy. Illus. not seen by PW. (Mar. 1) Forecast: This topical book will appeal to fans of John McPhee, as well as to science and history scholars. With publicity targeted at the coasts (author tour in L.A., San Francisco and N.Y.; a talk at N.Y.'s Museum of Natural History), a forthcoming review in Discovery magazine and Fagan's enthusiastic readership, it should sell well.
Copyright 2001 Reed Business Information, Inc. --This text refers to an out of print or unavailable edition of this title.

*******************************************************************************

So, it appears it was your comments that were lacking value.

 

[skookerasbil]

Here is a pretty good book that I would recommend to both skeptics and believers alike. It is written by Brian Fagan, an admitted true believer in AGW, even though practically every word of his book serves to disprove his belief.

Which tells us that either the book or your review is worthless.

But only to the AGW alarmists who indict anything that doesn't conform with the established narrative.


s0n......why do you think nobody cares about global warming anymore ( every single poll shows it )?


The snake oil shit doesn't sell anymore.



You guys need a Plan B

 

[mamooth]

Anyone babbing about lush Viking farms in Greenland instantly gets laughed out of the room for such brazen historical revisionism. Same for anyone claiming the MWP was global.

Causes of the LIA:

1. High volcanic activity.

2. Low solar output.

3. Low CO2 levels. The population crash in the new world resulted in much farmland going back to forest, which sucked up CO2, so the ice core data shows CO2 dropping by around 9 ppm.

Hence, the LIA would confirm AGW theory.

 

[Kosh]

Well you have to remember that the loyal followers of the AGW religion believe there was no such thing as the little ICE age.

This is what they believe in without question or hesitation:

In 1998 a team of scientists applied a statistical analysis to a selected data set of earth's past temperatures and reported that instead of having a Little Ice Age and Medieval Climate Optimum over the past 1000 years, the earth's temperature was relatively flat, until the latter half of the twentieth century when it skyrocketed, allegedly providing proof positive that mankind was causing the warming due to CO2 emissions. The curve was called the Hockey Stick Curve because of the similarity of the graph to a hockey stick. Without verifying these results, the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) made this graph the centerpiece of its 2001 Summary for Policy Makers. When other scientists tried to verify the results, Dr. Michael Mann (the lead author of the study) refused to provide the data set to the scientists wanting to verify his results.

 

[SSDD]

Anyone babbing about lush Viking farms in Greenland instantly gets laughed out of the room for such brazen historical revisionism. Same for anyone claiming the MWP was global.

Causes of the LIA:

1. High volcanic activity.

2. Low solar output.

3. Low CO2 levels. The population crash in the new world resulted in much farmland going back to forest, which sucked up CO2, so the ice core data shows CO2 dropping by around 9 ppm.

Hence, the LIA would confirm AGW theory.

Colder water uptakes more CO2...that's where your CO2 went. idiot.

As to the solar activity...if low activity brought on the LIA, don't you think the fact that solar activity was the highest it has been for a very long time at the end of the 20th century means anything? Low solar activity brings on the LIA but high solar activity doesn't cause warming? Only in the mind of a wacko warmist.

By the way, what do you believe to be the ideal temperature for life on earth? And why don't you wackos ever seem to have an opinion on that question...you seem to have opinions on everything else?

 

[mamooth]

Consider we don't have high solar activity now but see record warming, it would appear you've consumed a big heapin' helpin' of lead paint chips today.

And given I've specificially answered your question before, you'll need to apologize for lying about me before I educate you again. You need to learn that there's a penalty for being a pathologically dishonest asswipe, that penalty being that the decent people won't talk to you any more.

 

[Kosh]

Consider we don't have high solar activity now but see record warming, it would appear you've consumed a big heapin' helpin' of lead paint chips today.

And given I've specificially answered your question before, you'll need to apologize for lying about me before I educate you again. You need to learn that there's a penalty for being a pathologically dishonest asswipe, that penalty being that the decent people won't talk to you any more.

Now that is no way to talk about your hero Michel Mann or James Hansen.

 

[SSDD]

Consider we don't have high solar activity now but see record warming, it would appear you've consumed a big heapin' helpin' of lead paint chips today.

Guess you missed the memo that solar activity started falling off at the end of the 20th century...and there has been no warming since. Guess you missed the pause memo also. Seems that you are the one eating paint chips.

given I've specificially answered your question before, you'll need to apologize for lying about me before I educate you again. You need to learn that there's a penalty for being a pathologically dishonest asswipe, that penalty being that the decent people won't talk to you any more.

No you haven't, but feel free to answer now or continue to lie. And do stop projecting your deficiencies onto everyone else. If you just stop drinking the koolaid, you also can perhaps be a normal person. And surely you aren't lumping yourself in with the decent people. You are far to hateful and miserable to ever be counted among the decent people.

 

[skookerasbil]

Consider we don't have high solar activity now but see record warming, it would appear you've consumed a big heapin' helpin' of lead paint chips today.

And given I've specificially answered your question before, you'll need to apologize for lying about me before I educate you again. You need to learn that there's a penalty for being a pathologically dishonest asswipe, that penalty being that the decent people won't talk to you any more.

God I love this forum........ ^^^ always melts down when he gets pwned!!! SSDD makes you look like a fool EVERY DAY on here!!!

FACTS > whiney fag drivel every time s0n!!

s0n......lose the ghey cat avatar and maybe......maybe somebody takes you seriously!!

 

[SSDD]

Anyone babbing about lush Viking farms in Greenland instantly gets laughed out of the room for such brazen historical revisionism. Same for anyone claiming the MWP was global.

Causes of the LIA:

1. High volcanic activity.

2. Low solar output.

3. Low CO2 levels. The population crash in the new world resulted in much farmland going back to forest, which sucked up CO2, so the ice core data shows CO2 dropping by around 9 ppm.

Hence, the LIA would confirm AGW theory.

Colder water uptakes more CO2...that's where your CO2 went. idiot.

As to the solar activity...if low activity brought on the LIA, don't you think the fact that solar activity was the highest it has been for a very long time at the end of the 20th century means anything? Low solar activity brings on the LIA but high solar activity doesn't cause warming? Only in the mind of a wacko warmist.

By the way, what do you believe to be the ideal temperature for life on earth? And why don't you wackos ever seem to have an opinion on that question...you seem to have opinions on everything else?

Cracks me up...pause going on 20 years now..killing winters year after year....record snowfall everywhere...climate science shitting all over itself trying to make excuses for why they didn't see the pause coming or trying to find the non existant missing heat and admiral asswipe hairball is still claiming record heat.

How much more hysterical can they get?

Consider we don't have high solar activity now but see record warming, it would appear you've consumed a big heapin' helpin' of lead paint chips today.

And given I've specificially answered your question before, you'll need to apologize for lying about me before I educate you again. You need to learn that there's a penalty for being a pathologically dishonest asswipe, that penalty being that the decent people won't talk to you any more.

God I love this forum........ ^^^ always melts down when he gets pwned!!! SSDD makes you look like a fool EVERY DAY on here!!!

FACTS > whiney fag drivel every time s0n!!

s0n......lose the ghey cat avatar and maybe......maybe somebody takes you seriously!!

 

[skookerasbil]

Anyone babbing about lush Viking farms in Greenland instantly gets laughed out of the room for such brazen historical revisionism. Same for anyone claiming the MWP was global.

Causes of the LIA:

1. High volcanic activity.

2. Low solar output.

3. Low CO2 levels. The population crash in the new world resulted in much farmland going back to forest, which sucked up CO2, so the ice core data shows CO2 dropping by around 9 ppm.

Hence, the LIA would confirm AGW theory.

Colder water uptakes more CO2...that's where your CO2 went. idiot.

As to the solar activity...if low activity brought on the LIA, don't you think the fact that solar activity was the highest it has been for a very long time at the end of the 20th century means anything? Low solar activity brings on the LIA but high solar activity doesn't cause warming? Only in the mind of a wacko warmist.

By the way, what do you believe to be the ideal temperature for life on earth? And why don't you wackos ever seem to have an opinion on that question...you seem to have opinions on everything else?

Cracks me up...pause going on 20 years now..killing winters year after year....record snowfall everywhere...climate science shitting all over itself trying to make excuses for why they didn't see the pause coming or trying to find the non existant missing heat and admiral asswipe hairball is still claiming record heat.

How much more hysterical can they get?

Consider we don't have high solar activity now but see record warming, it would appear you've consumed a big heapin' helpin' of lead paint chips today.

And given I've specificially answered your question before, you'll need to apologize for lying about me before I educate you again. You need to learn that there's a penalty for being a pathologically dishonest asswipe, that penalty being that the decent people won't talk to you any more.

God I love this forum........ ^^^ always melts down when he gets pwned!!! SSDD makes you look like a fool EVERY DAY on here!!!

FACTS > whiney fag drivel every time s0n!!

s0n......lose the ghey cat avatar and maybe......maybe somebody takes you seriously!!

Hysterical indeed. We have this whole message board of thousands and we have 2......count it.....2 members in here banging the alarmist drum!! The Skeptics DOMINATE this forum!! And the two do that miserable pussy whining mental meltdown angst so typical of far left limpwristers.......its very clear to any curious USMB member stopping in here for a compass on this that this AGW shit is a religion!! Anybody just a little bit politically astute can spot them 1,000 miles away!! USMB members see these jackasses as radicals. They back their shit with a about 4 or 5 of the same lame old tired links and throw up the same 2 or 3 ghey phoney graphs. Best of all.......the bomb throwing.....crusades on stoopid-ass forms of energy and building 1,000 foot high walls to stop tornado's!!! !! People get it.......which is also why the PROOF THE SKEPTICS ARE WINNING thread is so epic.......people are coming in here to check out something other than the same old PC crap on global warming. They just finished freezing their balls off for over 7 months straight and are asking themselves, "WTF??!!". They come in here and get the straight dope sans the fantasies.

 

[Kosh]

Hundreds of research studies using ice cores, pollen sedimentation, tree rings, etc. from all over the earth have shown that there was a major cooling of the earth in the 1700s and 1800s when it was well over 1oC cooler than it is today. The theory is so well established that it is called the Little Ice Age. It was accompanied by major storms, very cold winters (the Thames River in London and the canals of Holland froze over every year), famine, and outbreaks of plagues. Scientists have discovered that during that period of time the sun was very inactive, which seems to be the driving force for climate change on the earth. The warming we see today is probably nothing more than the recovery from this Little Ice Age.

 

[mamooth]

Skook, you look kind of crazy to call people fags while you and SSDD are openly engaging in mutual masturbation. Get a room, you two. You three, now that Kosh is joining in. We don't want to see it.

Meanwhile, May 2014 is the hottest May ever, and SSDD thus claims it means the world is cooling. I kind of pity the guy, the depths of his delusions. It's not going to get any better for him, as the world keeps piling up the new high temperature records. It will be amusing to see what new creative ways the denier cult comes up with to deny the ever more undeniable evidence.

 

[asterism]

Anyone babbing about lush Viking farms in Greenland instantly gets laughed out of the room for such brazen historical revisionism. Same for anyone claiming the MWP was global.

Causes of the LIA:

1. High volcanic activity.

2. Low solar output.

3. Low CO2 levels. The population crash in the new world resulted in much farmland going back to forest, which sucked up CO2, so the ice core data shows CO2 dropping by around 9 ppm.

Hence, the LIA would confirm AGW theory.

"The population crash in the new world resulted in much farmland going back to forest, which sucked up CO2"

Show us the peer-reviewed study that idea came from.

 

[bripat9643]

Anyone babbing about lush Viking farms in Greenland instantly gets laughed out of the room for such brazen historical revisionism. Same for anyone claiming the MWP was global.

Causes of the LIA:

1. High volcanic activity.

2. Low solar output.

3. Low CO2 levels. The population crash in the new world resulted in much farmland going back to forest, which sucked up CO2, so the ice core data shows CO2 dropping by around 9 ppm.

Hence, the LIA would confirm AGW theory.

"The population crash in the new world resulted in much farmland going back to forest, which sucked up CO2"

Show us the peer-reviewed study that idea came from.

So a 9 ppm decrease caused the little ice age, but we had a 30 ppm increase over the last 17 years, and the temperature hasn't changed a bit?

 

[itfitzme]

Here is a pretty good book that I would recommend to both skeptics and believers alike. It is written by Brian Fagan, an admitted true believer in AGW, even though practically every word of his book serves to disprove his belief.

Which tells us that either the book or your review is worthless.

But only to the AGW alarmists who indict anything that doesn't conform with the established narrative.


s0n......why do you think nobody cares about global warming anymore ( every single poll shows it )?


The snake oil shit doesn't sell anymore.



You guys need a Plan B

"... nobody cares about global warming anymore.."

Well, there is a "head up your ass" statement.

A Steady 57% in U.S. Blame Humans for Global Warming

"March 18, 2014
A Steady 57% in U.S. Blame Humans for Global Warming
Even as more Americans say they're informed, blame on humans hasn't grown.""

" More Americans believe increases in the Earth's temperature over the last century are due to pollution from human activities (57%) than to naturally occurring changes in the environment (40%)."

That doesn't qualify as "nobody". So now we know that your comments are useless.

 

[Kosh]

The United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the media, and Al Gore repeatedly say that the science of global warming is settled and that only a radical fringe group of corporate-sponsored scientists disagree with the scientific consensus that man is causing global warming. Over $50 billion has been spent to support that believe. However, even as far back as 2003 a survey was conducted among all climate scientists (those actually having climate PhDs and working specifically on climate issues) showed that there was barely a majority, let alone a consensus that man was causing global warming. When the question was asked, "was the scientific debate about climate change over," less than half of the respondents agreed with the question. An equal number disagreed. This is far from a consensus among scientists who can actually speak to the issue.
In 2001 a voluntary petition was sent to all scientists in the United States stating that, among other things, "There is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane, or other greenhouse gases is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth's atmosphere and disruption of the Earth's climate." At that time, 17,000 scientists signed it. When the same petition was sent out in 2008, 31,000 scientists signed it, almost double the number in 2001. Nine thousand of these had PhD's in the physical sciences. This compares to only about 60 (not 2500) that support the IPCC's man-caused theory. More are signing every day. The IPCC's, media's, and Gore's instance that there is a consensus among scientists that the science is settled is completely false, designed to hide the fact that the entire effort is politically, not scientifically, motivated. Every effort is made to silence the dissenters, yet more and more scientists are speaking out because the actual science supporting man-caused warming is non-existent.

Bu then again since the AGW religion has been able to squash any real science on this subject and has 40+ years to push their propaganda and teach this propaganda in the school science classes what do you expect?

 

[mamooth]

Kosh, if we wanted to read your kook denier blog, we'd simply read it. You have no business cutting and pasting whole sections here, especially since you never give an attribution. That's a huge violation of board policy concerning fair use, and you need to clean up your act.