Democrat Scientists have Discovered the Cause of the Little Ice Age !

a reply to: Pyle

It's the asphalt jungle syndrome 😁

originally posted by: Pyle
Land use changes are still causing problems to this day. Dust bowl anyone? City heat island effect, beach erosion problems, irrigation/water usage. I know you all are hung up on the "Europeans killed millions" thing. But land usage does effect climate.

BTW the modern European wars people keep bringing up, people still used the lands after the wars. When the south american natives civilizations were ending there was no one to step in for the land to be still used not enough Spanish/French/Portuguese colonists to replace the native populations.

Similar climate issues have come about in north america due to switch of forest and grass lands into farm land.

SoOo... you are saying that reforestation of former agricultural lands causes C02 now?

Or did the evil oxygen emitted from the trees do it last time and now its C02's turn?

Jesus.. at least think before you type something.

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: xuenchen

In our universe sits a small galaxy that has a small solar system where a small planet orbits.

On that small planet is a library of the most idiotic things ever.

A new entry has just been made.

Do i hear a distant 'doh!!'?

originally posted by: Plotus
Sometimes wonder if our monkeying with mother nature didn't perhaps add to the situation were facing. Things like

HAARP (High Frequency Active Auroral Research Program) I know there's a lot of talk with Sun irregularities and cycles as well.

That begs the question did HAARP move the magnetic pole? Or is this serious pole change going to also result in a physical flip saying it did move the magnetic pole is some small way.

originally posted by: Zanti Misfit
a reply to: xuenchen

American Colonists Accumulated Farts Cause the "Little Ice Age " , Everybody Knows That ! ,,,,,,,,,,,)

Well not everybody.

originally posted by: Lumenari

originally posted by: Pyle
Land use changes are still causing problems to this day. Dust bowl anyone? City heat island effect, beach erosion problems, irrigation/water usage. I know you all are hung up on the "Europeans killed millions" thing. But land usage does effect climate.

BTW the modern European wars people keep bringing up, people still used the lands after the wars. When the south american natives civilizations were ending there was no one to step in for the land to be still used not enough Spanish/French/Portuguese colonists to replace the native populations.

Similar climate issues have come about in north america due to switch of forest and grass lands into farm land.

SoOo... you are saying that reforestation of former agricultural lands causes C02 now?

Or did the evil oxygen emitted from the trees do it last time and now its C02's turn?

Jesus.. at least think before you type something.

No, No, and I did.

The paper said the reforestation of the south american lands caused a DECREASE in CO2 due to carbon being sequestered in the forest land.

I am not sure where you got oxygen from as the increase in plant life at the time would have also increased the 02 content (barring some other major even destroying large amounts of vegetation/plankton).

a reply to: RighteousTwiglett

I may be out of the loop on this but before I signed up (long time lurker) I noticed something. Why do scientific threads, about news, research and such have to mention political associations?

If you’ve been a lurker, then you should know who the OP is.

The best part about this is that we can control the weather by either genocide to cool it off, or cutting up refrigerators to warm it up. So mathematically how many people and fridges do we cut up to have a nice year round 70 degrees?

On a more serious note, wouldn't this mean that during the rise of the Greek Naval Fleet 2500 years ago, the global temperature would have shot up, then the collapse of the Bronze age should have ice aged the planet? I personally think that there is enough evidence to justify other reasons for the little ice age (issues like volcanic activities and low solar activities). While I won't rule out that humans could affect the global climate, I would suggest that it would take a global effort to do so. The earth on the other hand can do more environmental damage with one volcano eruption then all of mankind has done through out it's history. Let's not even get into the hazards of space. Imagine if the Chelyabinsk meteor had impacted with the ground instead of dissipating a lot of it's energy in the atmosphere, or if it was bigger in size.

Since the first detonation in 1945 over 2000 nuclear tests have been conducted, and on top of that even more large scale non-nuclear test have been done (think MOABs). One would think that those should have affected the climate of the globe, but where's that data? Just the fact that over 2000 sun temperatured objects have been used inside the Earths atmosphere without any discussion of global warming or climate changes during that time should....should give a thinking person reason to question the idea that fossil fuels are really destroying anything other then local air quality and pre-selected ocean's ph levels.

Corn ties up just as much carbon as trees. It used to be said that the vikings burning forests to clear the land caused the mini Ice age to occur. Now make up your minds scientists, how about it was a cycle of the earth in relation to the sun or something.

originally posted by: Pyle

originally posted by: Lumenari

originally posted by: Pyle
Land use changes are still causing problems to this day. Dust bowl anyone? City heat island effect, beach erosion problems, irrigation/water usage. I know you all are hung up on the "Europeans killed millions" thing. But land usage does effect climate.

BTW the modern European wars people keep bringing up, people still used the lands after the wars. When the south american natives civilizations were ending there was no one to step in for the land to be still used not enough Spanish/French/Portuguese colonists to replace the native populations.

Similar climate issues have come about in north america due to switch of forest and grass lands into farm land.

SoOo... you are saying that reforestation of former agricultural lands causes C02 now?

Or did the evil oxygen emitted from the trees do it last time and now its C02's turn?

Jesus.. at least think before you type something.

No, No, and I did.

The paper said the reforestation of the south american lands caused a DECREASE in CO2 due to carbon being sequestered in the forest land.

I am not sure where you got oxygen from as the increase in plant life at the time would have also increased the 02 content (barring some other major even destroying large amounts of vegetation/plankton).

Do you, by any chance work for CNN?

Just asking for a bored super bowl viewer.

originally posted by: ausername

originally posted by: Pyle

originally posted by: Lumenari

originally posted by: Pyle
Land use changes are still causing problems to this day. Dust bowl anyone? City heat island effect, beach erosion problems, irrigation/water usage. I know you all are hung up on the "Europeans killed millions" thing. But land usage does effect climate.

BTW the modern European wars people keep bringing up, people still used the lands after the wars. When the south american natives civilizations were ending there was no one to step in for the land to be still used not enough Spanish/French/Portuguese colonists to replace the native populations.

Similar climate issues have come about in north america due to switch of forest and grass lands into farm land.

SoOo... you are saying that reforestation of former agricultural lands causes C02 now?

Or did the evil oxygen emitted from the trees do it last time and now its C02's turn?

Jesus.. at least think before you type something.

No, No, and I did.

The paper said the reforestation of the south american lands caused a DECREASE in CO2 due to carbon being sequestered in the forest land.

I am not sure where you got oxygen from as the increase in plant life at the time would have also increased the 02 content (barring some other major even destroying large amounts of vegetation/plankton).

Do you, by any chance work for CNN?

Just asking for a bored super bowl viewer.

No,

I just read the article instead of Xue's propaganda... I guess actually reading sources means I am a paid shill huh?

a reply to: xuenchen

Odd....

So all the fields the NA's cleared were just ignored by European settlers who were hoping to make a living by farming on...cleared fields?

I guess you find what you look for. It's clear the authors want to pin global climate change on Europeans. The readers who want to do the same, snuggle up to some confirmation bias and BAM!!! CNN has a headline.

Large swathes of farmland?

Pretty tough to swallow that tidbit since the vast, vast majority of natives in North and South America were nomadic hunter/gatherer analogues.

There were some tribes that farmed of course and the Incas and Mayans had agriculture but to say "vast swathes" of farmland existed is disingenuous at best and an outright lie to further historical revisionism at worst.

originally posted by: neo96

When Europeans arrived in the Americas, they caused so much death and disease that it changed the global climate, a new study finds.

Was that before or after the natives clear cutted their forest to make way for their 'mega cities' of the era?

It's interesting how it's always mentioned that Europeans brought disease but these same types never talk about diseases given to Europeans from Indians or the fact that tobacco is gift from Indians to the world.

Maybe they should have to pay reparations to everyone negatively affected by their introduction of tobacco.

Um, do I have to point out the obvious here?!

Gore & CRU deny the Little Ice Age even happened!

originally posted by: Wardaddy454

originally posted by: RighteousTwiglett
I may be out of the loop on this but before I signed up (long time lurker) I noticed something. Why do scientific threads, about news, research and such have to mention political associations? I understand that individuals have their own political views / sides, but why does that have to have anything to do with scientific discoveries?

Whenever I see stuff like this I always assume there's some passive-agressive agenda instead of just sharing interesting information.

Just to add for clarification, anybody can quickly research sources for scientific news to get to the bottom of whether it has legitimacy to it, so why are political associations important?

Because the IPPC was caught faking results to push an agenda.

It's truly amazing how few people know about the ClimateGate hack and how it exposed the entire foundation of the Climate Change movement as a complete fraud built on lies and fraud science, and flat out admitted in those hacked emails from the East Anglia Institute and the Climate Research Unit.

Of course it's been revised and the oh so faithful "the emails were taken out of context" canard was unleashed. Along with slurs against the people who realized what was up.

It's all a massive joke and a wealth distribution scheme designed to put ever increasing amounts of money into government coffers, never to be accounted for or seen again.

originally posted by: Pyle
Land use changes are still causing problems to this day. Dust bowl anyone? City heat island effect, beach erosion problems, irrigation/water usage. I know you all are hung up on the "Europeans killed millions" thing. But land usage does effect climate.

BTW the modern European wars people keep bringing up, people still used the lands after the wars. When the south american natives civilizations were ending there was no one to step in for the land to be still used not enough Spanish/French/Portuguese colonists to replace the native populations.

Similar climate issues have come about in north america due to switch of forest and grass lands into farm land.

If you put all the Indigenous farmland together it would probably be the size of Texas. And that's being generous.

The vast majority of Indians were not farmers. And its very, very unlikely that the cut down massive swathes of forest in order to farm. Actually it's pretty much guaranteed that they didn't.

This article gives the impression that agriculture was an equal part of the Indian lifestyle as hunter/gatherer. This is 100% false.

a reply to: Carcharadon

If CRU says there wasnt a Little Ice Age then there never was.

This "study" here is Republican False Flag Propaganda (RFFP).

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
a reply to: Carcharadon

If CRU says there wasnt a Little Ice Age then there never was.

This "study" here is Republican False Flag Propaganda (RFFP).

originally posted by: ausername
So, if true genocide can stop global warming!

The far left's solution to save the world in 12 years or less?

Ummm...now you’ve hit on a solution...

Just off all the leftists and...problem solved...

Win...win...





YouSir