BEER!Thanks greeneyes for posting the link over in the weekly gardening thread, it's about time I got off my duff and post the topic though. :^) Sounds like some academics have a bigoted opinion about farming and farmers.
BEER!He did this by analyzing animal bones from the last 13,000 years”
Not strictly true, apparently...
“the bone records showed a shift from diets rich in water fowl and large fishes to subsistence on smaller shellfish.”
Either he was analyzing shell data all along, or the shell data is being tacked on at the end of his analysis.
“forests composed of those species began to dominate the region as the climate warmed, but also led to decreasing water levels in lakes and wetlands.”
1. The climate warmed without any human inputs.
2. The warming climate led to lower water levels.
So, hypothetical warming-induced sea level rise is counterbalanced by lake and wetland sinking? Interesting to take note of.
Farming allows the former hunters & gatherers more time to sitting around the campfire discussing diversity, racism and wymen’s studies.
I can imagine one of two ways. First of all, after eating food with indigestible large seeds, like gourds in the Americas. Or noticing that very seed heavy plants, like Amaranth, that would lose many grains while harvesting, would have more plants around them the next season. Amaranth also contains an uncommon but essential amino acid and many minerals.
At first look, I thought it said “farting”
Perhaps a little bit of research upon the author is merited here.
https://www.upr.org/post/feast-or-famine-why-did-hunter-gatherers-start-farming-anyway
Read his prior thoughts there and then read the linked crap article again:
One term jumps out immediately to explain the asinine question (I can’t believe I’m the only one to catch it):
Grants which meet the ‘climate change’ narrative.
At its core, it’s a real dumb-assed question: Humans began cultivating to combat starvation as populations grew. It’s as academic as 1-2-3. The warming climate was obviously a catalyst. Humans are good observers and figuring out how seeds germinate is not a very complicated matter (why does a dog owner’s yard generate taller and greener grass in some spots and not others? C’mon, people). One only needs look no farther than Native Americans to understand why a nomadic people bothered to plant crops:
http://www.nativetech.org/cornhusk/cornhusk.html
“Eventually the productivity of maize cultivation was great enough to make it possible and worthwhile for a family to produce food for the bulk of their diet for an entire year from a small area. Although maize agriculture permitted a family to live in one place for an extended period of time, the commitment to agriculture involved demands on human time and labor and often restricted human mobility. The genetic alterations in teosinte changed its value as a food resource and at the same time affected the human scheduling necessary for its effective procurement.”
Cultivation FREED UP humans’ time to develop other skills and abilities. Society was one result. Unfortunately the better question is how cultivation has resulted in the decline of western society burdened by bloated bureaucracy, but that won’t generate a grant, now will it?
In this era of so-called ‘science’ it’s getting harder & harder for these sycophants to find anything worthwhile to study that generates funds to justify their salaries. He’s obviously run out of good questions so he’s dipped into the ‘climate change’ pool out of desperation to modify his prior hypotheses with questions which are pretty well already established with sound research.
Elic Weitzel is no scientist: He’s a disgrace.
The British archaeological TV series “Time Team” did several digs of stone and bronze age sites, wherein one of the questions was “why did the early (several thousand BC) people living in the British Isles change from nomadic to farming cultures. Here is a link to BBC4 that lists all of the 20 years of the show totaling 230 episodes.
https://www.channel4.com/programmes/time-team/episode-guide/series-16
One can view many/most of them on Youtube.
I’d posit that nomads who grazed on whatever food grew wild had to follow animals in order to find new sources of water.
That in turn meant humans had to compete with the animals, both for the water and for the food that grew naturally.
Seems logical that, when abundant water sources were found that could support both animals & people for more than a few days, irrigation & agriculture became possible, as well as the domestication of pack animals.
Yhis in turn led to communalism & villages sprang up.