Global warming [8000 years old]

CBC News ^ | October 25, 2005 | SUMITRA RAJAGOPALAN

[mathprof]

Global warming before Halliburton??

[weegee]

Burning Bush's fault.

[festus]

Every now and then – once in 22,000 years to be exact – the axis tilts causing the planet to wobble.

This statement is perhaps the best way to get absolutely everything wrong about precession in a single sentence.

[microgood]

I vote we whack off a big chunk of Antartica next summer and drag that sucker into the Gulf of Mexico. Who says we should be humble about controlling the weather?

[anthraciterabbit]

William Ruddiman, a professor of environmental sciences at the University of Virginia, is behind a controversial theory suggesting that humans had a hand in warming the planet nearly 8,000 years ago, and in doing so, might have prevented another ice age.

That's truly idiotic. There's nothing humans could do to affect the weather now and there sure as hell wasn't 6000 years ago.

What you DID have 6000 years back was a very hot age called hypsothermal or some such which corresponded roughly to the classical "golden age" described in literature and the reason they called it a golden age instead of the age when everybody drowned is that it was before the flood and there simply wasn't as much water on the planet at the time.

[satchmodog9]

Another pantload

[adorno]

Ruddiman suspected that these discrepancies were not driven by natural causes.

So, then, humans are not natural, and everything we do is harmful to the environment. I suppose going back to the stone age before we learned to grow crops is the best future for humanity.

And, anything that the rest of nature, which doesn't include humans, is OK and acceptable.

If cattle or dinosaurs ever assisted in causing global warming in the past, well, that was Ok because they weren't human.

As of today, I'm resigning from the human race. I'm not going to take the blame for harming the planet.

[FairOpinion]

Somethingorother PING

[Political Junkie Too]

Maybe we can convince the loonies that the Age Of Aquarius is coming up in a few hundred years (when precession moves the spring equinox into the constellation of Aquarius), and that all our Mother Earth problems will be solved at that time.

-PJ

[gondramB]

Well he sounds real....

"William Ruddiman is a marine geologist. He received his PhD from Columbia University, and is currently Professor Emeritus of Environmental Sciences at the University of Virginia. He was the Chair of this department from 1993 -1996. Prior to this, he was a senior research scientist at the Lamont-Doherty Observatory in New York, a program associate with the National Science Foundation, and a Senior Scientist/Oceanographer with the U.S. Naval Oceanographic Office in Maryland."

http://cires.colorado.edu/events/lectures/ruddiman/

[quantim]

Every now and then – once in 22,000 years to be exact

I thought it was 23K.  Do we have a rounding error to fit an agenda?

[SunkenCiv]

Greenhouse Effect Occurred 5,000 Years Ago: Archaeologists
China View/Xinhuanet | 10-31-2005
Posted on 10/31/2005 3:59:50 PM PST by blam
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1512913/posts

[SunkenCiv]

Thanks FairOpinion.

To all -- please ping me to other topics which are appropriate for the GGG list. Thanks.

Please FREEPMAIL me if you want on or off the
"Gods, Graves, Glyphs" PING list or GGG weekly digest
-- Archaeology/Anthropology/Ancient Cultures/Artifacts/Antiquities, etc.
Gods, Graves, Glyphs (alpha order)

[USFRIENDINVICTORIA]

It's great to see this theory finally appearing in the MSM -- even if the coverage is spun to try to preserve the doomsday theories underpinning Kyoto.

I posted something about this in this thread: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1500958/posts

Here's part of what I said then:

"There's another hypothesis about climate change that Scientific American printed back in March, 2005.

"Humans are causing global warming. It started over 8,000 years ago, with the advent of agriculture -- and it's good for us. Without this greenhouse gas effect, we are over 2,000 years overdue for another ice age. The ice age could start after we've used up all the fossil fuels. "It's all laid out quite logically in an article titled:"How Did Humans First Alter Global Climate?", by a William F. Ruddiman.

"When I first read this article, I wondered whether it would shake things up in the scientific and political realms. The logical conclusion is that we should be doing everything we can to preserve an adequate greenhouse effect. (Subsidies for buying SUVs?) The precautionary principle in reverse."

In short -- Global warming = a good thing.

[UCANSEE2]

and there simply wasn't as much water on the planet at the time.

Well, I disagree with the concept here. The 'water' on earth is increased very slightly by the influx of small 'asteriods' or snowballs that pelt the earth continuously.

Other than that, that water that was here is here. It can't go anywhere.

It may have been ice, or vapor, but, essentially still water.

[Mind-numbed Robot]

Sounds like a nice man who is simply educated beyond his abilities.

[elli1]

This statement is perhaps the best way to get absolutely everything wrong about precession in a single sentence.

Precession defined

[Waco]

Back when the world population was less than 500 million? Yep ll them sckers exhaling, and the animals exhaling, just runined it all. Long before rapant tobacco use destroyed it again.

[Fred Nerks]

FAIRIE DUST alert.

[driftless]

A co-worker of mine, and a strong anti-Bush "King George" lib mentioned Halliburton in the lunchroom the other day. It was all I could do to keep from laughing. Political conversations are supposedly forbidden in the workplace, but you know how that goes. To libs simply mentioning Halliburton or Karl Rove is supposed to settle arguments and show that by mentioning those names, the liberal person who mentioned them is a real deep thinker. I've haven't met one yet who is, but maybe someday I will.