Skip to comments.
How Weather Brought Down Mayan Empire
The Guardian (UK) ^
| 1-12-2003
| Robin McKie
Posted on 01/12/2003 11:28:32 AM PST by blam
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-64 next last
1
posted on
01/12/2003 11:28:32 AM PST
by
blam
To: blam
I just completed reading Brian Fagan's book,Floods,Famines And Emperors(El Nino And The Fate Of Civilizations), very interesting book.
2
posted on
01/12/2003 11:30:20 AM PST
by
blam
To: blam
'The fluctuations indicate the cold periods are the calamitous ones - which suggests all our fears about global warming may be misplaced.' heheheh
To: blam
Why does everything have to be changing all the time?
4
posted on
01/12/2003 11:34:31 AM PST
by
Six Bells
To: blam
'The weather of 1788 didn't start the French Revolution,' historian Brian Fagan says, 'but the shortage of grain and bread contributed in large measure to its timing.' Similarly, it wasn't the navy that saved England from the Armada in 1588, it was the lousy weather. Uhhh. What's that word "similarly" doing in there? This guy says that weather did not start the French Revolution, and similarly weather did destroy the Spanish Armada.
That's muddled thinking.
To: blam
"Gill and his contemporaries argue that humanity is much more vulnerable to weather changes than realised. "
The weather affects civilization more than civilization affects the weather................who'd a thunk?
To: blam
The Mayans "perished?" Who are those people who live today in the Yucutan and Guatemala - unless they are descendants of the Mayas.
To: blam
For anybody who has ever wondered about how important weather is, do little research on June, 1944 and the English Channel.
8
posted on
01/12/2003 11:50:45 AM PST
by
af_vet_rr
To: Six Bells
The only true constant is change.
In each 24 hour period, the Earth experiences both warming and cooling, if it didn't we would either burn up or freeze.
So far, man's influence on climate change is well below the natural variations we see in the geologic record.
The long term numbers excluding surface temp readings, indicate a slight cooling over the last 100 years, but not outside of the natural variations.
The real question is why do a minority of scientist and the press, in disregaurd of the data, wish to scare and mislead the world?
9
posted on
01/12/2003 11:50:45 AM PST
by
PeaceBeWithYou
(We will not tire, we will not falter, and we will not fail.)
To: blam
Mayans - famed for their massive stepped pyramids and astronomy - simply starved to death when their water supplies ran dryAh-HAH! So all those arguements going around at the time about the link between over-flatulent Llama's and global warming WAS THE TRUTH. Now we know! All those enviro-wakkos are really onto something. Now if we could just stop their form of verbal flatulence we just might save mankind...
To: blam
I don't mind the weather so much, but the climate scares the hell out of me.
11
posted on
01/12/2003 11:54:38 AM PST
by
scouse
To: blam
"Gill's work challenges this. 'I have seen with my own eyes the devastating effects of drought,' he says in Scientific American. Deprived of water, the Mayans could no longer grow crops and perished." What bullshit! More accurately would be: "Deprived of water, the Mayans could no longer build or support large cities, and dispersed into smaller tribal groups". I am sure there are folk of Mayan blood throughought Central America today--they just probably think of themselves as members of "xyz" tribe.
Another comment is that our ability to compensate for weather changes using technology is VASTLY higher than the primitive Mayans.
To: PeaceBeWithYou
In each 24 hour period, the Earth experiences both warming and cooling, if it didn't we would either burn up or freeze. I don't want this to change.
So far, man's influence on climate change is well below the natural variations we see in the geologic record.
I don't want this to change.
The long term numbers excluding surface temp readings, indicate a slight cooling over the last 100 years, but not outside of the natural variations.
I don't want this to change.
The real question is why do a minority of scientist and the press, in disregaurd of the data, wish to scare and mislead the world?
Maybe this will change.
But probably not.
14
posted on
01/12/2003 11:57:10 AM PST
by
Mo1
(Join the DC Chapter at the Patriots Rally III on 1/18/03)
To: blam
I think change of climate can have a profound impact on even modern civilizations (Grapes of Wrath). It is only the very human condition of hubris that denies it. I would prefer to miss the next cycle that brings devastation if possible. I do like to eat.
15
posted on
01/12/2003 12:04:30 PM PST
by
Movemout
To: blam
16
posted on
01/12/2003 12:05:10 PM PST
by
L`enn
To: blam
Drought is only part of the story. Overpopulation, deforestation, and bad farming practices led to soil erosion of their hillslope fields, and massive deposition of alluvial sediment on their floodplain and terrace fields, which rendered crop production impossible. The Mayans, as a collection of related ethnic groups, still existed, but no longer had the food surpluses necessary to support nobles, priests, traders, and others not directly producing food. The complex, advanced society collapsed, and was replaced by scattered peasants who raised corn and beans, and didn't do a lot else.
17
posted on
01/12/2003 12:13:46 PM PST
by
Renfield
To: Wonder Warthog
A major problem that the Mayan civilization was forced to confront was the expansion of agriculture on lands with a limestone substructure located very near the surface. That limestone cap not only reduced the output of crops but its sotanos, or underground cisterns where water collected, were notoriously unreliable. If the Mayans had developed a hydraulic civilization, a la Egypt, it would not have suffered as much.
18
posted on
01/12/2003 12:15:00 PM PST
by
gaspar
To: PeaceBeWithYou
The real question is why do a minority of scientist and the press, in disregaurd of the data, wish to scare and mislead the world?Grant money and publishing for the scientists. Fame and column inches for the press. Nobody ever became famous for saying, "The sky is not falling."
I can almost forgive the press, as sensationalism is in their job description. But scientists should know better and understand how to test hypotheses and interpret data.
To: Wonder Warthog
.....and dispersed into smaller tribal groups"....
You have correctly stated the actual result.
The Maya weren't wiped out. I am currently reading about the Pueblos in our own southwest who experienced a similar response to change. I think the final word has yet to be spoken on exactly what the dhange was, but drought is suspect.
20
posted on
01/12/2003 12:42:15 PM PST
by
bert
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-64 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson