Archaeologica.org

Haven't heard this one before; it's usually linked to the 'Maunder Minimum', suggesting that the Little Ice Age was caused by an almost complete lack of sunspots. Think this is the first time someone's tried connecting the two.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/4755328.stm

From the article:

"It appears that the human impact on the environment started much earlier than the industrial revolution," said Dr van Hoof.

Duh!
Did this dude 'discover' that only now? Apparently he doesn't know about the Rapa Nui and the Maya's, among others!
Which immediately discredits his postulations.

To be fair, He means it didn't happen on a global scale much before 1800.

I thought someone had pointed out that volcanic activity had caused the Little Ice Age.

Sounds like another scientific pissing contest is coming up!

Sit back and enjoy.

There's also the theory about it being caused by a marked decrease in solar activity, which apparently left evidence in tree growth rings of a decrease in sunspots.
Trouble is that a lot has been attributed to volcanic eruptions; not so long ago, they were cited as evidence of a Dark Age plague in Europe in the 5th or 6th centuries AD. And no-one has explained (as far as I can remember) why solar activity suddenly picked up again in the 19th century, or why it is now continuing to the point where some scientists are attributing global warming to it.

Here's some stuff on the Sun's current output.
www.pnas.org/cgi/content/full/97/23/12433
www.dukesnews.duke.edu/2005/09/sunwarm.html
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/358953.stm
www.space.com/scienceastronomy/sun_output_030320.html

Try this one again....

www.dukenews.duke.edu/2005/09/sunwarm.html

That's not such a stretch to believe. The sun is the engine which powers the solar system.


(And the Earth does revolve around it.)

Minimalist wrote:And the earth does revolve around it

Obviously!

There are some here who probably disagree.

There are some here who probably disagree.

i would not confuse the ignorance of some with scriptural truths. just because some men refuse to find information beyond the Bible does not mean the contents of scriptures are invalid.

people always make mistakes or limit their learning, that is their fault not the Bible's

that is their fault not the Bible's

Yes, it is. When people blindly accept easy mythological answers for complex problems they have no one to blame except themselves and the priest-class which encourages them to accept things on faith instead of proof.

The Little Ice Age was a period of some 300 years when Europe experienced a dip in average temperatures

how big was the dip? how much ice was there in europe in this so-called ice-age?

There are many theories as to what caused these bitter years,

why can no one come to a consensus?

believes that the oceans would have compensated for the change

how could the oceans compensate for the change? they are affected by the weather just like anything else.

When people blindly accept easy mythological answers for complex problems they have no one to blame except themselves and the priest-class which encourages them to accept things on faith instead of proof.

faith doesn't stop us from finding proof, it just helps us to know when to stop looking. you love to generalize or use the catholic middle ages as your motivation for your comments but not every religious person who believes the Bible is as inane as you paint them. nor are they as devoidof proof as you would like to believe.

why don't you go and attack the hare krishnas or some other cult as they know less than most christians do and ask even fewer questions, plus look for even fewer answers. your one note hatred has gotten tiresome as it impedes good discussions.

why don't you go and attack the hare krishnas or some other cult as they know

Because they aren't here contaminating discussion of real science with their silliness.

This might answer some of your questions-
http://www3.sympatico.ca/aclp/Report.pdf
There's an interesting temperature comparison chart on page 25.