Global warming sparked by ancient farming methods
 

The Global Warming crowd is really grasping at straws this time. :roll:

http://www.cnn.com/2009/TECH/science...ing/index.html

It's like they think the Earth has ever been stable in any thing or any time!!! :damn: If this is true though, why is our current temps of the last 50 years still below the 3000 year average? Farmers must have caused global cooling is what they will tell you next.

The Global Warming people are all a bunch of idiots.

-S

I find that both sides of this argument demonstrate stupidity and the usual sensationalism when 'reporting' details of Global Warming.

That's true, the earth has been through the warming and cooling cycle hundreds of times before and has always recovered.

Using the correct term, "Accelerated Global Warming", which has only been evident since the human race started mass events, be it the ancient farming methods you mention or the production of pollutants, I find the article to be correct in it's assumption that anything ejected into our atmosphere and in large enough quantities will accelerate global warming.

Blame the cave men! They've doomed us all!:rotfl:

Nice one, logical fallacies abound.

Pleace provide the citation for your 3000 year average temp claim. Other than that, you are making a mountain out of a molehill, this is just one piece of research on the subject and you make it sound as if this was the scientific concencus.

Ultimately you are correct :haha:

Well actually these people weren't "cavemen" as the stereotype goes among the typical masses. They were nomads. Well- most of them were nomads. You had a few places here and there where they'd decided to settle down and build settlements, but most people at the time were nomadic in nature. Actually the people of 7,000 years ago were very sophisticated for their time. The first real civilizations had started to tale root, people had learned to domesticate animals for food and transport (stemming mainly from China after they rounded up hogs), and people had begun devoting more time to things like arts and crafts instead of survival- which had been their primary focus before lol.

As it stands SUBMAN, your title is quite misleading (no doubt intentionally). The article merely states that deforestation by early civilizations is partially responsible the CO2-O ratio's inbalance (because after the after the industrial era began and factories began emitting more and more pollutants into the atmosphere; less trees = more CO2 buildup). It's quite a simple concept really. I'm surprised nobody bothered to investigate it until now.

Ideas about pre-historic carbon release and it's effect on climate are nothing new.

The idea isn't; research into the idea is.

They have, if they hadn't discovered fire, we'd still be eating raw meat and living in caves. :yeah:

I have experienced the mildest summer since moving here in 1991. My air conditioning use is at 8x this summer. Long time residents remember when A/C wasn't even thought of in this part of the country. Climate change, created by man, only happens in the minds of the weak-minded.

Scientists looking for the next grant are suspect.

Though we certainly haven't changed as far as extinguishing resource supplies is concerned.:nope:

I suggest you pick up more information for future mental use on the matter, because we've known for a good 15 years that humans are having an impact on the temperatures of the planet. Not as badly as people like Al Gore claim, but we are still having a significant impact. I suggest you start with some papers and resources. I'll recommend you to the Woods Hole webpage simply because they're one of the best and most reputable scientific organizations you could ever hope to come into contact with.

http://www.whrc.org/resources/online...arth/index.htm

So where would you like to stop 'extinguishing resource supplies', when it affects your life? Is there a line you would like to draw? No, there never is, its always others who must sacrifice, which is why your argument falls flat on folks who think..

I suggest you look outside your window and use some common sence.

It's not a matter of where I'd like to set the line. It's a matter of where we HAVE to set the line. The simple fact of the matter is that if you use up all the resources available to you, you're going to have a lot of trouble come up and slap you in the face. Social trouble, economic trouble, environmental trouble, you name it and it will be affected.

Easter Island is a perfect example of what happens when resources are completely used up. Everything collapses into chaos in the end.

Of course, but where I would want to draw it would screw us all in the end.

I sacrifice plenty for the good of the environment. I drive a hybrid van, I don't overuse the AC (unless it gets above 100*), I use low-watt lightbulbs, and I recycle. There are a bunch of other things I do, but you get the picture.

Clearly you're not one of those people.

If one is so commited to change the the world one has to do it on their own.show an example.......you don't want a change, or show an example, if it incorporates you. :nope::nope::nope: