5 ms·

Yes; especially given this comment on the article (by Bo Higgs): This article gives too much coverage to the 'Politically Correct' piece of crap by this clown,

Yes; especially given this comment on the article (by Bo Higgs): This article gives too much coverage to the 'Politically Correct' piece of crap by this clown, Richard Nevle. The "Little Ice Age" began long BEFORE 1492. The Pope in Rome sent Columbus a letter (after 1492) asking for Columbus to investigate, "what had happened to the Bishop of Greenland," because Rome had not had any letters from Greenland for many years. N.B. -- There were so many Catholics living in Greenland, that the Pope appointed a Bishop to live there. The Middle Ages Warm Period had ended decades before, and could no longer sustain the European-style agrarian life-style. Also, bear in mind that post-1500, World exploration meant required an exponential increase in wooden ships, both in number and in size. As a result, not only did population increase, but so did de-forestation. Indeed, perhaps the main export of the American Colonies was LUMBER. Even the export of tobacco,and then cotton required de-forestation. By 1608, the well-known, but un-mapped 'Northwest Passage' had frozen over to such an extent that Henry Hudson was un-able to complete his mapping. Re-forestation must have been exceedingly rapid to effect the entire Earth in such a short time. Richard Nevle is proof of the adage that, "If the only tool you have is a Grant to prove A.G.W.(tm), then everything in the result of A.G.W.(tm)"

scarmig 15y ago
Reprinting a comment from another page, particularly a comment full of abuse (politically correct piece of crap? clown?), inaccuracies, and conspiracist wonderings, is not really worthy of HN. I'll just point out the first glaring issue about the only fact that the comment even mentions: the "Little Ice Age," though somewhat ambiguously defined, is usually taken to mean the era from the mid sixteenth century to the nineteenth.
- mooism2 15y ago
  The text of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Greenland#The_demise_of_the_Greenland_Norse_settlements http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Greenland#The_demise... implies that the Little Ice Age is taken to have started earlier in Greenland, although this is contradicted by the graph next to it.
  - scarmig 15y ago
    There's actually some level of debate about whether the Little Ice Age even existed as a global event, as opposed to several coincidental regional climatic changes. So it's a bit messy (and if it didn't actually exist globally, it would suggest that the article is explaining something that never happened). I'm not sure of whether there's any scientific consensus on it, however. NASA does suggest the Little Ice Age started in 1550, though.

scarmig 15y ago

Reprinting a comment from another page, particularly a comment full of abuse (politically correct piece of crap? clown?), inaccuracies, and conspiracist wonderings, is not really worthy of HN. I'll just point out the first glaring issue about the only fact that the comment even mentions: the "Little Ice Age," though somewhat ambiguously defined, is usually taken to mean the era from the mid sixteenth century to the nineteenth.

mooism2 15y ago
The text of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Greenland#The_demise_of_the_Greenland_Norse_settlements http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Greenland#The_demise... implies that the Little Ice Age is taken to have started earlier in Greenland, although this is contradicted by the graph next to it.
- scarmig 15y ago
  There's actually some level of debate about whether the Little Ice Age even existed as a global event, as opposed to several coincidental regional climatic changes. So it's a bit messy (and if it didn't actually exist globally, it would suggest that the article is explaining something that never happened). I'm not sure of whether there's any scientific consensus on it, however. NASA does suggest the Little Ice Age started in 1550, though.