That might be true in the Bible but that’s about it.
You’re way out of your depth here and nothing you’ve presented backs up your story in any way. Might as well start referencing Genesis.
Wildrose, can you define, preferably using quotes from your links, what “rapid” means in this context?
I love how you pretend that 400 feet of sea level rise had no effect on people living on the low lands.
Please show me where I said anything even remotely similar to that.
Samm,
Let’s look at the North Sea Basin. What was the human impact during the early Holocene? I’ll help you out. There is practically no reliable information.
Here’s about the best that can be said. You don’t have to read it all. Check out the conlcusion:
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0305440313001982
History is not limited to the Bible.
If you want to believe that nobody lived in that vast area, of low elevation (meaning warmer than the uplands during the ice age,) highly productive (for the ice age era) land, you are welcome.
Did I say that? No. But I think I’m starting to like your misrepresentations. They’re endearing. Nighty-night.
You disputed it with nothing other than your own bluster.
Who besides yourself said anything about the warming and meltoff being “overnight”?
In this case they were very clear.
one-third to one-half of the warming—about 15 degrees Fahrenheit—occurred in about 10 years,
That’s not only going to cause massive flooding and rapidly rising oceans you would then have both flooding and flash flooding around every pond, lake, river, stream or buffalo wallow downstream of the meltoff.
In addition to the melt water generated by the rising temperatures you would also have extreme flooding event rainfalls due to the sudden rise in temps, RH, and Water Vapor and cloud cover generating tremendous storms.
Ever population center along the coasts relied on river and or well water and thus is even more prone to flash flooding coinciding with the rising seas and storm surges along the coast not to mention being far more vulnerable to such things as rogue waves and tsunamis.
That you would even attempt to argue this or that Humanity fled the advancing glaciers and many died off that couldn’t or didn’t is just laughable.
Most of the habitable landmass at the peak of the last glacial cycle in that era would today be under several hundred feet of water.
Human habitation on what is today the British isles dates back as far as 250,000 years ago so the evidence is far from scant.
You implied it. Huge areas of lowlands, some not even near the ice age coastline, were inundated in the fist thousand years after the end of the last ice age. It would be inconceivable that many thousands of inhabitants were not forced off that land, and the only place for them to go was where other people were already living by subsisting on limited resources. The conflicts that resulted undoubtably lead to a great many casualties.
They had two choices, flee or float into the sea becoming fish food.
Don’t know the guy. I just do know that historicly that when CO2 levels rise, green plant life on land, and after it gets absorbed into the water, sea plant life thrives and greatly increases. Soon after, animal life increases. Bottom of the food chain first, helped by the expected increase in available oxygen.
This is a cycle that has been recorded in the earth again and again, since time began. The only thing that has changed is the time table.
1 Like
Who could argue with that reasoning? But here’s a largely unrecognized pollutant that affects all of us. Dihydrogen monoxide. Thousands, if not millions of people have died due to accidental inhalation of dihydrogen monoxide and it can be found in just about all of our lakes, rivers, and oceans, and even has turned up in Antarctic ice. It’s also found in all cancer cells.
But the associated climate change with all the weather effects it entails neutralizes all of that and then some, what with arable land seeing climatic shift that result in less rain or an over abundance of flooding, destructive storms, less snow pack to predictably feed far away agricultural productive regions, etc… It’s not some slam dunk win adding more CO2 to the environment than humankind has had the fortune of building a modern civilization within. There’s also the depressing realities that as the CO2 levels increase the foods humanity and other lifeforms depend upon become less nutritious and in many instances increasingly poisonous. It’s a real problem when you dig into it all.
There was more atmospheric CO2 56 Million Years ago… good news… at current rates we will be there again in 5 to 10 generations.
Well… I am not going to be around for it.
https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2018PA003379
