Climate change and patterns

Ancient Orkney Islanders reveal an interesting insight into climate change.

I was pursuing my inner desire to be history detective with regards to Orkney.  The Orkney Islanders are interesting because they marked the zenith of henge building technology, in some ways more impressive than Stonehenge. Archaeologists have discovered a neolithic village that is going to take decades to uncover, and I am intensely wanting to know what the DNA studies of ancient Orkney skeletons will reveal.

In about  2500 BCE the majority of the henge builders of Orkney abandoned the island, and this was about the time when Stonehenge was being built.  Immediately I am looking for the reason why the people of Orkney abandoned ship – climate change or invasion?

I did not pick up any evidence of an invasion of Orkney, but I did of climate change, this was when I picked up a pattern.  Generally, since the last ice age the weather has been moving towards a warmer period, but with somewhat random cycles of mini shifts in climate.  In 2500 BCE a few interesting patterns emerge:

  • Glaciers increase.
  • It gets colder.
  • It gets drier.

In Orkney in about 2500 BCE  it was so cold the people went south to the warmer areas of the South of England. This was the period that the Sahara dried up to become desert today, and the glaciers were expanding.

Today, the reverse is going on:

  • Glaciers are decreasing.
  • It is getting warmer.
  • More rain.

I ran a check to see if the south of the world was different in the north, and the pattern remains the same.  I then did a check on the Sahara Desert, for in this pattern there should be more rainfall in the Sahara.  Eureka! There is more rain in the Sahara Desert, for that desert is starting to go green again.

I am no scientist, but I know a pattern when I see one.  I am deeply skeptical about the scaremongering claims of global warming scientists, who claim that this climate change is man-made.  Nope, this is a natural cycle, and no amount of what we do is going to make a difference in stopping this cycle from proceeding.

What is of concern is that with shifts of the climate there is in history a mass migration of people: which brings widespread warfare; paradigm shifts like the change from the bronze to iron age (another story); collapse of civilisations;  displacements of people.  In 2500 BCE there was said to be 30 million human beings in the world, now there are 7000 million people, and these people can’t migrate so well.  The future is going to be messy.


6 responses to “Climate change and patterns

  1. Another indication that this is something other than a man-made effect are reports that all the planets in the solar system are warming up. Something to do with sun cycles, I seem to remember.

  2. It is true that there are natural cycles — the Sahara desert was once a place covered in green. Justs like the ice ages, these cycles will keep on going. Luckily for us the time between these cycles is very long and we are not stuck in an ice age, at the moment.

    As you said, once there will be a turning point (and we’re getting closer) where the Sahara will start to get green and the Northern continents will start to dry. This pattern can be read in the soil research of both continents and if I remember correctly the cycle time was around 20.000 to 25.000 years (please do correct me if I’m wrong). There is nothing to do to stop these natural cycles, it’s the planet we live on and it’s beautiful.

    I study Geography, and I agree that the climate change is not man-made. However, I believe it is influenced by mankind. These natural cycles that happened in the history keep coming back in our soil research as our technology gets better and we can speculate earlier dates. The length between these cycles is also the same. However, with the influence of man, the process of this cycle is going a lot faster than anticipated. We are already in a much further phase than we should be in, if we compare to the earlier cycles.

    There are a lot of books I have read which point the finger to mankind and yell “Temperature is increasing! We can’t stop it! We are doomed!”. This annoys me every time I read it. In the research of soils we can also see that at the end of each cycle, the temperature shifts. Before every ice age, there was a very short amount of time where the temperature was extremely high. When it shifts back, it is the opposite. We can also see this coming back for every cycle and the better our technology gets and the further we can look back, it stays the same.

    This doesn’t mean we should forget about it and pump out as much CO² as we can to increase our business’ profit, ofcourse. I’d say to keep continuing researching greener technologies, make them more efficient and affordable. As the price for oil keeps rising and natural energy keeps dropping, I hope one day there will also be a turning point for greener energy. From this point of view, I think it is not bad that a lot of headlines in the newspaper are “Mankind will destroy itself!” or whatever they come up with. At the end I hope we can go to a society where we will not influence the natural cycles as much as we are doing today. Let the natural cycles go their way like they used to in the past.

    These are just my thoughts ofcourse. I agree with you that the climate change is not man-made, and I agree with the fact that a lot of scientists can be… thick-headed. A lot of them also seem to forget one of the fundamental things in science:

    Nothing, NOTHING, is proven. Everything is just a model where we try to fit in our world to recreate past events or predict the future.

    I see a lot of scientists bash on papers or research that do not agree with their model, and “therefore it is bad and these scientists should be expelled from science!”… You pretty much can’t get more hypocrite than that, as we all try to research to improve these models and understand them better. Blindly following someone else’s beliefs and not being open to other ideas means you’re not doing it right — we need to ask questions, why things happen, and understand them.

    And like I always say at the end of my ideas:

    These are just my speculations from the data which I have viewed. The better the technology gets, the more accurate the data gets and we might get a better view at how things are related to eachother. I might be missing something obvious and in plain sight, but if we’re not looking in the right direction we won’t see it.

    • Hi Jiyuu, thanks for your well thought out reply. I agree that the activities of mankind will impact the climate change cycles, though they will swing backwards and forwards as they have always done.

      I find that scientists, academics or experts tend to focus on a limited of variables, usually only in their specialised field, which means they seem to miss the holistic larger picture. My interest in climate change happens when I see a sudden change in activities in a people in history, then I will look at what the climate is doing. I always see how climate change has a huge impact on historical events.

      I am currently looking at cave painting, and in a number of sites there are interruptions between two key stages of painting lasting a period of time indicating interruption by climate change.

      • ” I am currently looking at cave painting, and in a number of sites there are interruptions between two key stages of painting lasting a period of time indicating interruption by climate change. ”

        This is exactly what I think more scientists should be looking for — these small, seamingly unimportant things can actually mean a lot if this pattern is repeated in several caves. You can use these things to help your research and make a solid base for it. We need to look for more relations with a lot of other stuff rather than only chemical and mathematical data. Which brings us to specialisation:

        Specialisation is good, but as scientists we should never forget to always be updated about the other areas. This doesn’t have to be detailed or filled with mathematical formulas, as long as we understand what is happening we can use that to look at our area from a different perspective.

        I see it more like an assembly line in a factory. You can divide everything into parts and let every small part be done by one man. This man will know what he is doing and he will do it good, however, he will only have knowledge about that part. He will not know how the rest of the machine works.

        In science (and actually any other area of life), this is pretty important. If you have completely no clue about the big picture, then you won’t be able to see what role your part is playing. You’ll miss out on so much.

      • You are right, it would be good to see experts have a grounding in a wide range of disciplines; or the alternative is to bring a wide range of specialists together.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s