Warmists New Claim: Little Ice Age Caused By American Settlers

Can you imagine what it would be like if scientists were discussing the deaths of millions, not in terms of moral outrage, but rather the effect on reducing Co2 emissions?

If you follow the news on global warming, you’ll have noticed an increasing trend towards studies that try and show a link between historical events and climactic changes, inevitably blaming them (somehow) on mankind in general.

Yet another one of these studies has just been released from the Ecole Polytechnique Federale de Laussane of Switzerland, which suggests that the little ice age can be blamed on the early American settlers:

a significant decrease in emissions began in the 16th century – the one which would herald the minor ice age. Jed Kaplan has an audacious hypothesis to explain the dip in the data curve: “Thanks to the reports of the early explorers, we know that the forests were less abundant on the American continent. Then the settlers gradually eliminated the indigenous population.” Threatened with extinction, these populations effectively deserted the forested areas, which – by taking up the carbon in the atmosphere – in turn set off the legendary frosts of the 19th century. “Of course, it’s only a hypothesis”, he concludes, “but given the data we have gathered, it’s entirely plausible”.

Physorg.com. New Model of Man’s Role in Climate Change.

So let me get this straight: Dr Jed Kaplan is arguing that the early American settlers turned up, started driving the natives off the land. Once the natives had been eliminated, the forests started to regrow, thus cooling the world and causing the Little Ice Age. Is that it?

This is not a new argument. As I’ve already pointed out on this website, the historian Edward Gibbon was making essentially the same argument hundreds of years ago.

What’s disturbing about this trend, though, is that it appears to be neo-Malthusianism by the back door. These studies are reported by the warmists in such a way that massive depopulation by death is a good thing, and civilization a bad thing, at least in terms of Co2 emissions:

The results of this research tell a very different story from that which has been circulating up until now. They show, for example, a first major boom in carbon emissions already 2000 years before our era, corresponding to the expansion of civilizations in China and around the Mediterranean.

Certain historical events, almost invisible in the preceding models, show up strongly in the data produced by the scientists. A good example is the re-growth of the forests as a consequence of the fall of the Roman Empire. The Black Death, a plague which resulted in the death of more than a third of the European population, also led to a fall in .

Physorg.com. New Model of Man’s Role in Climate Change.

See what I mean? The birth of civilization around the Mediterranean and in China is seen as leading to a “major boom in carbon emissions” whereas the fall of the Roman Empire is seen as a “good example” of how forests lead to carbon uptake. The black death, which wiped out around a third of the population of Europe is seen as having “led to a fall in carbon emissions”.

I’m not trying to imply that Dr Kaplan wants a massive die-off of humans to help combat global warming, far from it. What I am bemoaning, though, is the way that the deaths of millions and millions of human beings are discussed coldly and clinically solely in terms of their effect on carbon emissions. There is no mention of plague, collapse or genocide being a ‘tragedy’ or an ‘outrage’.

Can you imagine if, instead of ancient or medieval history, these studies were discussing the Nazi genocide in terms of Co2 emissions? Would it be acceptable? Of course not. Because you can’t reduce people to carbon emissions and discuss, with clinical detachment, the death of millions as leading to “a fall in carbon emissions”.

Can you?

14 responses to “Warmists New Claim: Little Ice Age Caused By American Settlers

  1. Pingback: CO2 Has Determined The Entire Course Of Human History | Real Science

  2. Or is it that the warm global temperatures during the Roman Optimim climatic period and the cooling associated with the Little Ice Age just resulted in more off-gassing of CO2/ more dissolving of CO2 from/into the oceans ie just what has happened for the whole of geological time (see Vostock ice core for the last few thousand millenia). But no civilisation MUST be to blame. Back to the caves everyone.

  3. Let me just try to pin this down a bit more……….Had Hitler succeeded in his aim of global conquest one can be reasonable certain that the global population would be markedly lower than it is today with the desired outcome above….

    This being the case presumably his losing the war is to be lamented?.

    If the only goal is a reduction in carbon emissions that is?…….Or do the proponents of this view hold that only CERTAIN populations should be culled?.

    I am genuinely interested in the mindset.

    I don”t expect a dispassionate response

  4. “Because you can’t reduce people to carbon emissions and discuss, with clinical detachment, the death of millions as leading to “a fall in carbon emissions”.

    Can you? ”

    I can assure anyone reading in that they most certainly can.

    What is of keen interest, however, is ‘their’ view on WHICH group should die off…..

    It would give a good measure of the level of self-hatred I suspect.

  5. Uh, hey Doc, the American Indian didn’t de-forest this country, the settlers did clearing the land for farming on a massive scale. Perhaps a better bite at the AWG apple would have been the killing millions and millions of buffalo (to starve out the indian tribes) lowered CO2 thus causing the mini ice age. Heck, works for me!!!

  6. “Ecole Polytechnique Federale de Laussane” ……

    My French is rusty, but does this phrase translate into “House of Idiots”?

  7. If killing a relatively few American Indians caused the little ice age, then we should all be freezing our asses off now after what Stalin and Mao did!

  8. “So boys and girls, the moral of the story is that any kind of disaster that reduces the population of the world is in reality a blessing for the earth. And as incredible as it seems, that includes the murder of all those Native Americans who were butchered and dispossessed by those wicked white European male Christians (who by definition are evil for being white, European, male, and Christian). So, if we look at 9/11 from an ecologically correct viewpoint, the jihadists were actually friends of the earth.

    “Okay, boys and girls, tomorrow’s lesson will be on those misunderstood statesmen Stalin and Hitler. And don’t forget your class project on how you too can help save the earth. Dr. Hansen from NASA will be here to give a special commendation for the best project.”

    –Yes, that is absurd, but it is the logical outcome of what that brand of warmists is saying.

  9. Even if one accepts the first half of their argument about the American forests, that the demise of the Native American population after the initial contact ca 1500 led to reforestation and then the low temperatures of the 1600s, by their own logic the second half of their claim – that this further led to the low temperatures of the early 1800s – can’t be right. By the 1700s the European settlers were removing the forests at a breathtaking rate. New England had less forested area at the founding of the US in the 1770s than it does now.

    In Europe, they may well have the direction of causality backwards (much like Al Gore’s implied claims about CO2 levels and temperatures through the ice ages). Many think the cooling climate pushed the “barbarians” south into Roman territory in the 400s. We know that there was terrible weather in the decades before the Black Death in the 1300s leading to crop failures and famine, leaving a weakened population.

  10. What’s cause and what’s effect?

    The earth warms and the Roman Empire flourishes.
    The earth cools and the Dark Ages come as civilizations are decimated, the Roman Empire falls.
    The earth warms and Medieval civilizations flourish.
    A Little Ice Age occurs and again, many civilizations suffer -famine, plague…

    Do do civilizations drive the climate, or does climate drive civilization? Has there ever been a time in history when increasing global temperature wasn’t a boon for humanity and all other life on the planet?

  11. I was watching a Three Stooges episode where they impersonate science professors at a college.

    When you read insane theories such as this one, I think the Stooges would represent a significant improvement over a lot of current faculty members.

    The idea that an academic journal would publish this intellectual claptrap is appalling. It shows what a bunch of clowns we have in our so-called system of higher learning.

  12. Pingback: Global Warming Hoax Weekly Round-Up, Jan 27th 2011 « The Daily Bayonet

  13. People will finally wake up when they realize the Warmists’ true ideal is Naziism for control of the state and massive depopulation. They truly are automatons. Heil ALGORE!

  14. Its unbelievable what these clowns will publish to support anthropogenic gloabl warming. The hockey stick theory has been torn to shreds so now some hacks are coming up with the theory that humans have been creating global warming or cooling throughout history.

    I think that it is a disgrace that any scientific journal would publish this trash.

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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