The 500-Year History of Climate Concern

[@itsureishotout-itshotterin3985]

Tremendous conversation. A line of study that I had never thought of or heard of - a good midweek mind expansion. It truly affects the way I think about the climate and mankind’s response to it. Some good depth added to my head.

[@alib6060]

Love that you are talking about climate concerns, deforestation etc, while surrounded by your plants.

[@chriskeefer3930]

Love it. I podcast out of my Son's bedroom. The plants hide his toys. You can make out the reflective planets on his ceiling.

[@stefanbernardknauf467]

What a man, I think his knowlege and wisdom is at least as big and strong as his French accent. Thanks for the interview, very interesting!

[@chriskeefer3930]

Not to mention his beard game.

[@alib6060]

I just ordered his book, Chaos in the Heavens. Kindle for me, hard copy for brother-in-law. Hope to share a good conversation with him.

[@jasonneugebauer5310]

I think most people throughout all human history understood that if the plants and animals are removed or changed by people then the " Climate will be changed " This is not a difficult theory to understand. I think modern people are very ignorant thinking that past people who lived on the land didn't understand the impacts of changing the environment on at least a local level. I would say that ancient Chinese and other societys that studied the effects of human activities on the biome would often have had a decent understanding of the subject.

[@ГеоргиКолев-ш3я]

Even the Sumerians were concerned about climate change desertification/salinification of fertile farmlands

[@voidisyinyangvoidisyinyang885]

yes archaeology has proven there was already an ecological crisis from deforestation by 8000 BCE and this caused the first white people to flee into Europe as ecological refugees - the first wheat farmings (monocultural wheat farming lacking vitamin D causing white skin in West Asia).

[@thomasgreene5750]

The real Green Revolution, which began after WWII and began to make significant strides in the 1960s and 1970s, was improvement in grain yields pioneered by people like Norman Borlaug. The widespread famines that routinely occurred in places like Africa and India no longer occur. Today, if there is famine, it is usually caused by war or dysfunctional national governments.

[@jeffbenton6183]

I appreciate the discusion of "natural theology" in the second half. It's an under-appreciated part of the development of Western Thought.

[@shawnnoyes4620]

Jean-Baptiste Fressoz - "Why do you think he has that outrageous accent" LOL :)

[@MrBallynally2]

The irony of colonialism is that it produced deforestation, like in Ireland. Now, centuries later, the british LOVE their trees and the irish overall cut them. I took my wife's catholic mother for a drive. She pointed out protestant lands, very leafy. Btw, it is not just colonial times that produced mass cutting of trees. It also happened in the medieval warm period with forest clearing and new towns often with the name 'new' in it. And it is my understanding that the original inhabitants of Australia were responsible for a lot of tree cutting as well as animal slaughter. Before anyone calls me a bigot please provide counter arguments..

[@aliendroneservices6621]

"According to current scientific understanding, yes, Australian Aborigines likely played a significant role in the extinction of many large animals (megafauna) in Australia, most likely through hunting and fire management practices..." "When the first Aboriginal Australians arrived around 50,000 - 65,000 years ago, Australia was home to a variety of large animals like giant kangaroos, wombats, and bird species, which subsequently became extinct." (Google AI)

[@voidisyinyangvoidisyinyang885]

Karl Polanyi's "the Great Transformation" is good on this

[@aliendroneservices6621]

25:31 *taa* · luh · mee

[@stefanbernardknauf467]

When saying we didn't have any hunger crisis in the last 20 years, you are forgetting the Ukraine crisis. OK, didn't turn into actual high death rates, but we shaved close to a major crisis there! And no, no chance we won't face dramatic hunger in the coming decades in my opinion. Unfortunately!

[@voidisyinyangvoidisyinyang885]

There's currently literally tens of millions of people in Africa undergoing "acute food insecurity" - as reported by the FAO. His "claim" as a youtuber is based on the typical corporate-state mass mind control soundbyte b.s.

[@The0ldg0at]

The variability of food production has been in Civilization history for millenia. Remember the myth of Pharaohs dream of 7 fat cows followed by seven lean cows, . Remember the Goddess Ishtar going to her father asking for the celestial Bull to start her war on Gilgamesh. She had to insure her father that the Temple granaries were full to prevent the famines that would result in devastated farm lands.

[@DavidL-ii7yn]

This seems to conflict with what is written in 1491 and 1493 where the the post-Columbian reforestation of the Americas is discussed. Deforestation would have been centuries later.

[@MrVorpalsword]

"how European societies grappled with climate change centuries before modern science proved the scale and breadth of its impact," sorry, they have 'proved its impact' have they, I didn't notice that?

[@rapauli]

Wake up historian -- the global heat of the last 3 years has NEVER ocurred in human history. You know that. We may as well regard our world today as totally new. Next year will likely set a record. And each month thereafter will set records. What good is your history except to say this is unprescendented and we need a totally new approach to survival ...

[@jesseherbert2585]

Have you looked at ice core papers (peer reviewed)? We are warming right on schedule. I care deeply about ecological destruction, but the gullibility of modern "intelligent " populations is impressive. As a Ph.D scientist (solid state physics/material science) who has debated this topic with science lovers for years, it is somewhat incredible that such poor critical thinking about official narratives has been demonstrated. Just look at the end of the film "Inconvenient Truth" if you want a quick demonstration. CO2 lags the long term temperature graph, rather than leading it. Right in plain sight! Sigh.

[@voidisyinyangvoidisyinyang885]

@@jesseherbert2585 what corporate-state Big Oil b.s. are you smoking? Globally Resolved Surface Temperatures Since The Last Glacial Maximum" Matthew B. Osman, Jessica E. Tierney, Jiang Zhu, Robert Tardif, Gregory J. Hakim, Jonathan King & Christopher J. Poulsen published November 10, 2021 Nature volume 599, pages 239-244 (2021) ----------- Analysis of global mean surface temperature (GMST) the last 24,000 years by combining several hundred previous published paleo analysis from all over Earth, took 7 scientists 7 years to do the work of combining hundreds of previous published paleo analysis and filling in the areas of Earth between the analyses using advanced statistical methods, and calculating the uncertainty in those statistical methods for the infill. "Climate changes across the last 24,000 years provide key insights into Earth system responses to external forcing. Climate model simulations and proxy data have independently allowed for study of this crucial interval; however, they have at times yielded disparate conclusions. Here, we leverage both types of information using paleoclimate data assimilation to produce the first observationally constrained, full-field reanalysis of surface temperature change spanning the Last Glacial Maximum to present. We demonstrate that temperature variability across the last 24 kyr was linked to two modes: radiative forcing from ice sheets and greenhouse gases; and a superposition of changes in thermohaline circulation and seasonal insolation. In contrast with previous proxy-based reconstructions our reanalysis results show that global mean temperatures warmed between the early and middle Holocene and were stable thereafter. When compared with recent temperature changes, our reanalysis indicates that both the rate and magnitude of modern observed warming are unprecedented relative to the changes of the last 24 kyr". Time to grow up people - industrial CO2 induced abrupt global warming was first analyzed in detail in 1890 by Svante Arrhenius! Current CO2 levels are already well above anything in the past 3 million years! There's already over 400 Zettajoules of EXTRA heat in the oceans accumulated since 1995. The Arctic will soon be ice-free with 1200 gigatons of pressurized methane hydrates being released as an "abrupt eruption" - just a 5 gigaton release will double global warming temperatures on Earth. I'm happy to answer questions, though you should keep in mind that my 26-year-old Greenland work has been superseded by more-recent studies, especially for the Holocene (the last 11,000 years), and in particular by the studies that combine records from a half-dozen ice cores in central and northern Greenland. These studies were lead by the Copenhagen glaciology group, and you can find them on Google Scholar. Bo Vinther was one of the main authors. I read quickly through the "carbonbrief" article to which you linked, and it seems accurate to me. If you read that carefully, it should answer the main questions you have. Having said that, my direct responses RE my study published in 1997 (and its predecessor in 1995): 1. Those studies were primarily designed to examine the glacial to Holocene transition (20--10 kyr ago), and they are *not* the best way to address the issue of recent warming and its millennial context. They captured the start of the current warming but were not designed or capable of resolving it well. And even if they did, it's just for one location in central Greenland. Using one location is a valid approach if examining very long-timescale changes (e.g., the 20--10 kyr transition) but not at all a good idea for decadal-scale changes. The noise at the short timescale requires that you average a group of sites spanning a region. "Noise" means both failures of the proxy record to record climatic temperature accurately, and real climatological / meteorological variability that arises strongly from atmospheric dynamical patterns. 2. In the context of (1), the questions you raise about how accumulation and isotope calibrations are treated in different studies is irrelevant to your concern. Those are minor issues. 3. The entire approach of comparing recent observed warming to past variability *for the purpose of inferring mechanism* is fundamentally a weak argument because the timescale is too short to reconstruct past variability well or, more importantly, to reconstruct the climate forcings well. This argument will become stronger as warming proceeds. 4. Following from (3), the reason we know the recent warming is due to changes of the atmospheric greenhouse is that we can measure the effects on the radiative balance of the planet and compare it to uptake of energy by the planet (primarily manifest as ocean warming) and to other forcings such as solar intensity. Here's an analogy: you are sitting in your house on a cold evening. You pull a thick blanket over yourself and start to feel warmer. Why do you feel warmer? Was it the blanket trapping heat (yes, at least in part, it must be)? Was it your furnace working harder? Was it a sunbeam coming through a window? There are only a limited number of options, and you can know about the role of all of them. In this case, greenhouse gases are the blanket. The sun is your furnace, etc. 5. Following from (4), the evidence is overwhelming that most of the warming of Earth since 1980 has been caused by anthropogenic greenhouse gases and the feedbacks associated with warming. The warming from 1850 to 1950, however, contains a "natural variability" signal in addition to an anthropogenic signal, and this natural component can be regarded as the "end of the Little Ice Age," and it was partly solar and partly volcanic. It is unlikely that we will ever be able to give a confident and fairly precise statement about how much of this earlier warming was anthropogenic vs. natural (most of the warming occurred between 1910 and 1950, as I recall), but there are strong arguments that it was at least half anthropogenic. The problem is we will never be able to head backward in time and launch some satellites to get the measurements needed. Best wishes, Kurt Cuffey ................................................................................................................... Kurt M. Cuffey Professor, Department of Geography, University of California

[@dadsonworldwide3238]

This is such deep their They're There conversations but is really disheartening that it's still reneging resurfacing as many tie in loose generalizations get computed out it's making many go after our strong identifiers. So many just got hurt over monastic vows 200k yr unbroken linage rationing math evidence of haplo groups faster mutation rate that desputed those miss aligned beliefs. Gradualistic evolutioniat went from opposing all code of life measure phenotypic epigenetic to thinking they would by pass all we know and create one size fits all gene therapeutic Treatment by hi jacking credibility from a proven method of vaccination that honers different & separated measurements defined by objects ,interaction, substate. Or.1 for=eign enVIRALmental injection 2 thru = interactions between cells 3 by = stimulated code of immunity = vaccinated 1 bad boost 2 good simulation .. Obviously specific targeting of gend therapy must account for 1 dietary objects 2 regional conditions/ environmental interactions 3 ethnic substrate haplo groups mutation rate = Treatment can be in alignment will what even non experts knows to be true rinse repeat no matter ecosystem feedback loop. Usa is such a mirrored thermodynamically moasic, by for thru = nicean creed everything is xyz manmade time hierarchy knowledge of good evil equations we send kids to kinder gardens ,el = ementary school. 3 towns make county, 3 body gov of selfless actors can reach truest known standard. Just like how we tuned all precision instruments . Because even before 1776 it's designed experiment is very specifically tasked with future generations guns loaded with whatever nature permits. One day morphology is subject to change without further notice. They know everything we know other than details steps by step specific technical data. They know how hard ethics will be and cross reference

[@pascalbercker7487]

500 years might be a stretch. 200 years is more reasonable - and 120 years is absolutely certain. What does chatGPT say: The idea that climate change has been a concern for 500 years is not accurate in the way we understand the term today. Awareness of climate-related changes in the past was different, primarily because modern concepts of "climate change" - driven by human activities such as fossil fuel burning - are rooted in 19th and 20th-century scientific discoveries. Here's a bit of a timeline to clarify: ### **1. Pre-modern Observations (500+ years ago)** - **15th - 18th centuries**: Some European writings noted changes in weather patterns, but these were often attributed to natural or divine causes, not human influence. For example, during the **Little Ice Age** (1300-1850), colder temperatures in Europe and North America were noticed, affecting agriculture and leading to speculation about natural climate variability. ### **2. 19th Century: Early Scientific Ideas** - **1824**: French physicist **Joseph Fourier** suggested that the Earth's atmosphere could trap heat like a greenhouse, laying the groundwork for understanding the greenhouse effect. - **1856**: American scientist **Eunice Foote** demonstrated that carbon dioxide can absorb heat, indicating that increases in CO2 could potentially affect Earth's temperature. - **1896**: Swedish chemist **Svante Arrhenius** first quantified the relationship between atmospheric CO2 levels and global temperatures, introducing the idea that burning fossil fuels could lead to warming. ### **3. 20th Century: Modern Climate Science** - **1950s**: Studies by scientists like **Roger Revelle** and **Charles David Keeling** (who began monitoring atmospheric CO2) confirmed rising CO2 levels due to human activity. - **1970s onward**: The term "global warming" entered popular discourse, and concern about anthropogenic climate change became more mainstream, leading to major international efforts like the formation of the **Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)** in 1988. ### **Citations:** - Joseph Fourier's early greenhouse effect theory is discussed in scientific history texts, such as **"The Discovery of Global Warming"** by Spencer Weart. - Svante Arrhenius’s work on CO2 and temperature is detailed in many historical accounts of climate science, such as the book **"A Vast Machine"** by Paul N. Edwards. - The Little Ice Age is explored in **"The Little Ice Age: How Climate Made History 1300-1850"** by Brian Fagan. In summary, while there were observations of weather patterns changing over centuries, the understanding of **human-caused climate change** specifically began in the 19th century, not 500 years ago.

[@chriskeefer3930]

Mon Ami. Listen to the episode. I think you will find it more informative than a 500 word ChatGPT search:)

[@microburn]

> Doesn’t listen to the thesis. > Argues against it with AI You lazy bum

[@instanoodles]

Who cares what chat-gpt says, it understands nothing.

[@patrickball2493]

Insignificant Humans don't cause climate change . The SUN and cosmic radiation is what causes climate .

[@jasonneugebauer5310]

I would say Chat GPT often has a hard time finding the facts you want. I find often Chat GPT will be very lazy on the first prompt and just give you generalized popular opinions. I like to tell Chat GPT it is wrong and to tell me why it is wrong about anything It says that sounds suspicious. It's responce answer is usually much better. Then keep asking for more specific details on what it is not telling you. After four prompts I was able to get the following from Chat GPT. I could have likely continued until I had thousands of pages on the subject of ancient people's understanding of anthropomorphic climate change. : Tell me about the earliest writings talking about human caused changes to the weather or types of plants that would grow in an area. The earliest writings that discuss human-caused changes to weather or the types of plants that grow in an area often intertwine mythology, philosophy, and nascent environmental observations. Here are notable examples: . Ancient Texts on Agriculture and Climate Hesiod’s Works and Days (circa 700 BCE): One of the earliest examples of agricultural writing, Hesiod advises farmers on planting and harvesting in alignment with seasonal changes. Though not directly about human-caused changes, the text reflects an understanding of how human activities align with and depend on climate. The Bible (circa 1000 BCE - 100 CE): The Hebrew Bible contains references to deforestation and land degradation. For example, the Book of Isaiah (Chapter 24) mentions the "earth languishing" due to human sin, which could be interpreted as an early moral framework connecting human actions to environmental changes. Roman Writings: In Georgics (29 BCE), Virgil discusses how farming practices impact land fertility. Roman engineers and writers like Pliny the Elder (Natural History) documented the effects of irrigation and deforestation, linking them to changes in the types of plants that could grow in an area. 2. Early Islamic and Chinese Writings Ibn Khaldun’s Muqaddimah (1377 CE): The medieval Islamic historian notes how deforestation, urbanization, and over-cultivation affect local climates and soil fertility, influencing the types of crops that can be grown. Chinese Agricultural Texts: Ancient Chinese texts, such as those from the Han dynasty (202 BCE-220 CE), contain references to deforestation and its impact on weather patterns and agricultural productivity. For example, irrigation projects during this period reflected an understanding of water’s role in supporting specific crops. 3. European Renaissance and Early Modern Writings John Evelyn’s Fumifugium (1661): In one of the earliest environmental treatises, Evelyn discusses how urban smoke in London affected air quality, linking it to human health and crop growth. He proposed measures to combat pollution and restore environmental balance. Jean-Baptiste Du Bos (1719): In Critical Reflections on Poetry and Painting, Du Bos speculated on how deforestation and urbanization might have altered weather patterns in Europe, noting that areas cleared for agriculture seemed to experience less rainfall. 4. Indigenous Knowledge and Oral Traditions Many Indigenous cultures have long maintained oral traditions about the relationship between human activities and environmental change. For example: Native American tribes in North America recognized that controlled burns altered ecosystems, encouraging specific plants like berries and grasses to thrive. Aboriginal Australians practiced fire-stick farming, reshaping landscapes to promote certain plant species. Summary The earliest discussions of human impact on weather and plant growth can be found in agricultural texts, religious writings, and environmental observations across various cultures. While these writings often lack the scientific rigor of modern studies, they reflect an awareness of how human actions like deforestation, irrigation, and urbanization influence the

[@skulptor]

No, it is not. He says so.

[@pascalbercker7487]

ok - but why not actually give some evidence for your assertion? You just "say so" in the same way you accuse him. You are not a credible source. Say something useful.

[@decouplemedia]

The debate has changed its emphasis, but the conversation about human impacts on the environment stretches back farther than many might think -- the point of this episode.

[@skulptor]

@pascalbercker7487 the speaker says so a few minutes in. He is talking about a 'discourse' on good and evil in the sixteenth and seventeenrh centuries.humanities academics...imprecise as ever.

[@chriskeefer3930]

⁠​⁠@@skulptoryour condemnation of humanities academics is terribly imprecise. Read his book before blanket condemnation if you care about being vigorous and precise.

[@skulptor]

@chriskeefer3930 blanket equation of renaissance climate perceptions billed as paralleling modern climate debate...no parallel just a vague analogy. Judging the natural environment as good or evil is not quite up to scientific approach.