Dumb question: What about historical developments during the period which have been well attributed to the warm climate of the time?
...there is no need to consider the temperature increase of the past century as anything other than the natural progression of the persistent millennial-scale oscillation of climate that regularly brings the earth several-hundred-year periods of modestly higher and lower temperatures that are totally independent of variations in atmospheric CO2 concentration.
Whew! Makes me glad I'm not a fan of so-called "anthropogenic global warming."
Southern England was a major wine growing region during the
Medieval Warm Period - so much that French wine makers
complained to their king about cheap British wine......
When climate turned the vines were pulled up as grapes no longer ripened
Wasnt until the later part of 20th cent that England is
warm enough for grapes to grow again
From there, try to pinpoint that 2,000-year "trend" on that timeline.
Westerners need to get a grip and man-up with reality. To think "we," gnats that we are, could identify, let alone manipulate, climate trends, is idiocy. We need to get on with our civilizations and lives. We don't manipulate the climate, it manipulates us.
Why are we revisiting this? Again?
It's historical fact.
Regardless of what the East Anglia criminals and co-conspirators tried to pull...
Thanks for this thread.
FINALLY! The GWs and CCs are being forced to admit that today is COLDER than the Medieval Warm Period.
OH NOES! The Globe will get even warmer! OH NOES!
BTW, how much heat could a Polar Bear bear if a Polar Bear could bear heat?
And just how, exactly, is this Bush’s fault?