Fred Flintstone Caused Global warming

ScreenHunter_187 Mar. 12 17.55

Humans Altered Climate 10,000 Years Ago, Study Claims

Forget auto emissions and power plants. Humans may have contributed to climate change more than 10,000 years ago, according to a new study.

“Some people say that people are unable to affect the climate, that it’s just too big,” said Christopher Doughty, a post-doctoral researcher at the Carnegie Institution for Science in Stanford, Calif., and a co-author of the study. “That’s obviously not the case. People started to affect global climate much earlier than we thought.”

Humans Altered Climate 10,000 Years Ago, Study Claims | LiveScience

Some people say that public funding for this fraud needs to be cut off.

About stevengoddard

Just having fun
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

27 Responses to Fred Flintstone Caused Global warming

  1. gator69 says:

    There were roughly 5 million people 10,000 years ago. What kind of an asshat would suggest that these primitives, few in number, could alter global anything?

    • Dave N says:

      That was my first thought, too.

      There is so much dubious crap in that article it beggars belief; least of which is that supposedly larger trees cause more warming. Strangely, they forget that more forestation (rather than grassland) consumes more CO2.

    • kbray in california says:

      Maybe their primitive diet produced a lot of methane…
      (it’s 20X stronger than co2 … or is it 40X… or is 105X…
      well you get the idea… it was the farting.)

  2. Ivan says:

    “Researchers aren’t sure exactly why mammoths went extinct or how much humans are to blame
    …but they will make the claim anyway.
    What they should say, is that “researchers haven’t got the first clue as to whether their arseholes were bored, punched, or pecked out by a flock of wild geese – but they suspect the latter.”

  3. B.C. says:

    I blame Barney Rubble. I never did trust him, what with the constant laughing and all. Fred’s just the fall guy.

    On a more serious note, what would the “carbon footprint” of a mere 5,000,000 cave dwellers be, compared to, say, something the size of a Krakatoa-type volcanic eruption? What about all of the other thousands of volcanoes that we can see, much less the tens-of-thousands of miles of volcanic vents that run through the oceans where the tectonic plates are spreading? Do these “scientists” really think that we’re all as dumb as their hostages students at the universities?

  4. Andy DC says:

    Five million survived the Ice Age? So people could adapt after all. We are not as frail or feeble as the alarmists would have us believe. Maybe some prehistoric SUV like the one Fred Flintstone is driving caused the ice sheets to recede and saved the planet!

  5. sunsettommy says:

    I can hardly wait for M>C> or David “PH.d” Appell to charm us with their support of this bird liner paper.

    • Glacierman says:

      M>C> will just pop off asking for a reaction to the paper and pretend he wants to see a response, all while being a tool.

  6. Craig says:

    Man was building large structures 10,000 years ago. Primitives they were not. The article is koolaid for the Global Warming Religion masses.

    • sunsettommy says:

      Yeah with around 5 million people “exploiting” about 2% of the land surface at the time.

    • gator69 says:

      “The earliest signs of a process leading to sedentary culture can be seen in the Levant to as early as 12,000 BC, when the Natufian culture became sedentary; it evolved into an agricultural society by 10,000 BC.[6] The importance of water to safeguard an abundant and stable food supply, due to favourable conditions for hunting, fishing and gathering resources including cereals, provided an initial wide spectrum economy that triggered the creation of permanent villages.

      The earliest proto-urban settlements with several thousand inhabitants emerged in the Neolithic. The first cities to house several tens of thousands were Memphis and Uruk, by the 31st century BC (see Historical urban community sizes).”

      10,000 years ago, man was primitive.

      • tckev says:

        “10,000 years ago, man was primitive.”
        And some procreated all the way up to the present day without any signs of development.

  7. kbray in california says:

    Why stop at 10,000 years ?…..

    “Fire found
    Traces of ash found in Wonderwerk Cave in South Africa suggest that at least some Homo erectus used fire as far back as 1 million years ago. Another site in Israel, Gesher Benot Ya’aqov, shows evidence of fire from around 800,000 years ago.”

    Looks like we been fuckin’ up the weather since the first sticks got rubbed together…


  8. leftinbrooklyn says:

    Fred owes me reparations.

  9. Andy Oz says:

    It should read – “Skeptics aren’t sure exactly why Hansen has no brain or how much Alarmists are to blame for the overall lowering of the human species IQ.”

    • Ivan says:

      I think you may be confusing cause and effect.
      I don’t know that Alarmists can be blamed for lowering the overall IQ – but they have certainly exploited it for all it’s worth – and then some.
      My take is that it is a manifestation of the “Frog in Boiling Water Syndrome,” and a sure sign that the “human species” is a failed evolutionary experiment that is rapidly heading the way of the dodo.

      • Andy Oz says:

        If Alarmists are exploiting others, that is lower on the psychological evolutionary scale, just with a lot more animal cunning. It’s still Win – Lose, not Win- Win.
        And the exploited ones are just not using that brain cell rattling around in their skulls. Unfortunately both are pretty difficult to quantify, without massaging the data, particularly historical data. 🙂

    • Ivan says: case any more proof of this is needed:
      British teenagers have lower IQs than their counterparts did 30 years ago
      Tests carried out in 1980 and again in 2008 show that the IQ score of an average 14-year-old dropped by more than two points over the period.
      The trend marks an abrupt reversal of the so-called “Flynn effect” which has seen IQ scores rise year on year, among all age groups, in most industrialised countries throughout the past century.”

      • Andy Oz says:

        I reckon immigration policies will have something to do with that, and not just in the UK, but in many Western Countries including Australia. Eventually that will revert to an increasing IQ score once the second and third generations of new immigrants get into the schooling systems, have no language challenges and be financially better off.

      • Ivan says:

        Don’t go betting the farm on that one, will you.
        The education system IS the problem.
        Australia slipping in world education standards
        A new report says Australian high school students are now up to three years behind in maths compared with students in parts of Asia, despite increasing funding.”
        And you think we’ve been getting better quality boat people -er- immigrants lately?

      • Andy Oz says:

        Hopefully we’ll get someone in soon who’ll stop the illegal immigration. But I do take your point Ivan. I guess I’m an optimist at heart, but also a scout – i.e. be prepared.

      • kbray in california says:

        This is an older article but it gives you an idea of where California is headed…

        There are serious consequences to allowing millions of poor people who were not successful in their own country to enter illegally to reap wonderful US benefits.

      • Ivan says:

        There are serious consequences…
        I believe we saw similar things happening in the closing days of the Roman Empire, with less than optimal outcomes as well.

  10. scott says:

    Hardly a new idea. Anyway, I first came across this notion in Scientific American in March 2005 in the article, “How did humans first alter global climate.” This article posits that human land use, in particular, agriculture, has had a long term impact on the climate. I found this interesting because it suggests that there are significant anthropogenic effects that do not include CO2. Indeed, aside from the posited effects caused by agriculture, other kinds of land use such as urbanization are well known to have strong local effects & possibly regional as well. I have had it on my desk for some time now & just got around to scanning it. I will post the scan here if anybody is interested in reading it. That said, it is probably available online.

  11. scott says:

    BTW – I am one of the many people that seem to be out there with an engineering background that is skeptical of CAGW. I started out as a strong believer and only after looking into the data myself did I become slowly but completely disillusioned. This seems like a journey many others have followed as well.

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 )

Connecting to %s