Global Warming caused the fall of the Roman Empire?

[WHAMPOM]

http://www.npr.org/2011/01/22/133143758/could-climate-change-have-led-to-the-fall-of-rome


Obviously this would be just one of many factors, including raging barbarian hordes (which might have been displaced by climate change as well), incompetent emperors and corrupt leadership. Interesting twist to add this newly found evidence into the mix to say the least. Shows the importance of understanding the sun's connection to climate change.

Ya mean the adoption of Christianity had nothing to do with it? WOW! Leave out a major factor there!!

 

[WHAMPOM]

In part, but how did they get to that state? Remember prior to the Crusades Islam was pretty much kicking ass.

Generally speaking the theory goes climate change = better crop yields = population explosion = expansion. Of course it's only one factor, but a very significant one.

Tell me another one, how the floods in Australia destroying their wheat crop did not make the wheat price jump.

 

[kage69]

The real reason the roman empire fell
The use of lead pipes for drinking water.

The use of lead for cooking vessels probably had more of an impact on their health (specifically the production of sappa, which was as ubiquitous as olive oil then) and then there was the penchant for Roman women to use powdered lead as general purpose make up. The stone of the aqueducts represented the majority of surfaces that Roman water came into contact with. But yeah, lead is a real culprit there.

People went crazy and sterile, sounds like far more of impact then a temperature fluctuation to me.

Not to say I don't think weather could play a role in world history to such a degree. It worked for the French after all.

 

[PingSpike]

In part, but how did they get to that state? Remember prior to the Crusades Islam was pretty much kicking ass.

Generally speaking the theory goes climate change = better crop yields = population explosion = expansion. Of course it's only one factor, but a very significant one.

That's interesting. I just looked it up and the crusades do pretty much coincide with the Medieval Warm Period.

 

[Elias824]

Yeah this.

lets just hope we don't find out we are doing equally stupid stuff.

I bet there is more of this type of stuff then we could imagine. In 2000 years im betting most of the stuff we do will be looked back on as moronic, well assuming humanity lasts that long.

 

[Elias824]

Also I had no idea about the lead makeup and using lead for cooking equipment that's very interesting.

 

[dainthomas]

...and you immediately emphasized the choice of Deniers. Sorry, volcanoes are a far bigger monkey wrench than Solar will ever(barring the Sun going Nova) be.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maunder_Minimum

 

[werepossum]

That's interesting. I just looked it up and the crusades do pretty much coincide with the Medieval Warm Period.

Makes sense. Islam's strength was in hotter climes less likely to benefit from warmer temperatures. Christianity's strength was in colder climes more likely to benefit from warmer temperatures. Thus Europe enjoyed better yield increases with more surviving children and more surplus, which can be used to fund things like warfare. So Christianity takes back part of the Middle East (and also learns that taking something /= holding it.)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maunder_Minimum

Sh! We must all respect the mantras. Climate was constant. The sun does not affect temperatures.

As a skeptic of CAGW I'm also skeptical of all claims that warming caused the failure of some civilization. I'm sure it has happened, I'm just skeptical because such claims, right or wrong, are also used to "prove" what a danger CAGW presents to modern civilization. In the case of the Roman Empire, such a connection seems very tenuous and convenient to me, which granted is my own learned bias rather than an examination of the actual evidence.

 

[Infohawk]

Conservatives killed Rome

Remember Etu Brute?

I'd love to hear the retarded logic behind that one. Especially since your boogieman version of a conservative probably didn't exist back then.

 

[irishScott]

Tell me another one, how the floods in Australia destroying their wheat crop did not make the wheat price jump.

Government bailout? Sorry, couldn't resist.

 

[Jaskalas]

Tell me another one, how the floods in Australia destroying their wheat crop did not make the wheat price jump.

Oh, so it's causing flooding now? What about drought last year? Oh, that's right.. once again we can conclude that global warming causes everything.

Prof. Cliff Ollier, University Of West Australia : “The Queensland floods are not related to anthropogenic global warming”

In 2003 Professor Karoly published, under the auspices of the World Wildlife Fund, a report that claimed that elevated air temperatures, due to CO2, exacerbated the drought.

“…the higher temperatures caused a marked increase in evaporation rates, which sped up the loss of soil moisture and the drying of vegetation and watercourses. This is the first drought in Australia where the impact of human-induced global warming can be clearly observed…”

and

“This drought has had a more severe impact than any other drought since at least 1950…. This is the first drought in Australia where the impact of human-induced global warming can be clearly observed.”

So Anthropogenic Global Warming can apparently be used to explain any current disaster. Any hypothesis (like AGW) that uses the same mechanism to explain opposite effects is untestable, and therefore not science. Its models are totally useless for prediction.

In brief, there is no reason whatever to associate the Queensland floods with global warming (if it is occurring at all). It is even more ridiculous to blame it on a trivial increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide.

 

[IGBT]

the usual alarmist eco-KOOK sky is falling BS.