Human Impacts on Ancient Marine Ecosystems

[Marc Verha]

Edited by Torben C. Rick and Jon M. Erlandson Human Impacts on
Ancient Marine Ecosystems A Global Perspective University of
California Press $60.00, £35.00 hardcover 978-0-520-25343-8
Available Now 336 pages, 7 x 10 inches April 2008, Available
worldwide Categories: Anthropology; Ecology, Evolution,
Environment; Archaeology; Ecology; Environment; Conservation;
Oceanography Description | About the Editors "An excellent
volume with mature, sophisticated, comprehensive research by
leaders in the fields of archaeology, zooarchaeology, and
paleoarchaeology that will be useful to scientists of many
interests."­David Steadman, author of Extinction and
Biogeography of Tropical Pacific Birds

"This volume will make a significant contribution to our
understanding of ancient human impacts on marine ecosystems,
which will be of interest to all researchers who are concerned
about the environment. The editors and contributors are
commended for their efforts on this significant research
topic."­Steven R. James, coeditor of The Archaeology of Global
Change: The Impact of Humans on Their Environment Description
Archaeological data now show that relatively intense human
adaptations to coastal environments developed much earlier
than once believed­more than 125,000 years ago. With our
oceans and marine fisheries currently in a state of crisis,
coastal archaeological sites contain a wealth of data that can
shed light on the history of human exploitation of marine
ecosystems. In eleven case studies from the Americas, Pacific
Islands, North Sea, Caribbean, Europe, and Africa, leading
researchers working in coastal areas around the world cover
diverse marine ecosystems, reaching into deep history to
discover how humans interacted with and impacted these aquatic
environments and shedding new light on our understanding of
contemporary environmental problems. About The Editors Torben
C. Rick is Assistant Professor in the Department of
Anthropology at Southern Methodist University and the author
of The Archaeology and Historical Ecology of Late Holocene San
Miguel Island. Jon M. Erlandson is Professor of Anthropology
and Director of the Museum of Natural and Cultural History at
the University of Oregon. He is coeditor of Journal of Island
and Coastal Archaeology and author of several books.

[claudiusde]

On Apr 9, 12:31=A0pm, Marc Verhaegen
<m_verhae...@skynet.be> wrote:
> Edited by Torben C. Rick and Jon M. Erlandson Human Impacts
> on Ancient Marine Ecosystems A Global Perspective University
> of California Press $60.00, =A335.00 hardcover
> 978-0-520-25343-8 Available Now 336 pages, 7 x 10 inches
> April 2008, Available worldwide Categories: Anthropology;
> Ecology, Evolution, Environment; Archaeology; Ecology;
> Environment; Conservation; Oceanography Description | About
> the Editors "An excellent volume with mature, sophisticated,
> comprehensive research by=

> leaders in the fields of archaeology, zooarchaeology, and
> paleoarchaeology=

> that will be useful to scientists of many
> interests."=ADDavid Steadman, au=
thor
> of Extinction and Biogeography of Tropical Pacific Birds
>
> "This volume will make a significant contribution to our
> understanding of ancient human impacts on marine ecosystems,

who cares.

which will be of interest to all
> researchers who are concerned about the environment. The
> editors and contributors are commended for their efforts on
> this significant research topic."=ADSteven R. James,
> coeditor of The Archaeology of Global Change: T=
he
> Impact of Humans on Their Environment Description
> Archaeological data now show that relatively intense human
> adaptations to coastal environments developed much earlier
> than once believed=ADmore than=

> 125,000 years ago. With our oceans and marine fisheries
> currently in a sta=
te
> of crisis, coastal archaeological sites contain a wealth
> of data that can shed light on the history of human
> exploitation of marine ecosystems. In eleven case studies
> from the Americas, Pacific Islands, North Sea, Caribbean,
> Europe, and Africa, leading researchers working in
> coastal area=
s
> around the world cover diverse marine ecosystems, reaching
> into deep histo=
ry
> to discover how humans interacted with and impacted these
> aquatic environments and shedding new light on our
> understanding of contemporary environmental problems.

Irrelevant.

> About The Editors Torben C. Rick is Assistant Professor in
> the Department of Anthropology at=

> Southern Methodist University and the author of The
> Archaeology and Historical Ecology of Late Holocene San
> Miguel Island. Jon M. Erlandson is=

> Professor of Anthropology and Director of the Museum of
> Natural and Cultur=
al
> History at the University of Oregon. He is coeditor of
> Journal of Island a=
nd
> Coastal Archaeology and author of several books.

[Caldervang]

On Apr 9, 10:06=A0pm, claudiusd...@sbcglobal.net wrote:
> On Apr 9, 12:31=A0pm, Marc Verhaegen
> <m_verhae...@skynet.be> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > Edited by Torben C. Rick and Jon M. Erlandson Human
> > Impacts on Ancient Marine Ecosystems A Global Perspective
> > University of California Press $60.00, =A335.00 hardcover
> > 978-0-520-25343-8 Available Now 336 pages, 7 x 10 inches
> > April 2008, Available worldwide Categories: Anthropology;
> > Ecology, Evolution, Environment; Archaeology; Ecology;
> > Environment; Conservation; Oceanography Description |
> > About the Editors "An excellent volume with mature,
> > sophisticated, comprehensive research =
by
> > leaders in the fields of archaeology, zooarchaeology, and
> > paleoarchaeolo=
gy
> > that will be useful to scientists of many
> > interests."=ADDavid Steadman, =
author
> > of Extinction and Biogeography of Tropical Pacific Birds
>
> > "This volume will make a significant contribution to our
> > understanding o=
f
> > ancient human impacts on marine ecosystems,
>
> who cares.
>
> =A0which will be of interest to all
>
>
>
>
>
> > researchers who are concerned about the environment. The
> > editors and contributors are commended for their efforts
> > on this significant researc=
h
> > topic."=ADSteven R. James, coeditor of The Archaeology of
> > Global Change:=
The
> > Impact of Humans on Their Environment Description
> > Archaeological data now show that relatively intense human
> > adaptations t=
o
> > coastal environments developed much earlier than once
> > believed=ADmore th=
an
> > 125,000 years ago. With our oceans and marine fisheries
> > currently in a s=
tate
> > of crisis, coastal archaeological sites contain a wealth
> > of data that ca=
n
> > shed light on the history of human exploitation of marine
> > ecosystems. In=

> > eleven case studies from the Americas, Pacific Islands,
> > North Sea, Caribbean, Europe, and Africa, leading
> > researchers working in coastal ar=
eas
> > around the world cover diverse marine ecosystems, reaching
> > into deep his=
tory
> > to discover how humans interacted with and impacted these
> > aquatic environments and shedding new light on our
> > understanding of contemporary=

> > environmental problems.
>
> Irrelevant.
>
>
>
> > About The Editors Torben C. Rick is Assistant Professor in
> > the Department of Anthropology =
at
> > Southern Methodist University and the author of The
> > Archaeology and Historical Ecology of Late Holocene San
> > Miguel Island. Jon M. Erlandson =
is
> > Professor of Anthropology and Director of the Museum of
> > Natural and Cult=
ural
> > History at the University of Oregon. He is coeditor of
> > Journal of Island=
and
> > Coastal Archaeology and author of several books.- Hide
> > quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

I care. I rode on the ferry to 'Southport the other day, and
talking to the pilot, he said he used to be a fisherman, but
there are not enough fish left to make a living. A very
vibrant fishing industry in NC (USA) is very very stressed. It
is unknown why the fish have declined, but it is suspected to
be a combination of factors... pollution upstream into the
sounds, overfishing, disturbance of the wetlands in general,
and of course unknowns are thrown in for the fun of it.

I care about zebra mussels in the Great Lakes.

or over population of rabbits in Australia. Or the
introduction of the mongoose into the Virgin Islands.

There are many problems in our world that are direct results
of human action. We are going to have to stretch to fix these
things, and that is all without any reference to your pet
peeve of global warming. If PA can contribute to some modern
solutions, that is a good thing, and would ultimately fund
more research.. more digs... and that in turn could help to
give your scenario needed evidence.

regards calder

[claudiusde]

On Apr 10, 8:08=A0pm, "caldervang...@gmail.com"
<caldervang...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Apr 9, 10:06=A0pm, claudiusd...@sbcglobal.net wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Apr 9, 12:31=A0pm, Marc Verhaegen
> > <m_verhae...@skynet.be> wrote:
>
> > > Edited by Torben C. Rick and Jon M. Erlandson Human
> > > Impacts on Ancient Marine Ecosystems A Global
> > > Perspective University of California Press $60.00,
> > > =A335.00 hardcover 978-0-520-25343-8 Available Now 336
> > > pages, 7 x 10 inches April 2008, Available worldwide
> > > Categories: Anthropology; Ecology, Evolution,
> > > Environment; Archaeology=
;
> > > Ecology; Environment; Conservation; Oceanography
> > > Description | About the Editors "An excellent volume
> > > with mature, sophisticated, comprehensive researc=
h by
> > > leaders in the fields of archaeology, zooarchaeology,
> > > and paleoarchaeo=
logy
> > > that will be useful to scientists of many
> > > interests."=ADDavid Steadman=
, author
> > > of Extinction and Biogeography of Tropical Pacific Birds
>
> > > "This volume will make a significant contribution to our
> > > understanding=
of
> > > ancient human impacts on marine ecosystems,
>
> > who cares.
>
> > =A0which will be of interest to all
>
> > > researchers who are concerned about the environment. The
> > > editors and contributors are commended for their efforts
> > > on this significant resea=
rch
> > > topic."=ADSteven R. James, coeditor of The Archaeology
> > > of Global Chang=
e: The
> > > Impact of Humans on Their Environment Description
> > > Archaeological data now show that relatively intense
> > > human adaptations=
to
> > > coastal environments developed much earlier than once
> > > believed=ADmore =
than
> > > 125,000 years ago. With our oceans and marine fisheries
> > > currently in a=
state
> > > of crisis, coastal archaeological sites contain a wealth
> > > of data that =
can
> > > shed light on the history of human exploitation of
> > > marine ecosystems. =
In
> > > eleven case studies from the Americas, Pacific Islands,
> > > North Sea, Caribbean, Europe, and Africa, leading
> > > researchers working in coastal =
areas
> > > around the world cover diverse marine ecosystems,
> > > reaching into deep h=
istory
> > > to discover how humans interacted with and impacted
> > > these aquatic environments and shedding new light on our
> > > understanding of contempora=
ry
> > > environmental problems.
>
> > Irrelevant.
>
> > > About The Editors Torben C. Rick is Assistant Professor
> > > in the Department of Anthropolog=
y at
> > > Southern Methodist University and the author of The
> > > Archaeology and Historical Ecology of Late Holocene San
> > > Miguel Island. Jon M. Erlandso=
n is
> > > Professor of Anthropology and Director of the Museum of
> > > Natural and Cu=
ltural
> > > History at the University of Oregon. He is coeditor of
> > > Journal of Isla=
nd and
> > > Coastal Archaeology and author of several books.- Hide
> > > quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> I care. =A0I rode on the ferry to 'Southport the other day,
> and talking to the pilot, he said he used to be a fisherman,
> but there are not enough fish left to make a living. =A0

I care about this kind of stuff also. My comment was with
regard to human evolution.

Marc's coy suggestion is that these observations make the case
for the notion that A'piths did the backstroke more plausible.
But Marc a zomby. The lights might be on, but nobody is home.
He is, for all practical purposes, retarded on the subject of
evolutionary biology. Ecological concepts are so far beyond
him, you might as well be trying to explain auto mechanics to
your dog than attempt to explain anything to Marc.

> A very vibrant fishing industry in NC (USA) is very very
> stressed. =A0It is unknown why the fish have declined, but
> it is suspected to be a combination of factors... pollution
> upstream into the sounds, overfishing, disturbance of the
> wetlands in general, and of course unknowns are thrown in
> for the fun of it.

My guess would be overfishing. I'd have to look at the data to
form an opinion on this specific situation. Be careful not to
fall for the propaganda. The environmental sciences are thick
with it. Not as thick (or not in the same way at least) as PA,
but there is a lot of
ea.

>
> I care about zebra mussels in the Great Lakes.
>
> or over population of rabbits in Australia. Or the
> introduction of the mongoose into the Virgin Islands.

These seem like noble causes. These seem like much better
causes than pretending that CO2 has an effect on atmosphere
temperatures despite the fact there is and has never been any
scientific basis for this assertion.

>
> There are many problems in our world that are direct results
> of human action. =A0

Uh huh.

> We are going to have to stretch to fix these things,

I suppose. But shouldn't we make some degree of effort to be
as sure as possible that they things we are striving to fix
are actually broken.

> and that is all without any reference to your pet peeve of
> global warming. =A0

Actually I didn't care all that much about GW (AGW) until I
fell into a discussion on sci.environment about march/april of
2006. Within about three months I had driven-off a bunch of
propagandizing scientists from the Hadley Research center UK.
They attempted to pull the discussion to their moderated
newsgroup but nobody followed. It's now a dead NG called
globalchange. ( http://groups.google.com/group/globalc=
hange?hl=3Den&lnk=3Dsrg )

They couldn't deal with my questions.

> If PA can contribute to some modern solutions, that is a
> good thing, and would ultimately fund more research.. more
> digs... and that in turn could help to give your scenario
> needed evidence.

Well, I don't know. More evidence to prove the obvious.

[Caldervang]

On Apr 11, 1:37=A0am, claudiusd...@sbcglobal.net wrote:
> On Apr 10, 8:08=A0pm, "caldervang...@gmail.com"
>
>
>
>
>
> <caldervang...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Apr 9, 10:06=A0pm, claudiusd...@sbcglobal.net wrote:
>
> > > On Apr 9, 12:31=A0pm, Marc Verhaegen
> > > <m_verhae...@skynet.be> wrote:
>
> > > > Edited by Torben C. Rick and Jon M. Erlandson Human
> > > > Impacts on Ancient Marine Ecosystems A Global
> > > > Perspective University of California Press $60.00,
> > > > =A335.00 hardcover 978-0-520-25343-8 Available Now 336
> > > > pages, 7 x 10 inches April 2008, Available worldwide
> > > > Categories: Anthropology; Ecology, Evolution,
> > > > Environment; Archaeolo=
gy;
> > > > Ecology; Environment; Conservation; Oceanography
> > > > Description | About the Editors "An excellent volume
> > > > with mature, sophisticated, comprehensive resea=
rch by
> > > > leaders in the fields of archaeology, zooarchaeology,
> > > > and paleoarcha=
eology
> > > > that will be useful to scientists of many
> > > > interests."=ADDavid Steadm=
an, author
> > > > of Extinction and Biogeography of Tropical Pacific
> > > > Birds
>
> > > > "This volume will make a significant contribution to
> > > > our understandi=
ng of
> > > > ancient human impacts on marine ecosystems,
>
> > > who cares.
>
> > > =A0which will be of interest to all
>
> > > > researchers who are concerned about the environment.
> > > > The editors and=

> > > > contributors are commended for their efforts on this
> > > > significant res=
earch
> > > > topic."=ADSteven R. James, coeditor of The Archaeology
> > > > of Global Cha=
nge: The
> > > > Impact of Humans on Their Environment Description
> > > > Archaeological data now show that relatively intense
> > > > human adaptatio=
ns to
> > > > coastal environments developed much earlier than once
> > > > believed=ADmor=
e than
> > > > 125,000 years ago. With our oceans and marine
> > > > fisheries currently in=
a state
> > > > of crisis, coastal archaeological sites contain a
> > > > wealth of data tha=
t can
> > > > shed light on the history of human exploitation of
> > > > marine ecosystems=
. In
> > > > eleven case studies from the Americas, Pacific
> > > > Islands, North Sea, Caribbean, Europe, and Africa,
> > > > leading researchers working in coasta=
l areas
> > > > around the world cover diverse marine ecosystems,
> > > > reaching into deep=
history
> > > > to discover how humans interacted with and impacted
> > > > these aquatic environments and shedding new light on
> > > > our understanding of contempo=
rary
> > > > environmental problems.
>
> > > Irrelevant.
>
> > > > About The Editors Torben C. Rick is Assistant
> > > > Professor in the Department of Anthropol=
ogy at
> > > > Southern Methodist University and the author of The
> > > > Archaeology and Historical Ecology of Late Holocene
> > > > San Miguel Island. Jon M. Erland=
son is
> > > > Professor of Anthropology and Director of the Museum
> > > > of Natural and =
Cultural
> > > > History at the University of Oregon. He is coeditor of
> > > > Journal of Is=
land and
> > > > Coastal Archaeology and author of several books.- Hide
> > > > quoted text -=

>
> > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > I care. =A0I rode on the ferry to 'Southport the other
> > day, and talking to the pilot, he said he used to be a
> > fisherman, but there are not enough fish left to make a
> > living. =A0
>
> I care about this kind of stuff also. =A0My comment was with
> regard to human evolution.
>
> Marc's coy suggestion is that these observations make the
> case for the notion that A'piths did the backstroke more
> plausible. =A0But Marc a zomby. =A0The lights might be on,
> but nobody is home. =A0He is, for all practical purposes,
> retarded on the subject of evolutionary biology. Ecological
> concepts are so far beyond him, you might as well be trying
> to explain auto mechanics to your dog than attempt to
> explain anything to Marc.
>
> > A very vibrant fishing industry in NC (USA) is very very
> > stressed. =A0It is unknown why the fish have declined, but
> > it is suspected to be a combination of factors...
> > pollution upstream into the sounds, overfishing,
> > disturbance of the wetlands in general, and of course
> > unknowns are thrown in for the fun of it.
>
> My guess would be overfishing. =A0I'd have to look at the
> data to form an opinion on this specific situation. =A0Be
> careful not to fall for the propaganda. =A0The environmental
> sciences are thick with it. =A0Not as thick (or not in the
> same way at least) as PA, but there is a lot of
> it.

No propaganda at all. This was one man, now working on a
ferry, that was out of a job... his family heritage of being a
fisherman.

>
>
>
> > I care about zebra mussels in the Great Lakes.
>
> > or over population of rabbits in Australia. Or the
> > introduction of the mongoose into the Virgin Islands.
>
> These seem like noble causes. =A0These seem like much better
> causes than pretending that CO2 has an effect on atmosphere
> temperatures despite the fact there is and has never been
> any scientific basis for this assertion.

The mongoose was purposely introduced to get rid of the mice
(which were also probably stow-aways on previous ships).
However, mice and mongoose rarely meet, because one is
nocturnal, the other daytime. <sigh> The islands do not have
any snakes. It is unclear whether or not there were ever
snakes, or if the mongoose ate all of them.

>
>
>
> > There are many problems in our world that are direct
> > results of human action. =A0
>
> Uh huh.
>
> > We are going to have to stretch to fix these things,
>
> I suppose. =A0But shouldn't we make some degree of effort to
> be as sure as possible that they things we are striving to
> fix are actually broken.

Less air pollution is probably a good thing, given that our
ozone in my hometown goes into the "red" every summer. and
places like LA could benefit too. Heck, Athens, Greece has too
much air pollution.

>
> > and that is all without any reference to your pet peeve of
> > global warming. =A0
>
> Actually I didn't care all that much about GW (AGW) until I
> fell into a discussion on sci.environment about march/april
> of 2006. =A0Within about three months I had driven-off a
> bunch of propagandizing scientists from the Hadley Research
> center UK. =A0They attempted to pull the discussion to their
> moderated newsgroup but nobody followed. =A0It's now a dead
> NG called globalchange.
> =A0(http://groups.google.com/group/glob=
alchange?hl=3Den&lnk=3Dsrg
> )
>
> They couldn't deal with my questions.
>
> > If PA can contribute to some modern solutions, that is a
> > good thing, and would ultimately fund more research.. more
> > digs... and that in turn could help to give your scenario
> > needed evidence.
>
> Well, I don't know. =A0More evidence to prove the obvious.-

Science, IMHO, is not about something that is already proved.
Rather, it is the sum of gathering evidence and testing
hypothesises (spelling?). No new evidence can disgree with the
existing hypothesis, or the whole thing is called into
question. In other words, it is never, IMHO, obvious, and
never a "done deal." Knowledge is the accumulation of accepted
facts. Wisdom is something entirely different. And the
application of technology is required to fix our problems.

regards calder

Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

[claudiusde]

> Science, IMHO, is not about something that is already
> proved. Rather, it is the sum of gathering evidence and
> testing hypothesises (spelling?). No new evidence can
> disagree with the existing hypothesis, or the whole thing is
> called into question. =A0In other words, it is never, IMHO,
> obvious, and never a "done deal." =A0Knowledge is the
> accumulation of accepted facts. =A0Wisdom is something
> entirely different. =A0And the application of technology is
> required to fix our problems.

In terms of what you are stating here my hypothesis is the
only one that presents a reasonable degree of detail, is
explanatory of the evidence, and is not contradicted by any of
the evidence. It stands alone. There really is no competition.
Most other hypotheses are either vague and/or sketchy or they
present details that are plainly absurd. New evidence that
agrees with my hypothesis is not going to make any difference.
It's already the only real scientific hypothesis of human
evolution out there.

[Caldervang]

On Apr 15, 9:21=A0pm, claudiusd...@sbcglobal.net wrote:
> > Science, IMHO, is not about something that is already
> > proved. Rather, it is the sum of gathering evidence and
> > testing hypothesises (spelling?). =A0 No new evidence can
> > disagree with the existing hypothesis, or the whole thing
> > is called into question. =A0In other words, it is never,
> > IMHO, obvious, and never a "done deal." =A0Knowledge=

> > is the accumulation of accepted facts. =A0Wisdom is
> > something entirely different. =A0And the application of
> > technology is required to fix our problems.
>
> In terms of what you are stating here my hypothesis is the
> only one that presents a reasonable degree of detail, is
> explanatory of the evidence, and is not contradicted by any
> of the evidence. =A0It stands alone. =A0There really is no
> competition. =A0Most other hypotheses are either vague
> and/or sketchy or they present details that are plainly
> absurd. =A0New evidence that agrees with my hypothesis is
> not going to make any difference. =A0It's already the only
> real scientific hypothesis of human evolution out there.

okay. no problems from my POV. You should publish and not
worry too much about sap. That is, you could make a great deal
of money if your hypothesis really solves this riddle... the
riddle of our evolution in the last 6 mya. I do think that
some of what you have posted could benefit from an editor.

Science will always be open to change and update, and
occasionally throwing out the whole mess, when new evidence
requires it. regards calder

[claudiusde]

Global warming is a cult, not a science.

On Apr 16, 8:08 pm, claudiusd...@sbcglobal.net wrote:
> On Apr 16, 5:24 pm, Quadibloc <jsav...@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:
>
> > On Apr 10, 11:37 pm, claudiusd...@sbcglobal.net wrote:
>
> > > These seem like noble causes. These seem like much
> > > better causes than pretending that CO2 has an effect on
> > > atmosphere temperatures despite the fact there is and
> > > has never been any scientific basis for this assertion.
>
> > We know that carbon dioxide is transparent to visible
> > light as well as short-wave infrared.
>
> Baloney. All atmospheric gasses can be so described.
>
>
>
> > We know that it is opaque to long-wave infrared.
>
> As with all bad science AGW consists of a lot of these kind
> of propagandistic statements. There is no experimental data
> or even definable theory.
>
>
>
> > We know that really hot bodies like the Sun emit lots of
> > energy in the form of visible light and short-wave
> > infrared.
>
> > Less hot objects are only red hot, and very cold objects
> > emit their heat energy in the form of radio waves. The
> > Earth's temperature means that it radiates its heat in the
> > form of long-wave infrared. Heat radiating away from Earth
> > into the blackness of space is the reason you can, even on
> > a hot night in the desert, cool water in a properly
> > insulated container.
>
> Yadda, yadda, yadda. This is all anecdotal nonsense. Sorry,
> but its that simple. Why don't you go to sci.environment and
> ask around for the experimental data. Do expect to never get
> a rational response to your request and a lot of accusations
> that you are one of them--them being anybody that asks the
> kind of question you just asked. That was my experience in
> sci.environment and alt.global-warming.
>
> > So we have a scientific basis for global warming, like we
> > have one for the proposition that water will make things
> > wet, or bullets can kill. When we actually see it happen,
> > it'll be too late to do anything about
> > it.
>
> It's never too late to get an education. In the meantime
> don't get your panties in a wad. Take it from somebody that
> has a lot of experience in the more controversial aspects at
> the cutting edge of science, global warming is dudu. There
> is no there there.
>
> > It's not as if we have to stop using energy and go back to
> > the dark ages. What about nuclear power?
>
> Well, actually, the problem with nuclear is, partly, that we
> don't get the benefits of CO2 to increase crop yields that
> we do with oil, coal or other carbon based sources of
> energy. Did you ever consider that? Your concerns regarding
> CO2 purported effect on atmospheric temperatures have, I
> assure you, more to do with indigestion than science.
>
> Don't bother to dispute me about any of this. Just go to
> this website: Junkscience.com You're lucky,. The prize is
> yet unclaimed. You should submit your solution--unless its a
> secret or something. That kind of thing seems to be
> happening more and more these days.

On Apr 17, 10:10 am, Quadibloc <jsav...@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:
> On Apr 16, 9:08 pm, claudiusd...@sbcglobal.net wrote:
>
> > > Less hot objects are only red hot, and very cold objects
> > > emit their heat energy in the form of radio waves. The
> > > Earth's temperature means that it radiates its heat in
> > > the form of long-wave infrared. Heat radiating away from
> > > Earth into the blackness of space is the reason you can,
> > > even on a hot night in the desert, cool water in a
> > > properly insulated container.
>
> > Yadda, yadda, yadda. This is all anecdotal nonsense.
>
> None of this is anecdotal. These are basic scientific facts,
> and repeatable observations.
>
> Anecdotal would be if I talked about the high temperatures
> last year. Since you don't know what "anecdotal" means, yes,
> I don't need to bother arguing seriously with _you_.
>
> John Savard

[Lee Olsen]

On Apr 17, 12:20=A0pm, claudiusd...@sbcglobal.net wrote:
> Global warming is a cult, not a science.

Says the illiterate who claims:

1 Nobody lived on the savanna until the advent of jeeps and
guns. 2 Lions evolved from saber-tooth cats. 3 Apiths never
ventured more than 50/100 yds away from a tree. 4 Climate
change is not happening presently. 5 Agriculture probably
stretches back hundreds of thousand if not millions of years.
6 Genetic drift is a pseudo-scientific notion. 7 Spears are
useless against hyena and lions.
8 ..then what purpose do the stone weapons (spears, bow and
arrow) serve that show up in the fossil record starting
about 2.5 mya?
9. Then you should stop;pissing into it. 10 Speak for
yourself. I see just fine at night.
10. Uh, er. These artifacts don't come with notes attached to
them that indicate how they were actually used.
11. Why we see stasis in tool advancement up until a few
thousand years ago.
12. So Paul, now that you've, finally, come to accept the
fact that early hominids--both A'pith and HE--resided in
treed habitat

I didn't think it was possible, but McGinn knows even less
about global warming than he knows about anthropology.

[Lee Olsen]

On Apr 16, 8:08=A0pm, claudiusd...@sbcglobal.net wrote:

>
> Don't bother to dispute me about any of this. =A0Just go to
> this website:

http://in.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idINIndia-33104420080-
417

Tip: buy Greenland ice-covered property today, tomorrow they
will be putting up condos on the bare rock.

[Rmacfarl]

On Apr 18, 10:56=A0am, Lee Olsen <paleoc...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
> On Apr 17, 12:20=A0pm, claudiusd...@sbcglobal.net wrote:
>
> > Global warming is a cult, not a science.
>
=2E..
>
> I didn't think it was possible, but McGinn knows even less
> about global warming than he knows about anthropology.

Yeah, his views on PA are moronic and obnoxious but his views
on GW are obscene and downright dangerous...

Ross Macfarlane

[claudiusde]

On Apr 18, 1:28=A0am, rmacfarl
<rmacf...@alphalink.com.au> wrote:
> On Apr 18, 10:56=A0am, Lee Olsen
> <paleoc...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Apr 17, 12:20=A0pm, claudiusd...@sbcglobal.net wrote:
>
> > > Global warming is a cult, not a science.
>
> ...
>
> > I didn't think it was possible, but McGinn knows even less
> > about global warming than he knows about anthropology.
>
> Yeah, his views on PA are moronic and obnoxious but his
> views on GW are obscene and downright dangerous...

It's always so predictable that science cultists are so sure
they are right and so complete unwilling to discuss why they
are so sure they are right.

[Lee Olsen]

On Apr 18, 9:47=A0am, claudiusd...@sbcglobal.net wrote:
> On Apr 18, 1:28=A0am, rmacfarl
> <rmacf...@alphalink.com.au> wrote:
>
> > On Apr 18, 10:56=A0am, Lee Olsen <paleoc...@hotmail.com>
> > wrote:
>
> > > On Apr 17, 12:20=A0pm, claudiusd...@sbcglobal.net wrote:
>
> > > > Global warming is a cult, not a science.
>
> > ...
>
> > > I didn't think it was possible, but McGinn knows even
> > > less about global warming than he knows about
> > > anthropology.
>
> > Yeah, his views on PA are moronic and obnoxious but his
> > views on GW are obscene and downright dangerous...
>
> It's always so predictable that science cultists are so sure
> they are right and so complete unwilling to discuss why they
> are so sure they are right.

You are the best argument we have for global warming. Anyone
who could get so screwed up on anthropology is an
advertisement for the same fundamentaly-flawed thinking being
used on other issues.

[claudiusde]

On Apr 18, 10:56=A0am, Lee Olsen <paleoc...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
> On Apr 18, 9:47=A0am, claudiusd...@sbcglobal.net wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Apr 18, 1:28=A0am, rmacfarl <rmacf...@alphalink.com.au>
> > wrote:
>
> > > On Apr 18, 10:56=A0am, Lee Olsen <paleoc...@hotmail.com>
> > > wrote:
>
> > > > On Apr 17, 12:20=A0pm, claudiusd...@sbcglobal.net
> > > > wrote:
>
> > > > > Global warming is a cult, not a science.
>
> > > ...
>
> > > > I didn't think it was possible, but McGinn knows even
> > > > less about global warming than he knows about
> > > > anthropology.
>
> > > Yeah, his views on PA are moronic and obnoxious but his
> > > views on GW are obscene and downright dangerous...
>
> > It's always so predictable that science cultists are so
> > sure they are right and so complete unwilling to discuss
> > why they are so sure they are right.
>
> You are the best argument we have for global warming. Anyone
> who could get so screwed up on anthropology is an
> advertisement for the same fundamentaly-flawed thinking
> being used on other issues.

You sure told me.

[Lee Olsen]

On Apr 18, 12:27=A0pm, claudiusd...@sbcglobal.net wrote:

>
> You sure told me.

Well, don't get discouraged, nothing that few trips to the
library can't cure.

[McLark]

On Apr 18, 2:27=A0pm, claudiusd...@sbcglobal.net wrote:
> On Apr 18, 10:56=A0am, Lee Olsen
> <paleoc...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Apr 18, 9:47=A0am, claudiusd...@sbcglobal.net wrote:
>
> > > On Apr 18, 1:28=A0am, rmacfarl
> > > <rmacf...@alphalink.com.au> wrote:
>
> > > > On Apr 18, 10:56=A0am, Lee Olsen
> > > > <paleoc...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > On Apr 17, 12:20=A0pm, claudiusd...@sbcglobal.net
> > > > > wrote:
>
> > > > > > Global warming is a cult, not a science.
>
> > > > ...
>
> > > > > I didn't think it was possible, but McGinn knows
> > > > > even less about global warming than he knows about
> > > > > anthropology.
>
> > > > Yeah, his views on PA are moronic and obnoxious but
> > > > his views on GW are obscene and downright dangerous...
>
> > > It's always so predictable that science cultists are so
> > > sure they are right and so complete unwilling to discuss
> > > why they are so sure they are right.
>
> > You are the best argument we have for global warming.
> > Anyone who could get so screwed up on anthropology is an
> > advertisement for the same fundamentaly-flawed thinking
> > being used on other issues.
>
> You sure told me.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

People have been telling you for years, Dimmy --to no avail. I
guess the willfully ignorant are both willful and ignorant.

=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=-
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= 3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
"I'm not understanding." --Dimmy, 12/10/2005

[claudiusde]

On Apr 18, 3:24=A0pm, mclark <mbclar...@comcast.net> wrote:
> On Apr 18, 2:27=A0pm, claudiusd...@sbcglobal.net wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Apr 18, 10:56=A0am, Lee Olsen <paleoc...@hotmail.com>
> > wrote:
>
> > > On Apr 18, 9:47=A0am, claudiusd...@sbcglobal.net wrote:
>
> > > > On Apr 18, 1:28=A0am, rmacfarl
> > > > <rmacf...@alphalink.com.au> wrote:
>
> > > > > On Apr 18, 10:56=A0am, Lee Olsen
> > > > > <paleoc...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > On Apr 17, 12:20=A0pm, claudiusd...@sbcglobal.net
> > > > > > wrote:
>
> > > > > > > Global warming is a cult, not a science.
>
> > > > > ...
>
> > > > > > I didn't think it was possible, but McGinn knows
> > > > > > even less about=

> > > > > > global warming than he knows about anthropology.
>
> > > > > Yeah, his views on PA are moronic and obnoxious but
> > > > > his views on G=
W
> > > > > are obscene and downright dangerous...
>
> > > > It's always so predictable that science cultists are
> > > > so sure they ar=
e
> > > > right and so complete unwilling to discuss why they
> > > > are so sure they=

> > > > are right.
>
> > > You are the best argument we have for global warming.
> > > Anyone who could=

> > > get so screwed up on anthropology is an advertisement
> > > for the same fundamentaly-flawed thinking being used on
> > > other issues.
>
> > You sure told me.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> People have been telling you for years, Dimmy --to no avail.
> I guess the willfully ignorant are both willful and
> ignorant.
>
> =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3-
> =D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
> "I'm not understanding." --Dimmy, 12/10/2005

Now that I have you full attention, Mikey, I need to you
answer this question: Human intellectual, communal, and social
behaviors would have had to have been selected by the process
of natural selection or they would not exist. Right?

It's a simple question. Why not just supply a simple
answer? I mean, come on now, It's not like you're fooling
anybody anyway.

[Lee Olsen]

On Apr 18, 7:23=A0pm, claudiusd...@sbcglobal.net wrote:

=A0It's not like you're fooling anybody anyway. 1 Nobody lived
on the savanna until the advent of jeeps and guns. 2 Lions
evolved from saber-tooth cats. 3 Apiths never ventured more
than 50/100 yds away from a tree. 4 Climate change is not
happening presently. 5 Agriculture probably stretches back
hundreds of thousand if not millions of years. 6 Genetic drift
is a pseudo-scientific notion. 7 Spears are useless against
hyena and lions.
8 ..then what purpose do the stone weapons (spears, bow and
arrow) serve that show up in the fossil record starting
about 2.5 mya?
9. Then you should stop;pissing into it. 10 Speak for
yourself. I see just fine at night.
10. Uh, er. These artifacts don't come with notes attached to
them that indicate how they were actually used.
11. Why we see stasis in tool advancement up until a few
thousand years ago.
12. So Paul, now that you've, finally, come to accept the
fact that early hominids--both A'pith and HE--resided in
treed habitat

[Rmacfarl]

On Apr 19, 12:23=A0pm, claudiusd...@sbcglobal.net wrote:
> On Apr 18, 3:24=A0pm, mclark <mbclar...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>
>
> > People have been telling you for years, Dimmy --to no
> > avail. I guess the willfully ignorant are both willful and
> > ignorant.
>
> > =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D-
> > ==3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
> > "I'm not understanding." --Dimmy, 12/10/2005
>
> Now that I have you full attention, Mikey, I need to you
> answer this question: Human intellectual, communal, and
> social behaviors would have had to have been selected by the
> process of natural selection or they would not exist.
> =A0Right?
>

Wrong.

>
> It's a simple question. =A0Why not just supply a simple
> answer? I mean, come on now, =A0It's not like you're fooling
> anybody anyway.
>

No, it isn't a simple question.

[claudiusde]

On Apr 18, 10:17=A0pm, rmacfarl
<rmacf...@alphalink.com.au> wrote:
> On Apr 19, 12:23=A0pm, claudiusd...@sbcglobal.net wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Apr 18, 3:24=A0pm, mclark <mbclar...@comcast.net>
> > wrote:
>
> > > People have been telling you for years, Dimmy --to no
> > > avail. I guess the willfully ignorant are both willful
> > > and ignorant.
>
> > > =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=-
> > > =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
> > > "I'm not understanding." --Dimmy, 12/10/2005
>
> > Now that I have you full attention, Mikey, I need to you
> > answer this question: Human intellectual, communal, and
> > social behaviors would have had to have been selected by
> > the process of natural selection or they would not exist.
> > =A0Right?
>
> Wrong.

Divine intervention?

>
>
>
> > It's a simple question. =A0Why not just supply a simple
> > answer? I mean, come on now, =A0It's not like you're
> > fooling anybody anyway.
>
> No, it isn't a simple question.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

[Rmacfarl]

On Apr 19, 3:28=A0pm, claudiusd...@sbcglobal.net wrote:
> On Apr 18, 10:17=A0pm, rmacfarl
> <rmacf...@alphalink.com.au> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Apr 19, 12:23=A0pm, claudiusd...@sbcglobal.net wrote:
>
> > > On Apr 18, 3:24=A0pm, mclark <mbclar...@comcast.net>
> > > wrote:
>
> > > > People have been telling you for years, Dimmy --to no
> > > > avail. I guess the willfully ignorant are both willful
> > > > and ignorant.
>
> > > > =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3-
> > > > =D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
> > > > "I'm not understanding." --Dimmy, 12/10/2005
>
> > > Now that I have you full attention, Mikey, I need to you
> > > answer this question: Human intellectual, communal, and
> > > social behaviors would have had to have been selected by
> > > the process of natural selection or they would not
> > > exist. =A0Right?
>
> > Wrong.
>
> Divine intervention?
>
>

Your PC evolved by natural sekection did it?

>
>
>
> > > It's a simple question. =A0Why not just supply a simple
> > > answer? I mean, come on now, =A0It's not like you're
> > > fooling anybody anyway.
>
> > No, it isn't a simple question.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

[claudiusde]

On Apr 18, 11:06=A0pm, rmacfarl
<rmacf...@alphalink.com.au> wrote:
> On Apr 19, 3:28=A0pm, claudiusd...@sbcglobal.net wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Apr 18, 10:17=A0pm, rmacfarl
> > <rmacf...@alphalink.com.au> wrote:
>
> > > On Apr 19, 12:23=A0pm, claudiusd...@sbcglobal.net wrote:
>
> > > > On Apr 18, 3:24=A0pm, mclark <mbclar...@comcast.net>
> > > > wrote:
>
> > > > > People have been telling you for years, Dimmy --to
> > > > > no avail. I guess the willfully ignorant are both
> > > > > willful and ignorant.
>
> > > > > =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D-
> > > > > ==3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
> > > > > "I'm not understanding." --Dimmy, 12/10/2005
>
> > > > Now that I have you full attention, Mikey, I need to
> > > > you answer this question: Human intellectual,
> > > > communal, and social behaviors would have had to have
> > > > been selected by the process of natural selection or
> > > > they would not exist. =A0Right?
>
> > > Wrong.
>
> > Divine intervention?
>
> Your PC evolved by natural sekection did it?

Space aliens? Elves?

>
>
>
>
>
> > > > It's a simple question. =A0Why not just supply a
> > > > simple answer? I mean, come on now, =A0It's not like
> > > > you're fooling anybody anyway.=

>
> > > No, it isn't a simple question.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

[Lee Olsen]

On Apr 19, 5:58=A0pm, claudiusd...@sbcglobal.net wrote:

>
> Space aliens? =A0Elves?

1 Nobody lived on the savanna until the advent of jeeps and
guns. 2 Lions evolved from saber-tooth cats. 3 Apiths never
ventured more than 50/100 yds away from a tree. 4 Climate
change is not happening presently. 5 Agriculture probably
stretches back hundreds of thousand if not millions of years.
6 Genetic drift is a pseudo-scientific notion. 7 Spears are
useless against hyena and lions.
8 ..then what purpose do the stone weapons (spears, bow and
arrow) serve that show up in the fossil record starting
about 2.5 mya?
9. Then you should stop;pissing into it. 10 Speak for
yourself. I see just fine at night.
10. Uh, er. These artifacts don't come with notes attached to
them that indicate how they were actually used.
11. Why we see stasis in tool advancement up until a few
thousand years ago.
12. So Paul, now that you've, finally, come to accept the
fact that early hominids--both A'pith and HE--resided in
treed habitat

[claudiusde]

On Apr 19, 6:11=A0pm, Lee Olsen <paleoc...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Apr 19, 5:58=A0pm, claudiusd...@sbcglobal.net wrote:
>
>
>
> > Space aliens? =A0Elves?
>
> 1 Nobody lived on the savanna until the advent of jeeps and
> guns. =A02 Lions evolved from saber-tooth cats. =A03 Apiths
> never ventured more than 50/100 yds away from a tree. 4
> Climate change is not happening presently. 5 Agriculture
> probably stretches back hundreds of thousand if not millions
> of years. 6 Genetic drift is a pseudo-scientific notion. 7
> Spears are useless against hyena and lions.
> 8 ..then what purpose do the stone weapons (spears, bow and
> arrow) serve that show up in the fossil record starting
> about 2.5 mya?
> 9. Then you should stop;pissing into it. 10 =A0Speak for
> yourself. I see just fine at night.
> 11. Uh, er. =A0These artifacts don't come with notes
> attached to them that =A0indicate how they were actually
> used.
> 12. Why we see stasis in tool advancement up until a few
> thousand =A0years ago. =A013. =A0So Paul, now that
> you've, finally, come to accept the fact that early
> =A0hominids--both A'pith and HE--resided in treed
> habitat

Is it a secret?

[Lee Olsen]

On Apr 19, 6:45=A0pm, claudiusd...@sbcglobal.net wrote:

>
> Is it a secret?

Message-ID: <376ED09C.69A21...@thegrid.net>#1/1 Niccolo
Caldararo: " It is embarrassing to you (or should be) for you
to continually make statements which most of us know are
unsupported by the data."

Dan Barnes: "..a number of people have suggested that the best
thing you can do is do substantial background reading, reframe
your arguement and come back again."

Greg Laden: "Read the stuff. If you have a vague memory of it,
that is not good enough." "Hit the books, kid!"