Science & Space :  The Official GrahamHancock.com forums
For all that is Scientifically related to Cosmology and Space. (NB: Please take discussions about UFOs, possible Alien contact, Crop-Circles, Alien Abductions, Planet-X and Niburu to the ‘Paranormal and Supernatural’ Message Board). 
Welcome! Log InRegister
JonnyMcA Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The point they make in their paper is that it
> wasnt just the volcanoes (which are pretty large
> in comparison to the 1815 Tambora eruption), but
> that solar activity was also weak, the cumulative
> effect being enough to tip the climate into a
> cooler phase over a prolonged period due to
> feedback mechanisms. As I understand the Little
> Ice Age in the 2nd millennium is blamed upon
> similar combinations of volcanoes and solar
> activity, but it suffers from a poorly defined
> start date.

Just for the record, I haven't finished the paper so bear with me here.

I like the solar connection. It points to what I've been arguing for years: that the sun most certainly does play a role in climate here on Earth.

But this isn't a global warming thread.

The trouble is the correlation, while strong, hasn't actually been proven. We're in a period of low solar activity right now after a period of intense activity. The next several years could count as a natural test of this paper's theory.

Here's what's interesting about that. There is a persistent hypothesis that as far as I know has never been disproved: that low solar activity can trigger volcanic eruptions.

> This LALIA would seem to have a definitive trigger
> at 536/540. It may well have been that some global
> cooling could have occured anyway, but the one-two
> punch of 536/540 just exasperated it all.

Yep. Combined with Napier and Clube's Taurid dust loading at this same time period. :)) (Sorry, had to throw that in there!)

As you
> would have seen from private communication
> (Baillie and McAneney 2015 "Why we shouldn’t
> ignore the mid-24th century BC when discussing the
> 2200-2000 BC climate anomaly"), the 2200 BC event
> (AKA 4.2 kya event) seems to have a similar abrupt
> trigger, though ice cores are unfortunately poorly
> dated at this time (in my opinion) to link it to
> any volcanic eruption.

Let's talk about the historical record. What do the historical chroniclers of the time say?

(Sorry, I just had to throw that in too!)



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09-Feb-16 14:43 by Aine.

Options: ReplyQuote


Subject Views Written By Posted
Late Antique Little Ice Age 761 JonnyMcA 09-Feb-16 10:05
Re: Late Antique Little Ice Age 279 Aine 09-Feb-16 13:02
Re: Late Antique Little Ice Age 243 carolb 09-Feb-16 13:20
Re: Late Antique Little Ice Age 325 JonnyMcA 09-Feb-16 13:49
Re: Late Antique Little Ice Age 313 Aine 09-Feb-16 14:42
Re: Late Antique Little Ice Age 332 JonnyMcA 09-Feb-16 15:07
Re: Late Antique Little Ice Age 398 Aine 09-Feb-16 16:35
Re: Late Antique Little Ice Age 328 JonnyMcA 09-Feb-16 19:11
Re: Late Antique Little Ice Age 293 Aine 09-Feb-16 19:23
Re: Late Antique Little Ice Age 222 drrayeye 13-Feb-16 01:09
Re: Late Antique Little Ice Age 184 Aine 13-Feb-16 15:06
Re: Late Antique Little Ice Age 185 carolb 13-Feb-16 19:46
Murky 262 drrayeye 13-Feb-16 21:05
Re: Murky 270 Aine 13-Feb-16 22:28
Re: Late Antique Little Ice Age 436 Me 15-Feb-16 15:40


Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.