Back to Climate Change for a bit

Well, after a particularly offensive "human induced global warming" or climate change article from BBC News here, i went on another search regarding a rational explanation of the "Great Medieval Warming Period".  About a 400 year period when dairy cattle were raised on the west coast of Greenland and wine grapes may have been found as far north as Labrador.


This has been pooh-poohed as a "blip" (Al Gore) or as "localized" by many scientists.  There are numerous blogs and counter blogs regarding the issues.  However a new chip has been tossed on the table in the form of  "An Ikaite record of late Holocene climate at the Antarctic Peninsula" a paper written that seems to support a much larger warming area than "localized" proponents wish us to believe.  I would attempt to work through it, but it appears to be 40 bucks for the privilege. There is an article I found here from "investors business daily's" website.  I have not vetted them for quality or bias, but it seems a reasonable argument for the continual media bias (or ignorance) in existence for climate change.

The climate change alarmists/power players have many blogs etc attempting to rebut the Ikaite study, relying on an interview with the author of the paper who essentially says "this was not meant to be extrapolated over the entire planet", which is cool, no one wants that, it is just more supporting evidence that the GMWP was more than a "blip".

But then he goes on to say that he supports anthropogenic global warming theories and i sincerely wish i could look him in the eye when he was saying it.

Well, after about another 2 hours of trying to find good information within my intellectual grasp i still see stones being thrown across the aisle by apparently legitimate scientists representing both the AGW faithful and "Gore is a Crook" sides.

In all the readings i have done in the areas of history and anthropology climate is often a force driving humans and their ancestors hither and yon as we have evolved.  Some of these climatic forces are treated as that's the way it was by historians and anthropologists and yet never seem brought up by the climate types.
My latest thought to research (i am out of time) is: is the Shang Dynasty of China's agricultural model (during a "warmer, moister period in history"*) sustainable in today's climate?

Later, i found this:
http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2012/05/29/4000-years-ago-climate-change-caused-massive-civilization-collapse/
Same time frame, different civilization

Here it is, official blessing of AGW under the radar with so speculation as to fiscal impact:
www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/06/26/us-court-upholds-agency-global-warming-rules/

* China, A Modern History, by J.K Fairbank, M Goldman. pub. 2006