Time--2017 A to Z Theme

My theme for the 2017 Blogging from A to Z April Challenge was "Time". The posts are of a more philosophical, contemplative, and even autobiographical bent. No time management tips in this theme, but stuff intended to make you think.

Always a work in progress--welcome to my blog...

**

Friday, April 28, 2017

Xerothermic Period (#atozchallenge)


          For the dreaded "X" day I figured I'd have to go with some arbitrary throwaway concept like "Hour X" or "X O'Clock" until I actually found a time term not only beginning with the letter X, but also relevant to a controversial topic of our time--Climate Change.  






Xerothermic Period

        A number of people have asked about my views on climate change suggesting that I write a post on the topic.  This X post will not be that requested post, but it will be somewhat related. Maybe this post will give you a hint where I stand on this highly controversial and even divisive topic.

         If I am interpreting the data I've found correctly then the Xerothermic Period might also be the same as or related in some way to the post-glacial warming era called the Holocene climatic optimum. This was an era of warmer, drier climate that occurred 4,000 to 12,000 years ago according to scientists. 

        The warming primarily was in the northern polar regions as well as climate changes throughout the northern hemisphere and other parts of the Earth.  Since industrialization or other human caused factors were unlikely to have been any influence on this climate change the speculation is that this warming trend was a natural and perhaps cyclical event that could have been due to fluctuations in the Earth's orbit or some other natural cause.

         During this era of climatic change the polar ice caps melted to a great extent as well as the massive glaciers that had moved southward.  There are indications that certain lakes were larger than they are now and it is likely that the oceans came farther inland.  

          As a caveat I will say that I didn't do any extensive research on this topic and by no means offer this post to be of any solid scientific authority, however this seems to be generally representational of certain scientific schools of thinking regarding historical climate change cycles.

           So make of this what you will.  My thoughts are that those who are crying "Wolf!" concerning any influence of human activity regarding climate change might be overlooking historical scientific findings on climate fluctuations of the past.   Maybe some of you have more information about my pondering in this post.  The comment section will welcome any further facts or opinions regarding this.

          Do you think there have been non-humanly influenced periods of climate change in the Earth's past history?   Are you familiar with the theories that vast areas of what is now dry land were once covered by ocean?   Would you rather live in a colder glacial climatic period or a warmer period?  




            


36 comments:

  1. This was most interesting Lee, I suppose like everything else the Earth has changed quite abit over time. When you look back to the Ice Age etc to where we are today. A very good V WORD, which I haven't heard of before , so I have learned something new today already.
    Yvonne.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yvonne, I my lifetime I can't say that I remembered much in the way of unique change over the years, but I've moved around a lot and can't measure as accurately regarding a place if I haven't lived there my entire life.

      Lee

      Delete
  2. Some of it is surely a cop out so the greedy a-holes can just keep churning out that same old crap, but global warming isn't all due to man, like so many would have one believe. It would happen as Earth does go through cycles, we are just hastening it. I'll take warm over ice age any day.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Pat, I think humans are giving themselves too much credit that they could "destroy" the Earth as we now know it. Not that we shouldn't be wise with the Earth and use it in good ways, but we should consume what has been given to us. For example, it's a waste not to use coal, but we should find the cleanest best ways to use it.

      Lee

      Delete
  3. Good Morning! I'm up early today so I thought I'd get a few comments in. The dreaded "X"... oh yeah, it was a humdinger as my dad use to say! Now as far as your questions Non-humanly? Nahhhh but I'll tell you what I do think is I think our planet has been knocked a tad off it's axis. When I was little the weather was truly very different. Halloween we never had to wear coats or nothing like that for one. Winter snow was deep now and then... we use to make snow forts... kids today don't even know what that is... oh and we use to have snowball fights... not today!!! As far as land that was once covered by the Ocean.. no I don't know about that one, but what I do know about is what about California dropping into the ocean...??? Now that's creepy, and earthquakes are being taken notice too! Where would I like to live... right here!!! Sure the weather changes at will, but I love Spring Weather and Fall weather... but I like the changes... because I'm not an all the time girl... ya know what I mean? Give me the changes. I'm good with it! :) That was fun! Thanks... Great Post!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Marie, have you gone back to review weather records in your past? Your perception of weather might have changed and even if the weather has changed, has it changed so drastically? If anything drastically bad happens to the state of California then I hope that I get out of here before so.

      Lee

      Delete
  4. I want to live where it's rainy and cool. Oh wait...I did, then moved back to the worst climate ever. But yes, I do believe that humans are responsible for the climate change we see today. And science proves that some areas of dry land were covered by ocean. That's irrefutable proof. Science trumps all.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. JoJo, they've found marine life fossils in the deserts and even on mountains so I think that must mean something about the Earth and its oceans. I won't go so far to say "science trumps all" as I think we have to determine what science by whom for what purpose.

      Lee

      Delete
  5. I'd like the climate to be how it was say 5years ago when the weather was predictable, cold in winter, warm in summer. Not like it is now, way too hot in some parts, extreme droughts, water shortages. I agree though that we need to cast our eyes back over much longer periods of time to get the fuller picture. Thanks Arlee .. great X word!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Susan S, I don't see much difference in the weather since I've lived in Southern California. We got more rain this year I think, but that was direly needed. In the twenty five years I've lived here there has always been talk of drought and the temperatures seem to change with some consistency though each season. Our air definitely seems to be cleaner than when I first moved here to that's a good thing.

      Lee

      Delete
  6. What a great "X" word, by the way. I believe in climate change and I think how we live as humans on Earth effects it and I do think the world goes through its own cycles. I am originally from Colorado and miss the snow that winter used to bring (now I live in Indiana). And, the summers do seem hotter but still too humid for me. It will be interesting to see how the next generation views our actions and thoughts. Stopping by on the A to Z tour. www.dianeweidenbenner.com

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Diane, I'm sure that humans can affect climate to some degree, but I think the potential has been overblown to some degree. However having an awareness of a looming problem that could lead to disaster has made more of us more environmentally conscious and industry seems to be continually working toward improvement. We'll see where it all goes from hear and keep tweaking the weaknesses as we go.

      Lee

      Delete
  7. Though I love paleoanthropology and prehistory, I have to admit I haven't done too much reading on this specific issue. I do know that there have been some periods in the past (and in modern times) when the weather was abnormally hot or cold, like the Medieval Warm Period of about 950-1250, and the Last Glacial Maximum (ice age) about 20,000 years ago.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Carrie-Anne, the age of the dinosaurs was supposedly a worldwide tropical phenomena for thousands, even millions, of years. Plants and animals flourished according to some accounts. Then we had the major ice age. We should probably expect the world to go through major changes no matter how environmentally aware we are. Some changes just happen and we have to learn to adapt accordingly.

      Lee

      Delete
  8. It's true that as cities grow, more concrete and metal are brought in, and populations expand, the average temperatures in major metropolitan areas rise. That stands to reason. Other than that, however, man and his endeavors has little to no effect on overall planetary temperatures.

    If we really were in the midst of a man-made global warming, these so-called "scientists" would not have to repeatedly lie and fudge their numbers about it. The very fact that these government funds-dependent "scientists" repeatedly get caught lying about their data is all the proof the thinking person needs to know that this is a big, fishy fish story.

    There are plenty of books out there that use "real" facts and statistics to unequivocally PROVE that there is no such thing as anthropogenic global warming. But expecting the Americonned Sheeple to actually think outside the box and actively look for this contrary evidence is definitely expecting way too much.

    ~ D-FensDogG
    [Link:) Stephen T. McCarthy Reviews...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. STMcC, logic often becomes too much of a burden for the left and others who subsist on trying to pass of inane theories on the people and the government. Certain quarters would like to convince the world that scientists are in total unwavering agreement about schools of thought like climate change and evolution.

      The curtain needs be drawn to exposed the con-men who are perpetuating the lies and unfounded theories so we can all think more clearly about this climate change scam. I don't think President Trump was too far off base when he joked about global warming being a hoax started by the Chinese. We can forget the other hoaxsters like Al Gore, Bill Nye, and the endless parade of conned celebrities who continue to spread a mythology which will greatly undermine our U.S. economy if they get their ways.

      Humans are giving themselves far too much credit to believe they have the power to destroy this God-created Earth. But I guess if an opening premise is that there is no God then humans will credit themselves with any outlandish foolish idea.

      There are logical answers to everything and we don't arrive at those answers with preconceived thinking and skewed data.

      Lee

      Delete
  9. First time I've seen this word. Nicely done, Lee. ☺ I think climate change is a combination of natural cycles and misuse of resources by humans, not exclusively one or the other.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Debbie D, I think you've come to a pretty plausible conclusion about climate change.

      Lee

      Delete
  10. I generally go with the scientists on global warming IF they present a logical argument and do not seem to have an ax to grind. Putting "so-called" before scientist does not add anything to the logic or prove anything but personal bias. Nor does government funding - some important discoveries have come from that source, including the Internet.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Jack, the problem is that the arguments we get are not always logical and I don't think we hear the full arguments or all of the arguments. The left is trying to present climate change as a one-sided they're right and everyone else who opposes is wacky or evil argument. I do think many of these climate change perpetuators can be put in a "so-called" box. I don't dispute that good that has come from some government funding and university studies, but there is still a lot out there that should be subjected to heavy scrutiny and massive debunking. Opportunists flock to where the most money can be found and these days the money is in climate change. A lot of it is a racket in my opinion. For one thing I look at all of the "energy" related telemarketing calls that I get from solar, window, and other businesses that are jumping on this climate change bandwagon.

      Money can fertilize a lot of harebrained idea fields that end up sprouting massive amounts of weeds.

      Lee

      Delete
  11. Putting "SO-CALLED" before the word "scientists" indicates that unlike "real" scientists, who simply go where the evidence leads them WITHOUT a predetermined bias, these people "fake" the evidence to prove the point that they WANT proven. Which is in fact the exact OPPOSITE of science. Hence, they are not "real" (read: objective) scientists.

    When someone or something is dependent upon government funds in order preserve his or its livelihood, there is a natural tendency to lean toward self-preservation (i.e., return with the conclusion that your benefactor is hoping you will return with).

    No sensible, reasonable, informed person would deny that some valuable discoveries have resulted from government investments. BUT!... when you're dealing with a very controversial issue, and the government has an ax to grind, an intelligent person will examine the evidence carefully to make sure that it matches the conclusion reached. That intelligent person wants to be CERTAIN that the data was not deliberately skewed toward a preferred outcome.

    YOUR TURN AGAIN! As Marvin Gaye sang, "Let's get it on!"

    ~ D-FensDogG
    [Link:) Stephen T. McCarthy Reviews...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. STMcC, there is nothing in your comment with which I can argue. Money--scads of money--draws those with good and bad intentions as well as those whose primary intent is to grab money. Our government has often been like Santa Claus to educational institutions.

      I've heard about some the nuttiest studies out there that garner millions. How many studies do we need to tell us that shit stinks, heat is hot, or five year old kids won't eat food that someone else has sneezed on.

      In the end, to my thinking, it's like Jerry Brown's bullet train. Why expect tax money to pay for nonsensical pipe dreams? If an idea is worth studying and will have a beneficial outcome then let businesses invest. You can bet that those who see no value in research are not going to pay for it. Politicians mainly dish out money for the influence that is afforded to them no matter how crazy ideas are.

      Lee

      Delete
    2. Oh, do you mean like THIS?...

      https://fellowshipoftheminds.com/2017/04/29/your-tax-dollar-at-work-390k-grant-to-study-duck-penis/

      I learned the truth many years ago that a large amount of foreign aid and government-funded research studies were really just a guise meant to deliberately drain off American wealth.

      Believe it or not, there are groups out there and people in high places who DON'T WANT America to be too successful and too wealthy. A good way to prevent that is to knowingly throw our money away on boondoggles.

      ~ D-FensDogG
      [Link:) Stephen T. McCarthy Reviews...

      Delete
    3. Yes, the penis study is a good example although the amount she received seems somewhat low in comparison to some other grants I've heard about.

      If the wealth of America is drained then we will be more apt to make a bigger move toward globalism. Some of the elite long for the day when the U.S. is just another country among countries with agencies like the U.N. dictating what we can do as a country and what the people should think.

      Those globalist aspirationalists are screwier than duck penises.

      Arlee Bird
      Tossing It Out

      Delete
    4. It looks like we can count on at least two activists to ferret out the phony scientists and the quick-buck artists. We could also use help with Internet scam artists. I recently had to threaten a lawsuit to get rid of a scam which wanted to bill me monthly forever because of my one request to look into a local sex offender. However, I think the research on rising sea levels caused by excess carbon emissions is genuine.

      If I ever get the energy, I'd like to start a blog about community-private enterprise projects to put solar energy on every rooftop that wanted one. The present system of building in big profits, sales fees, and TV ads is too iffy and, by necessity, too costly. A community system that used the grid to receive overages and feed back rainy-day power would provide the home owner with power that was 80% free for home and electric-car use. Eventually, we could forget about carbon-fuel emissions - there wouldn't be that much needed.

      Delete
    5. Jack, internet scamming as well as all other scams including telemarketing are and have been a serious issue that I too wish someone would take care of. I'm more concerned with those than any kind of climate change issues.

      Hope you find the time to do that blog as it could be interesting and helpful. If we could take the scam aspect out of the solar and other roads to help improve energy usage and pollution, etc more people would be willing to take advantage of those things. But I see the economic drawbacks in promoting something that is essentially self-sustaining and doesn't require fuel purchases to keep it going.

      Lee

      Delete
  12. The answer to heavily reducing petroleum fuel purchases is GOOD - if it is phased over at least 10 years. We need that time for the big, regional power utilities to downgrade and shift into other services or products, just as buggy-whip manufacturers had to do a century ago. However, we can expect heavy and well funded opposition from them and from the petroleum industry, even though a well-planned solar industry would, in itself, produce alternative opportunities. No on likes change if he sees it as a threat.

    ReplyDelete
  13. >>... "It looks like we can count on at least two activists to ferret out the phony scientists and the quick-buck artists."

    No, you can count on a great many "truth-seekers" to engage in this activity, most of them possessing doctorate degrees in various sciences.

    They're not hard to find if one is willing to put in just a modicum of effort in looking for them. They are in abundance, but you won't find them if you stick to Mainstream Media sources. What the government doesn't like doesn't get promoted. Thank God for the alternative media we have now.

    So, you can rest easy, because we are hardly the only two.

    ~ D-FensDogG
    'Loyal American Underground'

    ReplyDelete
  14. I don't agree that all the truth seekers are on one side or that the government is our enemy. If there are impractical idealists on the side of climate control, there are also practical entrepreneurs who will eventually find a way to lead us to solar energy and electric cars. We can then get out of the Middle East and let them eat their oil.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Lee,

    I think climate change is normal and there is no reason to panic. I think we should be good to our world but not to go overboard. Some of the so-called eco-friendly things our society has in place actually causes more harm to the earth but this topic will be a hot one for years to come. Thanks for visiting, Art Sketching Through the Alphabet “X”!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Cathy, I can't help but think that there is more to this climate change controversy than meets the eye. I think we might be getting scammed to some degree.

      Lee

      Delete
  16. THE GREATEST LIE EVER TOLD:
    “You will not surely die. For God knows that in the day you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.”

    THE SECOND GREATEST LIE EVER TOLD:
    I am from the government and I'm here to help you.

    I certainly agree about getting the hell out of the Middle East. No one could be more sick of our wars for oil and territorial control by proxy than I am. That aside, the first imperative is to learn to recognize one's great Ally and one's great enemy.

    An objective study of American history, particularly since 1913, leaves no doubt whatsoever that Uncle Scam -- representing the cloaked ruler of "this world" (Biblically speaking) -- is the American People's great enemy.

    I could certainly recommend some excellent written and documentary starting points for a mindset reset on this topic, but there would be no point to it. For surely there is nothing you could learn from a young, pessimistic, radical "activist" like me.

    ~ D-FensDogG
    'Loyal American Underground'

    ReplyDelete
  17. Just here to catch up on the posts I missed. I am aware about the theory on vast deserts being oceans in the deep past. Not through any special reading/research, though. In Fayoum in Egypt, there is an area called Wadi al Hitan which has fossils of whales and other sea creatures from the time the desert was supposed to be a sea. A UNESCO heritage site now.

    Climate change is a combination of factors, humans need to use the earth's resources more responsibly, sure. But doing so cannot prevent the change that happens because of the earth's rotation/orbiting and other cosmic phenomena beyond our control.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Nilanjana, I think there are some who would just prefer humankind to totally disappear or at least for civilization as we know it to go away.

      Lee

      Delete
    2. D-FDG: I see nothing wrong about being an activist or the other adjectives you apply to yourself. Would you prefer to be a passivist? However, I don't believe that we have one great ally and one great enemy, nor am I interested in reading any documents advancing such a simplistic approach. Incidentally, I have a great respect for our government and its accomplishments. I am also aware of its stumbles -Vietnam and the Middle East are examples. They are also the stumbles of our people.

      Delete
  18. I didn't say anything about simplicity. It's no more simplistic than is the human body and the human psyche.

    ~ D-FensDogG
    'Loyal American Underground'

    ReplyDelete

Go ahead and say something. Don't be afraid to speak your mind.
I normally try to respond to all comments in the comment section so please remember to check the "Email follow-up comments" box if you want to participate in the comment conversation.

For Battle of the Bands voting the "Anonymous" commenting option has been made available though this version is the least preferred. If voting using "anonymous" please include in your comment your name (first only is okay) and city you are voting from and the reason you chose the artist you did.

If you know me and want to comment but don't want to do it here, then you can send me an email @ jacksonlee51 at aol dot com.

Lee