Climate Change Killed Ancient Biblical Civilizations Or Something

They really shouldn’t have driven fossil fueled vehicles back in the old days

(Haaretz) Between 1250 and 1100 B.C.E., all the great civilizations of the eastern Mediterranean – pharaonic Egypt, Mycenaean Greece and Crete, Ugarit in Syria and the large Canaanite city-states – were destroyed, ushering in new peoples and kingdoms including the first Kingdom of Israel.

Now scientists are suggesting a climatic explanation for this great upheaval: A long dry period caused droughts, hunger and mass migration. Such is the conclusion of a three-year study published this week in Tel Aviv: Journal of the Institute of Archaeology of Tel Aviv University.

Wait, drought in the Middle East? Shocking! I bet those folks refused to give up their air conditioning and never unplugged their electronic devices from the outlets when not in use.

On the bright side, the article didn’t add the typical bloviation about concern that this could happen now. Well, 100 years in the future, when everyone will have forgotten the prognostication. You’re supposed to gleam that we’re doomed from Hotcoldwetdry, er, “climate change” caused by Mankind. Interestingly, what caused the changing climate back then?

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at 1800flowers.com. Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

19 Responses to “Climate Change Killed Ancient Biblical Civilizations Or Something”

  1. […] at Pirate’s Cove is blogging about “Climate Change Killed Ancient Biblical Civilizations Or […]

  2. blick says:

    Just for grins, I looked up the bronze Age collapse at Wikipedia. It happened at the end of the bronze age/ beginning of iron age. Soooo, by a stretch of the imagination, the great drought was caused by the industrialization of the Stone age. All those industrial furnaces for smelting and casting bronze caused the climate to warm creating a drought which destroyed these civilizations. See, Its fun to play global warming.

  3. Jeffery says:

    T.W.,

    Just because the current rapid increase in global temperature is driven by human-generated CO2, it doesn’t mean that every local effect is or was. It may well be that severe, local droughts 3000 yrs ago weakened some city-states, which likely did not have the resources to survive.

    Even though mild climate change wiped out some of the most advanced civilizations (according to your citation), our modern societies should be better able to adapt to the more severe conditions we face in the future. On the other hand, in 1000 BCE had about 50 million inhabitants, and now we have some 7 billion.

    The Earth has a long history of climate change and cycles, but the current warming is different.

  4. gitarcarver says:

    Once again Jeffery misses the point of the post. Other civilizations and severe weather has happened in the past which to him eliminates any similarity with changing weather and climate today.

    You can’t argue with that lack of critical thinking.

  5. Jeffery says:

    gitar,

    There was a point to his post other than to pander to his commenters? My points are (1) that climate doesn’t drastically change by magic – there have to be causes, (2) unsubstantiated claims that a small region of the Earth (Mediterranean coasts) had a severe drought some 3000 years ago doesn’t necessarily imply anything about the global climate at the time.

    The Earth is rapidly warming now because of the CO2 that we humans have been adding to the atmosphere.

  6. gitarcarver says:

    There was a point to his post other than to pander to his commenters?

    Ah. So as I said you did miss the point of his post. Thank you for admitting that.

    My points are (1) that climate doesn’t drastically change by magic – there have to be causes,…..

    Such as a natural cycle of the earth?

    (2) unsubstantiated claims that a small region of the Earth (Mediterranean coasts) had a severe drought some 3000 years ago doesn’t necessarily imply anything about the global climate at the time.

    Except of the fact the paper says that climate change caused the difficulties, you might have a point.

    I am always amazed at how easily people like you lie and just turn away from anything that might challenge your cult like beliefs.

  7. Jeffery says:

    What causes the natural cycles? (we know what they are, so you should easily be able to explain them). There is no magic. Which of the natural cycles known to cause climate change are causing the current rapid warming?

    So you accept the secondhand conclusions of the description of the actual study or did you read the paper itself?

    By all means, criticize any “lie” that I type. Please be specific, though. Otherwise you come off as childish.

  8. gitarcarver says:

    What causes the natural cycles? (we know what they are, so you should easily be able to explain them).

    Actually, we don’t know the causes of natural cycles or the level of impact those cycles have on the earth.

    The original post is a good example of how you have to ignore history and then say “it can’t be anything that would disprove the theory in which I believe.”

    So despite your claims that you will look at evidence that disputes AGW, you don’t or won’t.

  9. Jeffery says:

    gitar,

    By all means, live in your cloistered world where ignorance reigns.

    As I see no evidence of magic, miracles or controlling hands, we have little to discuss regarding climate.

    Natural does not mean magic.

  10. gitarcarver says:

    As I see no evidence of magic, miracles or controlling hands, we have little to discuss regarding climate.

    Wow. Just wow. You bring “magic” into the conversation when no one else has mentioned it and then think that somehow you are right.

    You created a strawman argument of epic proportions and now that you feel you have knocked down what was only said by you, you have demolished opposing arguments.

    We have little to discuss because you are wedded to the AGW theory because any opposing evidence is immediately dismissed by you without consideration.

    You can’t get basic math straight and so you have to attack something else. Of course, those attacks are based on falsehoods but that is your MO.

    By the way, give up that patent right yet?

  11. What causes all the previous warm periods, Jeffrey? How about the cool periods? Did fossil fuels end the last glacial age? Or were natural forces at play? Sun, moon, gravity, vulcanism, etc?

  12. Jeffery says:

    W.T.,

    You know the answers to your questions. Of course, the glacial and interglacial periods were not man-made, but neither were they caused by magic.

    Which of the natural forces you cite, sun, moon, gravity, volcanoes (others you didn’t cite, cosmic rays, mountain building, plate tectonics, changing ocean currents, changing Earth’s orbit) are causing the Earth to warm now?

    In any event, I’m right, you’re wrong, but it doesn’t matter. Our global plutocracy dictates that we learn to live with it.

  13. Jeffery says:

    gitarcarver,

    Not sure how my patents impact global warming, but anyway…

    Please be specific and tell me what basic math I did not get straight?

    What evidence did I ignore? Again, be specific.

    Thanks

  14. gitarcarver says:

    Jeffery,

    The patent doesn’t have anything to do with global warming, but it does illustrate you are a hypocrite.

    As for the math, that has already been shown.

    You really have comprehension issues, don’t you?

  15. Jeffery says:

    gitar,

    I understand you being envious of my success, and fortunately for you, the taxes I pay will fund your unemployment, disability, Medicaid, Medicare, SS and defense. But I don’t complain about supporting “takers” like you since my hard work, conservative decisions and good luck have given me more than I feel I deserve. I mean, good health, 40 yr marriage, happy and productive grown children, smart and kind grandchildren, successful businesses, solid golf swing, great friends and colleagues, contributions to society, and yes, patents too. I’ve been blessed. And I do get frustrated by know-nothing blogs (see Gateway Pudenda for prototype).

    You haven’t responded constructively for quite some time and appear spent. I suspect in real life you are not the petty, thoughtless reactionary you appear to be online. You’ve been casting about calling me a liar, but refusing to identify a lie; saying I deny evidence, but refusing to identify the denied evidence.

    Just remember: The Earth is warming rapidly now from an enhanced greenhouse effect resulting from the CO2 we are all adding to the atmosphere. You and I will both be dead before the worst occurs, but our grandchildren, great-grandchildren and great-great-grandchildren will wonder how we could have been so selfish, knowing what we know.

  16. gitarcarver says:

    Oh Jeffery, if you only knew.

    I am not envious of your life or your fantasies that you put forth here on this site.

    As for not bringing anything of substance to the conversation, we all know that is just liberal speak for “I can’t refute what you are saying.”

    Have a good night.

  17. Overtaxed_Gumballs says:

    wow J, talk about running the gamut. J really does not know how to stay on topic or to even debate the content of the post and cited article.

    Hey, could these people have been either removed from earth or absorbed in to another culture due to war? Funny that notion.

    So, J agrees that natural cycles can affect global temperatures to the point of creating glacial and inter-glacial periods, but yet denies those natural cycles are affecting us now. Why? he can’t say except that it feels like it shouldn’t.

    He ignores that his cult’s models do not model reality but lays our lives on those same models.

    He ignores that there is absolutely no correlation between CO2 rates and temperature. But then claims that CO2 is the sole reason for our warmth.

  18. Jeffery says:

    GummyBalls,

    I’ve asked you and wt dozens of times to please just explain to me what the “natural processes” are that are causing the Earth to rapidly warm. You always refuse. Yes, scientists recognize that previous periods of global climate change did not occur by fossil fuel burning.

    Scientists who study such things cannot find those natural processes either, but since they don’t believe in magic they have an alternative hypothesis that has the added benefit of being supported by the evidence.

  19. Overtaxed_Gumballs says:

    GummyBalls,

    I’ve asked you and wt dozens of times to please just explain to me what the “natural processes” are that are causing the Earth to rapidly warm.

    Dude, go see a mental health doctor, cuz you’re really slipping. You have not asked me that. You’ve ask Gitarcarver once and I’ve asked you several times to answer a question similar to that.

    First off, the earth is not rapidly warming. There is no difference in the rate of warming now than in times past. We just have better resolution nowadays than during the days of dinosaurs and giant underwater arachnids.

    Second, you’ve already stated the processes several times yourself and yet ignore yourself when talking about sources of heat. And I’m not too sure what a discussion of natural heat sources for the earth has to do with warring factions during the BC era.

    Unless you are trying to suggest that heat makes people angrier to the point of starting wars?

    You might have something there. Because, during the Roman Warm Period, the Romans were pretty angry bunch of people and they conquered and killed lots of people. So, their cars caused the earth to warm and then in turn caused them to turn murderous and start killing people and expanding their empire? Surely, you are not suggesting that? ARe you?

    Does that mean that when they started losing their empire the earth started cooling again?

Pirate's Cove