http://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/a/-/world/13814840/huge-ancient-civilisations-c...

Like their contemporaries in Egypt and Mesopotamia, the Harappans, who were named after one of their largest cities, lived next to rivers.

"Until now, speculations abounded about the links between this mysterious ancient culture and its life-giving mighty rivers," Giosan said.

Now Giosan and his colleagues have reconstructed the landscape of the plain and rivers where this long-forgotten civilizationdeveloped. Their findings now shed light on the enigmatic fate of this culture.

"Our research provides one of the clearest examples of climate change leading to the collapse of an entire civilization," Giosan said.

.

.

All climate on Earth is driven by the sun, and so the monsoons were affected by the lower insolation, decreasing in force.

This meant less rain got into continental regions affected by monsoons over time."

Eventually, these monsoon-based rivers held too little water and dried, making them unfavorable for civilization.

If you want to read the whole story - go ahead.

The whole point of this "research" is that climate change wiped out a civilisation 3,000 years ago. What was the world's population then? I bet it wasn't 6 billion people

Mind you this civilisation was a fraction of the current civilisation and it only represent 10% of everyone on earth at the time.

Now get this - the current climate change people are arguing that it's the carbon emissions of the current crop of people that's causing climate change.

Are you kidding me?

(c) Cut down carbon emissions, if that's what really makes you happy, and stop the fear-mongering.

So, I vote for (c).

Uncle Meat wrote on May 30^th, 2012 at 11:40am:


So in other words, you've got nothing to say really other than you just want people to say you were right. I did that in my previous post.

Glad to see you opt for action on carbon emissions.

cods wrote on May 30^th, 2012 at 11:57am:


Great! Fan-TAS-tic! They discovered the real reason. You were right all along. Congratulations!!

So what's your choice - option 1 or option 2? If your choice is option 2 then do you want to do (a) or (b)?

cods wrote on May 30^th, 2012 at 12:02pm:


Let me help you cods because I know you find it difficult to scroll up a few posts. Here is what the rant is about:

Gist wrote on May 30^th, 2012 at 11:27am:

Uncle Meat wrote on May 30^th, 2012 at 12:11pm:


Sooo... basically you agree the AGW proponents are 100% right but you just don't like the way they say what they say. Kind of a shallow argument to bang on with isn't it?

Doctor Jolly wrote on May 30^th, 2012 at 11:43am:

It is the empirical data (its all history) that blows the AGW nutters theory out of the water.