Actually, starting in the 1500s, the rate of population growth started to increaseIan, Wouldn't you say that an increase in temp begining in 1500 was most likely natural? Not a lot of cars, cow & Gore flatuence, and industrial polution 1500 to 1900.Again, all climatologists agree that the earth goes through warming and cooling cycles.
Two of the things that bother me with Easterbrook's conclusions: 1) he downplays the
steady increase in temp since 1500, even taking into account the Little Ice Age, and
provides no explanation
significantly. Without knowing for sure, I would say that the increase in fires to
keep people warm probably helped start the climb in temp due to increases in
pollutants in the air. The world population is estimated at 310 million in 1000 AD,
hitting 450 million in 1340, before the Black Plague reduced it back to about 350 million in 1400, and then reaching about 500 million in 1500 AD, and almost 1 billion by 1800 (1804 is
thought to be when 1 billion was hit).
And, as I said before, my problem is that Easterbrook doesn't even try to explain
why, but his theories really hinge upon some sort of explanation about the temp
increase starting in 1500 that might support them. To dismiss it off hand as he
does is rather self-serving and not at all scientific. And, on top of that, he doesn't
even touch on the sharp increase starting around the Industrial Revolution, for