Never the less the first civilizations started close to if not on our equator. During the ice age this is where humankind clung to life, we numbered in the thousands if not a lot less. And it is from there that mankind moved out DUE to the warm up. The warming has only been good for mankind, now billions.

This is about control, and nothing else.

Science, just like politics has too much power in too few hands.

---

Must not conflict resolve by suggesting that someone should go sit on an ice pick...

Never the less the first civilizations started close to if not on our equator. During the ice age this is where humankind clung to life, we numbered in the thousands if not a lot less. And it is from there that mankind moved out DUE to the warm up. The warming has only been good for mankind, now billions.

This is about control, and nothing else.

Science, just like politics has too much power in too few hands.

How about the Neanderthall? What ever you classify them, As either Homo Sapiens Neanderthalensis or Homo Neanderthalensis they lived in ice age Europe for some 100,000 thosands years.

---

[/quote]

Old James

And are you sure it was the Fertile Crescent why not the Black Sea area, because that is the area where most languages originated.

If you don't think so then look at the similarities in the words used for father from India to the Atlantic.
They are usually grouped under Proto-Indo-European language.

How about the Neanderthall? What ever you classify them, As either Homo Sapiens Neanderthalensis or Homo Neanderthalensis they lived in ice age Europe for some 100,000 thosands years.

And i side with the camp which says Neanderthalis wasn't replaced by Sapiens but instead reintegrated with them to create modern Europeans, or to put it in a less PC manner, white people.
DNA tests have shown (i'll find the research if i have to) that the parts of our DNA that give white skin comes from the Neanderthal species.
On a side note; it also showed that the only people who could claim racial purity would be black Africans, which is kind of ironic really.

---

Life on earth is the global equivalent of not storing things in the fridge.

How about the Neanderthall? What ever you classify them, As either Homo Sapiens Neanderthalensis or Homo Neanderthalensis they lived in ice age Europe for some 100,000 thosands years.

And i side with the camp which says Neanderthalis wasn't replaced by Sapiens but instead reintegrated with them to create modern Europeans, or to put it in a less PC manner, white people.
DNA tests have shown (i'll find the research if i have to) that the parts of our DNA that give white skin comes from the Neanderthal species.
On a side note; it also showed that the only people who could claim racial purity would be black Africans, which is kind of ironic really.

Recent DNA research, building on earlier research which identified the DNA change responsible for white skin, shows the opposite.

(Ironically, I'm a white African of European descent.)

---

Recent DNA research, building on earlier research which identified the DNA change responsible for white skin, shows the opposite.

(Ironically, I'm a white African of European descent.)

The first article seems to have disappeared, or else been pulled, either way the link doesn't work.

---

Life on earth is the global equivalent of not storing things in the fridge.

Recent DNA research, building on earlier research which identified the DNA change responsible for white skin, shows the opposite.

(Ironically, I'm a white African of European descent.)

The first article seems to have disappeared, or else been pulled, either way the link doesn't work.

I've reported the broken link. It worked earlier today. The abstract of the academic publication is here, and there's a short summary here.

---

It would appear that every post after mine is off topic.

To answer your questions and support what I have said, however not fully, read Guns, Germs and Steel by Jared Diamond.

It would be nice to come back to topic and it would be nice if you all directly addressed my post. Taking just part of it to b!tc$ about isn't really banter.

---

Must not conflict resolve by suggesting that someone should go sit on an ice pick...

It would appear that every post after mine is off topic.

To answer your questions and support what I have said, however not fully, read Guns, Germs and Steel by Jared Diamond.

It would be nice to come back to topic and it would be nice if you all directly addressed my post. Taking just part of it to b!tc$ about isn't really banter.

So what you are are arguing for now, is not that hotter climates have benefited man but that moderate climates have benefited man.

Please make up your mind.

Science is just like politics in the way of too much power is in too few hands.

Your argument is a strawman argument, save taxes or kill our kids by doing nothing.

Logic tells us that the warming is what advanced humans as a species.

---

Must not conflict resolve by suggesting that someone should go sit on an ice pick...

Humans as a species have bottlenecked and during that bottleneck we almost didn't make it. We bottlenecked during the last ice-age.

It has only been during this warm-up that we as a species have grown. Warming has only been a good thing for us and life in general.

When the weatherman gets the 7 day forecast correct I might look a little harder at what the fools say about what too warm would be.

In order to have real science we need to know what the average days weather would be. But in fact we have no idea what average is for a day.

Yep, I deny global warming as something to worry about.

---

Must not conflict resolve by suggesting that someone should go sit on an ice pick...

Address my last two posts.

If you cannot then say nothing to me.

If you can then we can talk.

---

Must not conflict resolve by suggesting that someone should go sit on an ice pick...

Address my last two posts.

If you cannot then say nothing to me.

If you can then we can talk.

As your arguments are not consistent, I would suggest that you answer my last so that we know where you stand on the climate that benefits mankind most.

You put forward first that hot climates were the place to be, and global warming will not be a problem, and therefore basically reject it as a problem, but then said it was a place outside the Tropics, the hottest places, where man developed.

Then you have suggested a book that argues that the moderate climates of Eurasia are the best places for mans advances.

As I said in my previous, make up your mind so that we can either agree with you or try to show you the error of your thinking.

Good luck.

---

Good luck.

+1000

---

Good luck.

+1000

+ http://grist.org/climate-change/cohort-replacement-climate-deniers-wont-change-but-they-will-die/

------------------------------
What is Intelligent Design?
It's God having One Brain Storm in a Million Brain Farts.

Just one other thing to add. With the discoveries of Lucy and Ardi, it has been put forward that is the area in which man first developed.

Well this place is close to Addis Ababa, which you may not know is not like the dry deserts, or the great plains with their seasonal rainfall, or the hot humid rain forests.

Addis Ababa is in the mountains at an altitude of 7,546 feet (2,300 metres). That's 2,000 feet (700 metres) higher than Denver. So not that hot a place either.

As I said during the ice-age we lived on or close to the equator. This was because OF the ice. LOL!

The WARMING is what gave us the almost 7 BILLION people we have now. At the time of the ice-age we bottlenecked as a species. LOL! It was BECAUSE of the warming that we have made it as a species NOT BECAUSE of the cooling! BAWahaha!

There has been in the past on this planet times when there was NO ice at our poles, life went on and later produced us. Just because there was no ice at our poles does not mean that there will be no life on the planted, this is a piss poor excuse to spend trillions of dollars for a natural occurrence. I don't care if they rob your countries of their tax dollars but I don't believe that I will allow them to rob my country of our tax dollars! LOL!

As the warming dug in and the ice moved more and more north so did the population. The straits between the old USSR and Alaska opened up a land bridge and North America became populated with humans. This was good for humans. Warm is good for human and cold is bad for human, as Dull might say. ;-)

Plant life flourished. And in time humans who were once hunters and gatherers became farmers after they learned to cross breed grasses, tubers, and other plants around the world. All of this would never have happened without the warming. As I said the warming was good.

---

Must not conflict resolve by suggesting that someone should go sit on an ice pick...

So you have now decided it is places with moderate temperatures that benefits man the most.

So what do you propose when the temperature increases such that the people who live in the Tropics now decide it is too hot and want to move North. You might not have noticed but there isn't that much land in the Southern Hemisphere, so moving South isn't an option for the majority.

And if the temperature rises a bit more and the Northern Mediterranean countries and the Southern States of the US become too warm. Especially if Canada say's "just stay where you are, we don't want Climate refugee's". Unless of course unless they needd some cheap labour for the new Farm Land that used to be the tundra.

Canada , Russia, and Australia would be happy to take in climate refugees as long as they're Atheists. We all like smart people.

-----------------------
What is Intelligent Design?
It's God having One Brain Storm in a Million Brain Farts.