Comments about ‘BYU field study reveals clues about ancient inhabitants of southern Utah’

"Researchers do know that the climate was beginning to warm up and the earth dry out about 9,000 to 10,000 years ago, precipitating changes in the animal species frequenting the area."

Wait, how is this possible? Perhaps they should keep digging until they discover evidence of evil, prehistoric capitalists who were burning fossil fuels.

Thanks! Very interesting article and research.

The earth's climate was changing (warming) 10,000 years ago? Did the archeologists find evidence of the combustible engine? Republicans? Industrialists?

More important, how did we survive?

I wonder if they kept searching the site, if they would find a 15,ooo year old oil rig.....

@ MapleDon: LOL We survived by adapting! ;) Great article! Loved that the concept of women as culture-builders (by continuing the shift from hunter-gatherer to established farming communities)was reiterated.

Wow.... these comments would be hilarious if they weren't so frighteningly representative of the general population of Utah.

You seem to think that because there has been climate change in the past that somehow it invalidates the current warming trend. I guess it is a good thing we have you infinitely wise Utahns to so shrewdly point out that climate has changed in the past, otherwise we never would have noticed. If it weren't for you, then the scientists who study this stuff would have never even thought to consider that glaringly obvious piece of information which completely invalidates decades of scientific study.

Why don't you climb out of your holes and try to understand the science before you ignorantly attack it. Climate changes for a variety of reasons including solar activity, orbital variations, volcanism, etc. What makes the current warming trend unique is that there is no viable explanation beyond human activity to explain the changes.

Well, I guess it may be too much to ask because simple straw men arguments are easier to cling to than actual science.. after all, they don't require being bothered by actually having to think.

@Spaghedeity
I think that it is interesting that you are attacking people on this site for their comments about climate control issues and their judgemental attitudes about it... yet you JUDGE in the fact that indeed you do not know if the people writing the comments indeed live in UTAH. This paper comes out of Utah that is indeed true... but people all over the world can read it via the internet, so maybe you should not be so judgemental about the people of Utah.

"etc. What makes the current warming trend unique is that there is no viable explanation beyond human activity to explain the changes."

Oh please... There are dozens of other possibilities. The CO2 possibility is not even the most plausible, it is just the most politically expedient.

In the many past warming periods the earth has experienced CO2 increased...after the warming period, and without human causes.

@ Spaghedeity | 9:58 a.m. Aug. 24, 2010

I live in the ultra liberal peoples republic of Seattle, not Utah.

I am also an engineer/scientist.

Today's warming trend is explained quite nicely with solar activity. Temperatures dropped from the 1940's to 1975 even as industrial emissions increased with the post war industrialization period. We also began cleaning up the air in the late 1970's. As we cleaned up the air temperatures increased and peaked in 1998-1999. Temperatures have been dropping for ten years.

The hacked email accounts at East Anglican University show quite nicely that the data has been rigged.

Scientists are people. People with agendas fund research. If a scientists does not produce the correct results, he loses funding and stops researching.

Loved the article. I like old bones.

PP - please explain then. The millions of pounds of CO2 being pumped into the air are not a problem. Ok, so since you know evidently what is causing it, please explain.... in very small words so we can benefit from your research.

I don't think many think man is the sole contributor, but to say human activity has no impact is just an ignorant concept. It amazes me that today there are still those that don't think pollution causes any impact to the earth or peoples health. I would love to see the rock these people have crawled from under, because it must be huge.

The debate is to what extent humans are impacting, not if.

Spaghedeity: Listen to PP above. Yes, there is man made pollution, but there are massive sources of natural co2.
That being said, it is interesting that the discussion took this slant. Obviously, it is due to the conclusions that the earth was warming at the time. I'm not arguing that it wasn't, the earth has warmed and cooled throughout history.
What is interesting, always in scientific investigation is the tendency to create conclusions from assumptions. Perhaps they were cultivating wheat and corn. Nah, that doesn't fit neatly into the existing paradigm - toss that out.
When I find archeology and anthropology really interesting is when they make a "remarkable" discovery that leads to comments like "this would suggest that we've been wrong about.....".
Theories are always being "accepted", not proven, to be facts in science. And those "facts" are what are children are taught, and what we were taught.

Spaghediety:

Those who mock current climate research pointing to human causes are as short-sighted and narrow minded as you are for attacking them with your assertion that "there is no viable explanation beyond human activity to explain the changes." I have yet to be convinced in either direction. I've read enough to know that recent warming trends have ended (hence the change in language from "global warming" to "climate change") but I also know that the models used to predict climate change from so called "green house gasses" is widely accepted. The only thing I believe is certain is that when someone comes to me and takes my money I will no longer have that money. Those who promote global climate change keep finding ways to steal from me so I distrust them. The other side is willing to leave me alone so I tend to like them better.

@JanSan | 11:32 a.m. Aug. 24, 2010
I said nothing of the judgmental attitudes, I was referring more toward flat out complacent ignorance of science. Regardless of whether the comments were written by Utahns, they are still reflective of the majority opinion and therefore the point is still valid. But you are right, ignorance is not unique to Utah, it is just a shining example.

@PP | 11:42 a.m. Aug. 24, 2010
Care to list the dozens of causes that are valid for the last 100 years?

@Cameron | 12:13 p.m. Aug. 24, 2010
I see you are holding tight to your favorite piece of the puzzle and are ignoring the rest of the pieces that don't support the image you think the puzzle should look like. Yes, CO2 increases often follow heating trends... and then cause further increase temperatures via a feedback loop. These trends where CO2 increases happen shortly after temperature increases have been shown in the literature to support the fact that human released CO2 is causing global warming. Increase in temperature causes increase CO2 which in turn causes further increase temperature. However, in many cases CO2 is the original instigator.

@The Rock | 1:10 p.m. Aug. 24, 2010
You are wrong.
From the early part of the century to the 60's solar output was thought to be the cause of warming. However, since the 60's as warming has continued, the observed output of the sun has dropped. You can't blame the sun on this one. Temperatures have not been dropping for 10 years, that's nothing but a highly spun talking point.

The East Anglia issue has been investigated and they were found to not be guilty of any wrongdoing. In fact they were able to independently recreate the data they generated. You don't hear about this stuff if you only pay attention to FOX news.

@CaseyA | 1:19 p.m. Aug. 24, 2010
Apparently you don't read enough. The warming trend has not ended. The 12 month period from June 2009 to May 2010 was the hottest on record. Take a look at the data over the past 12 years from a scientific source then tell me heating has subsided. "Global Warming" is still a valid term, even the old skeptics now admit warming is happening.. get with the times man!

@ Spaghedeity

The East Anglia emails where the leaders on climate research were discussing how to cover up the fact that temperatures have been dropping for a decade doesn't count?

In the 1970s they were talking about "The Coming Ice Age", not global warming. Solar output has increased from a low in the 1970s to a high in 1999.

You need to watch a video: The Great Global Warming Swindle. I would be happy to loan you my copy.

The science behind global warming just does not hold up.

I get my science news from scientific journals, not Al Gore.

Interesting report.As for the resulting comments off the topic among terse members, I am reminded, we are but specks, on a mostly blue orbiting masterpiece,suspended in space.Trying to find all the answers amongst ourselves.Poking,testing while we are running around.Debating studying, searching, and hoping to learn all the great secrets,solutions and complex workings of where we live.Grasp all the historical answers to everything.With so many egos and emotions, what maybe called designs,focused on the importance of who is right by various methods. We will not,during our puny individual lifetimes find out such things.But it's the ability to form limitless questions with unknown answers which man seeks that's crucial to most I think. While eyes of a creator, if such do existence, look down I would suspect,in somewhat bemused,a bit impatient.Waiting with to gently take a finger tip.And stir things up some more.Heaven help us,if one does exist,if that mind does decide to really heat things up! And not necessarily just temperature wise.Won't science, religion,and those who love commenting have a lot to comment on!