Canuck wrote:
"Primitive cultures ... didn't have as much of an impact because too many of them died before having more kids."
Not true. Research in NZ has shown that the first settlers here (Polynesians) were easily as destructive as the later European arrivals. And the population grew rapidly for a start and then crashed. By the time Europeans got here the earlier inhabitants had been forced to adopt a more conservation based strategy through necessity. They would have died out otherwise. The same has been shown to be true in Australia although they had more time to adapt there. And for the country to adapt to their presence. I would assume the same is true for North America although there seems to be extreme opposition there to accepting this possibility.
Ellis. We've had a fairly mild winter here too.
Hi Terry - I meant that primitive cultures simply did not have the wherewithal to cause large-scale destruction like modern man has. We're saying the same thing, that both primitive cultures and modern man are just as exploitative - I'm just making the statement that we are much better at it.
You're absolutely right about Native Americans, although you might get lynched for saying so in NA (there's that extreme opposition you hinted at). There is a real feeling upon North Americans that Native Americans were one with nature, and would never do something to overexploit it. Truth of the matter is, most of the Native American societies where semi-nomadic, and would completely exhaust the local resources before moving onto the next locale.
As far as weather goes - Summer here in southern Ontario has been cooler than in recent years. Only had a couple real heat waves where I had to put the AC on.
Alternatively, we could just stop guessing and look at the satellite data for this summer(or winter, depending on your hemisphere;) )
http://www.remss.com/data/msu/monthly_ti...Ocean_v03_0.txt
