Episode #104 Holocene Temp Variations / 22ky Footprints in New Mexico

That's the sound of a big deal. At Wayfair, that sound happens a lot. Dream sofa for half the price? Big deal. New dining table you've been eyeing for months? Big deal. Finally, picking up those last few pieces and finishing that bedroom? Now that's a really big deal. Whatever your home needs, Wayfair has the selection, the savings, and over millions of five-star reviews to back it up. Shop Wayfair.com today before someone else snags your big deal. Wayfair, every style, every home. This is Cosmographia, the Randall Carlson podcast. Welcome back, ladies and gentlemen. This is Cosmographia, the Randall Carlson podcast. Episode, what is it, Brad? 104. 104. Thank you. Episode 104. Last episode, we were talking about the sun. Are we continuing in that vein, Randall? Yeah, well, I want to continue on the idea of the natural forces that have been affecting civilizations on the planet, including the sun. There's a lot to get into with the sun and unpack. And we just kind of barely touched the, scratch the surface of the new information and new knowledge that's coming out about the sun. We can certainly get into that. But I had a few more things that have kind of been sitting on the back burner, a couple of new things that I thought would be interesting to look at. I've been kind of diving into some of the periods of upheaval in the history of civilization on planet Earth. And recently, I've been looking at the neoglaciation, or the neoglacial, the neoglacial, which is usually dated around 6,000 years ago, plus or minus a few centuries. Right? Now, that is what followed immediately after the so-called climatic optimum, which was kind of the period that lasted from about 10,000 to roughly 6,000 years ago, with, of course, variability within it and a major interruption at about 8,300 years ago. Remember the cold spike, that 8,300-year cold spike? We've talked about it. We've seen the Greenland ice core graphs, and it shows up pretty prominently. It's probably the most prominent spike within the Holocene record. And it dates about 8,300 years ago, and it was in the middle of the climatic optimal. Now, the climatic optimal, you know, was the period post-glacial, immediately post-glacial, that actually was warmer than now. And it kind of was in two phases, sort of like the ice age, the little ice age, which kind of was in two phases. You know, it started around very, with some variability. It started in the late 1200s and early 1300s, depending where you were on the planet. It didn't start simultaneously everywhere. Important point. And then it ameliorated somewhat, and then it came back again with full ferocity and carried us up into the 1800s. And then it began to ameliorate. And that's when we began to see the glaciers starting to recede and so on. And, you know, there's a new study. Let me see if I have it. So there was a cold spike at 6,000 BC, 6,300 BC. That's what you're saying? No, the cold spike. Well, okay. So in the middle of the climatic optimum, a little bit more towards the earlier half of it, there was this cold spike that lasted at least a few years, maybe a few decades. I haven't looked at the latest data on that, but now it's a fairly well-known. If you look at the ice core graphs and some of the other climate records, it shows up very prominent. Like I said, it's probably one of the most prominent cold spikes in the entire Holocene. But then, around 6,000 years ago, the second phase of the climatic optimum gave way to the neoglaciation, as it's called, the neoglacial. And so that was a very significant climate shift within the Holocene. And usually it's dated around 6,000 years ago. And it was marked by global cooling and an expansion of glaciers and ice sheets worldwide. Okay. And then there was some variability in there. There was the Minoan warm period. Then that was followed by cold. Then there was the Roman warm period. And then that was followed by the cold of the dark ages. Then that gave way to the medieval warm period. And then, like I was just saying, in the late 1200s, early 1300s, the medieval warm period gave way to the first phase of the Little Ice Age. And then that ameliorated somewhat around between the time of the Renaissance. And then it got cold again and then began to ameliorate or lessen the intensity of the cold around, again, not simultaneous everywhere. Because there's a lot of regional factors that play into this. But generally, you could say around 1850, it's pretty clear that the planet is starting to warm. Because we can see that most glacier recession began in the mid-19th century. It didn't begin in the mid-20th century when we started, when humans started pumping, you know, huge volumes of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. In fact, what we see, and I can probably pull up a graph here. There's been several graphs done showing the glacier recession that occurred. Uh-oh, did we have an intruder? An interloper. Okay, so there was an amelioration of the Little Ice Age that began in the 19th century. And we're essentially been in that. But even now, if we look at it, we see there was variability within that. So it began to warm, and then it warmed up. And in the 1930s, that global warmth peaked. In fact, in the United States, I think the two warmest years were 1935, 1936. So the 30s were warmer than now. Then, between the 1940s and the 1970s, the climate cooled. And that was one of the things that gave rise to the fear that we were going to be, you know, that global cooling was going to be the thing that did us in it. We might be headed back into an ice age. And that was actually based upon empirical evidence and proxy evidence, not proxy evidence, empirical data of real time that showed that the climate was cooling slightly between the 1940s and the 1970s. Then, in the 1980s, it began to warm again. And then, around between 10 and 15 years ago, it pretty much stabilized, and the planet hasn't gotten really any warmer in the last 10 years. I mean, the warming now, the temperatures are about the same as they were 10 years ago. Pretty much flat. The pause, oftentimes, it's referred to. And the pause is real. So, there is a lot of variability. Now, oh, I'll mention this, too. When that global cooling period between the 1940s and the 1970s occurred, the other thing that happened simultaneous with that was the radiocarbon dating that was showing the onset, the last glacial onset, was way quicker than anybody had imagined. And that the periods of interglacial warmth, such as now, were much shorter than previously believed. So, at that point, it became apparent that the current warming period has outlasted any of the previously measured warming periods or comparable. So, those two things sort of fueled the initial fear that they're, you know, are we sliding into another ice age? If this trend keeps going for decades, how long will it be before we're back into the little ice age? You know, I mean, if that trend had kept going between the 40s and the 70s, yeah, we'd be in a little ice age right now. So, then that raises an interesting question. What climatic factors caused the warming that began pretty much in the 1980s? So, there was pretty much a major spike of warming in the 80s, 90s, and into the early 2000s. The point is that the climate has not been stable. It's been variable. And you can see that there's variability, more, you know, time-limited variability within greater cycles of change. So, the signal, let's say, of the little ice age, that's left a pretty good imprint. Because one of the things that happened during the little ice age is that the glaciers that had grown to their largest extent in the entire Holocene built moraines and as a result of that and made, you know, glacial deposits, you know, datable glacial deposits. It showed, one could see that, yeah, these are the biggest the glaciers have gotten because any previous expansions of the glaciers, say, like even at the onset of the neoglaciation 6,000 years ago, they were overridden by the little ice age glaciers. So, in other words, earlier glaciers had expanded, but the little ice age glaciers expanded more. So, when they did that, they pretty much obliterated the previous moraines, terminal moraines and so on. Does that make sense? And so, we could see that the little ice age glaciers had grown to the biggest extent that they've been throughout the entire Holocene. So, interestingly, if you look at the baselines, you know, in the global warming scenarios, in the climate crisis scenarios, glacier recession is considered one of the main canaries in the coal mine of the impending global warming crisis that we're supposedly heading into. But, in reality, if you look at it, I mean, it's no worse than anything that's happened before, previous to this. I got this. This just came out. This is an interesting, this just came out three days ago. And, let's see, what was the source of this? Yeah, here's the report. Archaeologists surveyed melting ice patches in Canada. And uncovered dozens of ancient artifacts spanning 7,000 years. Then, there's photos that show the unique and perishable finds. After two winters with low snowpack, researchers set out to survey several melting ice patches in Mount Edziza Provincial Park. Do you guys know where that is, by any chance? Is this the place where the hikers started going up there? They started finding, because, like, the ice... No, the first time, the first one we talked about, that was in an Alpen pass between the Italian Alps and the Swiss Alps. And then, there was a subsequent report from the Norwegian mountains where the glaciers had receded and showed the same thing. I don't have either one of those reports at my fingertips. But, this is a third. This is, maybe, Kyle, look at this. E-D-Z-I-Z-I-Z-A Provincial Park. That's... So, okay, so this study was published in the Journal of Field Archaeology. It's in Canada, Mount Edziza, probably, Provincial Park. What province is that? Northwestern British Columbia. Oh, okay. Northwestern British Columbia. So, it says it's a volcanic landscape that is extremely significant to the Tahaltan, one of Canada's indigenous First Nations. The Tahaltan have used the mountains for seasonal hunts for centuries and continue to do so today. Previous scientists had located many vast obsidian quarries and obsidian artifacts in the park, but the nearby ice patches had not been studied as extensively. Researchers said they were intrigued by the possibility of finding perishable ancient artifacts preserved in the ice. So, when the ice receded, the researchers visited nine patches and, of course, immediately found 56 perishable artifacts that were mostly things manufactured from wood, birch bark, projectile shafts, walking staffs, animal remains used for stitched hide boots, carved antler, and bone tools. So, anyways, here's the point. These artifacts, like the ones in Norway and the ones in the Italian Alps, were buried under the ice. With the recession of the ice, now it's apparent that people were occupying that for 7,000 years when there was no ice there. So, yeah, here's the title. That melting ice reveals dozens of 7,000-year-old artifacts in Canada. Not that they lived there for 7,000, but it says here, artifacts spanning 7,000 years. I went, I got the, I went to the, the website, I found the journal, found the article from the Journal of Field Archaeology. So, I have that, but I, that was just yesterday, so I haven't had a chance to actually read the original article. This is just the report that appeared three days ago. But, but that's interesting. But, but see, what that does is it supports the idea that, that the recession of the glaciers that we've seen in the last century is nothing unprecedented. In fact, what it is, is that the expansion of the Little Ice Age glaciers in the context of the Holocene, that was unprecedented. Anyways, then within that, we have, you know, the history of civilization is entirely contained and encompassed within, at present, anyway, within the Holocene. And we're pushing back, oh, let's see, and what's the, one of the more recent things, I don't, maybe I'll pull it up here in a minute. The, the study's showing, let's see, where were they now? The study's showing that, now that it proved definitively, oh yes, the footprints in New Mexico. Have you seen that? Yes. Proving definitively that people were walking there 22,000 years ago. Yes, that's awesome. Uh-huh. Yeah, they now have multiple, uh, different dating techniques. Showing that the, the original idea, the original dates, which they got, that people were worried there was contamination because they were too early. Yeah, the old carbon effect, I think. Yeah, they've got, yeah, now they've got multiple lines of evidence pointing to this. Pointing to that date. And, and, and, now I just, the report came out, I haven't really digested it yet, I just scanned it. The tracks were mostly women and children, right? Well, there's one, I don't know about that, but there's definitely one famous set of a track of a woman and a child. But, yeah, we talked about that on the show. But, yeah. I haven't, I haven't heard it. They apparently went to an encampment or something. They turned around and went back. And in that interim, there was like some mammoths and things that crossed their track and some other mega mammals. And, yeah. So that was a really interesting story. The outgoing track was a, was a female carrying a child. Right. And then occasionally she would stop and you'd see the child's footprints running around her. Uh-huh. Then it would just be her footprints going out. And it was a mile, a little over a mile or something, in a very straight line that deviated no more than one meter from straight. Wow. And then sometime later she came back, but she didn't have the child. Her footprints were not as heavy, not as heavily indentated, and there wasn't as much twisting in the footprints, which suggests she wasn't going as fast. So on her way out with the child, she was like, go very fastly walking, like as fast as you can walk. Uh-huh. And then her return journey was like a normal pace. But while she was gone, a sloth approached her footprints, a great sloth, and stood up on its hind legs and looked around, then went back down and kept going. And then a mammoth walked by and did not care at all. Oh, and then she came back over time. Yeah, her footprints returned over top of their tracks. So like they passed in the rough hour or whatever while she was gone. It's wild. I love that. It is wild when you start actually imagining that whole scenario and realizing this is something that happened. Yeah, and then those footprints, something happened that preserved those footprints forever. They were never trampled on by any other animals or people. So it's like she was the last one to step in those places before they were covered forever until now. That is crazy to me. So how did that happen? And it dried out, right? It didn't stay wet or else the prints would have been slowly destroyed. So then you got to wonder, you know, OK, well, what was it's almost like she was on a mission. She had this child. She was in a big hurry. She delivered the child to somebody and then came back. Yeah. And then right after that, something happened now that preserved the tracks. Yeah. So what was that? Yeah. Exactly. What happened? Does it have anything to do with the fact that she was in a hurry? Yeah. Yeah. That's what I wonder, too. And this is a thing. This crazy thing to me is that the stories said she was walking on the bank of the lake. Yeah. So if it was the bank of a lake. That kind of tells you how she was able to walk this perfectly straight line. But but how are the mammoths and sloths crossing her track? They would have to be walking into the lake. Well, OK, so is it possible then? I mean, that the lake was a watering hole and they're there shallow, shallow. They're there drinking water while she's walking by. Then she gets by and then they're done drinking, you know, hydrating and they get up and they they go back across. That could be it. Yeah. Well, because how close was her track to the to the shoreline of this lake? We don't know. It doesn't. I tried to find this out, but that's the weird thing about it is that the animals don't have a return path. So if she was on the bank of a lake, the animals had to walk into the lake and not return or out of the lake. Oh, wait a minute. So so the animals crossed going towards the lake, not away from the lake. I don't know. It doesn't say they crossed her track, crossed her track. But if she's walking on the bank, there's only they either have to come out of the water or go into it. And not return. Yeah. So maybe it's a really shallow lake and they just could walk all the way across. I don't know. Well, that would make me think that they were in the water getting a drink and then they left and didn't come back. So. Yeah. But wait a minute. Why would you not see their tracks on the way in on the way in? Yes. And there's I mean, the stuff that I've read on this says that there's tens of thousands of print. I've heard this, too. Yeah. And a lot of them are almost invisible because they're still beneath the surface layer. And the researchers were saying, like, when you go out in the morning at the when it's exactly the right time and the air temperature is correct and there's a little bit of dew on the ground, then you see all the prints because what you're seeing is like a ghost of the prints that are actually below the surface. Uh-huh. And they've done some digging, like, you know, where they kind of very carefully go in and sort of pull the material of the surface off of the layer that has the prints and expose them. But they don't. I think they're not trying. They're trying not to expose too many of them because, you know, they degrade pretty quickly once they're unsure. Sure. The other thing that's not stone, you know, it's sounds like there must be a Brothers of the Serpent episode already about this. We have covered this multiple times. Yeah. The other thing that's interesting, too, is that what there's there's a famous one of like kids playing in a big footprint. Like little children's foot like they're playing in the puddle, like a puddle inside a big print. So, I don't know. It's just trying to. I just love it. I don't know. There's there's something incredibly mysterious about it. And and it's like. That one set just doesn't make a story out of these few clues that you get. Yeah. And then it's like, who were these people and where did they go? You know, they vanished. They disappeared. I mean, that's this is a screen share of the 22,000 year old footprints in New Mexico. Fossilized human footprints shown at the White Sands National Park in New Mexico. According to a report published in the journal Science, the impressions indicate that early humans were walking across North America around 23,000 years ago. We have to go there, boys. Yeah. Yeah. We need to go see this stuff. We need to go there and leave our footprints. Yeah. Yeah. Some humans were walking across New Mexico. We had these early humans. And then 23,000 years later, some other humans came. So, OK, there. This human is clearly wearing Merrill boots. Pretty sure those are Birkenstocks. Uh, no, they're, they're, they're, they're obviously they're barefoot. Yeah, I know. We're talking about if we left. If you left footprints, they would be Merrill boots. Oh, but anyways, what we got onto this, we got on a little bit of a sidetrack there, but that. Yeah. How does this tie into where you were going? The, the white sands footprint? Well, just, you know, the, uh, well, okay. Um, I'm not sure. Oh, well, because of the fact, the white sands footprint just was just in the news. And, uh, only because, you know, they had, it had been proposed, like you said, a couple of years ago, it had been proposed. Uh, but then there were the skeptics who didn't think that the, the dating was correct. And now, I mean, what that's doing is pushing the accepted date by mainstream academia back by what, 7,000 years or so? Yeah. Anyway. Yeah. What's, what's the climate situation in the, in North America 22 to 23,000 years ago? Well, I mean, we're getting into the New Mexico wouldn't have been glaciated, but no, you know, the, the late Wisconsin phase of glacial expansion began around 25 to 26, maybe, maybe 27,000 years ago. So, so the glaciers, you know, North would be still growing, um, for another couple of thousand years, at least. So that's, it's like, that's what I thought. Is it like right around the late glacial maximum? Is that sort of? Yeah, it's pretty much heading into the late glacial maximum. Yes. Wow. And of course there would have been lots of megafauna in North America then. That's the other really cool thing about this is that it, it utterly destroys the overkill hypothesis. Yeah. Those people had been living with the megafauna. Yeah. Like you said, for thousands of years before the megafauna went extinct. Right. And the, and the argument for the overkill hypothesis is that like they show up and it's like these animals never saw humans before and didn't know that they needed to fear them. So they were just easy to, to slaughter. Yeah. They just stood there like, you know, totally dumb animals and duh. Well, I mean, I think, yeah. And the other way that they put it is that, that, you know, it's, it's the arrival of humans that, that begins the total decline of all the megafauna. Right. So like whatever the reasons are, they're trying to say that these animals had survived here for millions of years and we're fine. And then humans show up and they all disappear. And that's part of the overkill. But I mean, those same animals were also in the old world side by side with humans for hundreds of thousands of years and they weren't being slaughtered. So I don't think it's a good argument, but it is one of the ones that they try to make for the overkill hypothesis in the, in the, in North America. Right. And yeah, it doesn't seem to work now because now we have human occupation going back to 22, 23,000 years at the, at the least. Yeah. So, and that seems to be the. You know, that's, that date is the end of the, of the time of these people that left these prints living in that area because they are gone after that. So then this is from the, yeah, this is directly from the Journal of Field Archaeology here. It says, uh, the article presents the results of archaeological survey of ice patches in the vicinity of the vast obsidian quarries and artifacts, uh, scatters found near goat mountain and the Kitsu plateau in Mount Aziza provincial park. Let's see. Ice patch research in North America has been the most intensive in the Yukon with survey and monitoring conducted since 1997. Uh, most of the objects found there are associated with the ancient practice of hunting caribou on the ice patches. Uh, as of 2012, at least 207 perishable artifacts from 43 ice patches had been recorded with associated radio carbon ages spanning the last 9,000 years. Um, so this work has been going on. Uh, so this is, this of course is all Holocene or even going last 9,000 years. I would put us wouldn't, you know, into the early Holocene and that would have been very much into the climatic optimum. So the climatic optimum glacier glaciers were much smaller than they had been during the late ice age, even in fact, smaller than they are now in some, that would, is what we'll put it this way. Even conservatively, they were receded to the, uh, an extent similar to what they are right now. And in fact, when you have an ice sheet and a glacier receding, and then you see that there are these artifacts under there that were left there when, when there was a preceding era, when there was no ice there, well, then you've got to go, okay, well, how much further up, you know? And then of course the tree line during the warmer periods went, went up during the climatic optimum and has gone back down again during the little ice age. So that's the other thing is that when the glaciers are receding, now they're finding remnants of former forests that were growing there during the Holocene when there was no ice. Then the ice came in, destroyed the forest, covered the forest. And so now when it's receding, it's exposing the former existence of the forest. So what is this telling? I mean, to me, the message here is pretty unmistakable. And that is that, yeah, we're looking at times as warm or even warmer than, than present. But, um, so like, here's, here's another, I'm going to take from this one. This is very consistent with studies on the Holocene. This is from nine years ago, but it's, um, you know, it's, uh, two geologists have been studying radiocarbon dates from peat, uh, from the top and base of a bog exposed by recent retreat of the Rutor Glacier. Uh, let's see, where is the Rutor Glacier? Um, I'm sure it'll come up at any, some point here, but this is similar, this similar kind of evidence here. Um, the retreat, retreat of the Rutor, it's spelled R-U-T-O-R, glacier, showed that the glacier front terminated up valley from the bog from 8,400 until at least 6,000 years before present. The evidence is consistent with botanical data that point to a high tree line during the interval and to reconstructed mean July temperatures, get this now, at least four degrees centigrade warmer than present temperatures. It's in Italy. Italy. Okay. So this is, yeah. So this is in that, I wonder where in Italy, is it up near the, uh, it's one of the biggest in the Aosta or Aosta Valley and the sixth biggest glacier in Italy. It is located in the Valley of La Tuile or Tuile. I don't know how to say it. Testa del Rutor is the name of the mountain in the, the highest mountain in the region. Okay. That's probably in the same region as the earlier study that I was referring to, which I might be able to pull up on the break. But anyways, did you get that? The evidence is consistent with botanical data that point to a high tree line higher than now during the interval and to reckon reconstructed mean July temperatures, at least four degrees centigrade warmer than the present temperatures. Wow. If the mass balance history of the glacier is typical of other glaciers in this region, it is likely that average equilibrium line altitudes during the interval of contraction remained above those of the present and well above those of subsequent neoglacial ice advances. So in other words, they're saying that the tree line was well above the current tree line between 6,000 and 8,400 years ago. And temperatures in this particular region were up to four degrees warmer in the summer than at present. However, the current warmth is unprecedented according to... Yes, that's what I was going to say. I'm sorry for interrupting you, but when I was trying to look up neoglaciation earlier to see if I could find some timelines for it. By the way, they're basically saying the timelines shift depending on where in the world you're looking at it. Yeah, yeah. Yeah. But Wikipedia says, neoglaciation has followed the hypsothermal or Holocene climatic optimum, which was the warmest point in the Earth's climate during the current interglacial stage, excluding the global warming-induced temperature increase starting in the 20th century. Of course they're going to say that, because Wikipedia is completely politically compromised. Yeah. Uh-huh. But what you were just reading is evidence for four degrees centigrade warmer than now. Yeah. And that's based upon the plants that were growing there, the tree line. Yeah. I'm sure that if I went in here, we would see that it would give us how much the differential in the tree line here. Yeah. And then he quotes here in the discussion. Mountain glaciers are commonly believed to have been less extensive immediately prior to neoglacial ice advances of the past five millennia than now. And then he quotes Porter and Denton from 1967, Denton and Parler from 1973, Mayuski and others from 1981, and others. Um, so, yeah, so again, here, you know, the, the point I think is, is that, um, you know, there is a manufactured narrative that is cherry picking the evidence and, you know, most people who hear about, oh, it's the warmest it's been, you know, like the claim was just made last summer that this is, I mean, literally it was said over mainstream media, this is the warmest it's been in a hundred thousand years. Right. I mean, that's ridiculous. It's laughable, but you know, when you have people that have our products of the government education monopoly, they hear that and then they believe it, you know, we got to do something. We've got to shut down civilization. Well, here's the thing. I mean, if we go along oblivious sooner or later, nature will do what it's done before nature has shut down civilization many times. Yeah. No, we have to shut down civilization to keep nature from shutting down civilization. Well, yeah, that's, that's the goal, right? If we don't shut it down, then nature will shut it down. So we got to shut it down to keep it from being shut down. Yeah. Let's go back again. Stronger than nature. Yeah. Now, the field evidence and radiocarbon dates from Rutor Glacier indicate that one or more bodies of peat, which now lie in the deglaciated foreland and possibly still beneath the glacier, formed and remained beyond the terminus from at least 8,400 until about 6,000 years before present. Such conditions require that the glacier's equilibrium line stood as high as or higher than it does today for an extended time. That this is not a unique case is demonstrated by fossil remains of laryx and pinus trees, which recently have been released at the fronts of Gorners, Zemut, Firpaclay, and Montmine or Manet glaciers in the Swiss Alps. So there he's referencing one, two, three, four glaciers that have been receding in the Swiss Alps showing the same thing. They're revealing former trees. So in other words, the trees were growing, the weather got cold, the glacier advanced, encroached over areas that had previously been forested, killed the trees, and then now they're melting back to really to where they were previously. So, again, we're being told over and over, oh, all this stuff that's happening is unprecedented. And then so let's see, they dated... I'm also interested in this, like, what is the state of these tree remains? You know, like, we've talked about this many times, like, the advance of the ice is just crushing everything in front of it into dust. But if it's retreating and leaving evidence of trees, then, I mean, are they talking about tiny wood fragments, or are they finding root systems? Well, let's see here, but it said, seven such trees from those four glacier, four lands is the area in front of the glacier snout. Okay. So we can add that to our vocab. The four lands. Four lands. The glacier four lands. Okay. Yeah. That's different than four plants. The parts that stabs down into the warm areas. Yeah. Okay. Seven such trees, samples of which range in age from about 8,200 to 6,000 years before present, must have lived in stable environments behind or above the present limits of the glaciers. Although the trees are inferred to have been killed and overrun by advancing ice at the times indicated by the radiocarbon dates of the outer wood, such advances were restricted to the zone inside A.D. 1973 limit of the ice, as the data provide only maximum possible limits for the glacier expansion, the true magnitude of the advances is unknown. However, they were small enough that the ice front advanced no further than its limit during the recent interval of mid-20th century glacier contraction. It doesn't really describe the state of the tree samples they're finding. So far, no. Yeah. The evidence supports the hypothesis that mountain glaciers were in a contracted state for several millennia during the Middle Holocene hypsothermal interval. It is also consistent with results of recent paleoclimatic reconstructions of Europe that on the basis of pollen data indicate that mean July temperature in the Western Alps was at least four degrees centigrade warmer about 6,000 years before present than it is today. So, interesting stuff. Well, on that question about the state of the trees, I think in one of the mountain passes, the first one that I heard of where people were able to finally go up there, they found like a quiver of arrows. Yeah. So, if the glacier didn't destroy a quiver of arrows, they probably didn't destroy those trees. Yeah. I'm thinking, you know, there are places, you know, where you have, for example, your accumulation zone where there's not going to be a lot of glacier flow. I mean, it'll flow out from there, but picture the snow starts coming and you're going to have multiple years of snow burying whatever is there. Now, you go down slope from there and again, the steeper the gradient, the faster the glaciers are going to be moving. So, I presume it's slumping off of the accumulation zone. Yes. Yeah. So, what's underneath is very well effective. Yeah. And I would think, too, if those, you know, if it was doing a lot of ripping up and grinding of these trees, then they would be much further down the mountain than they would have started at. If they're ripping up the trees. Yeah. No, I think they're finding, like, I've actually seen. They're in situ. Yeah, I think that there's actually, in some cases, like, stumps still there. They've been sheared off, but the stumps and the roots don't. They're finding roots. Yeah. That's cool. So, there he was referencing the Alps and then the Rutoi. This is, yeah, in British Columbia. So, we have basically two sides of the world showing the same evidence of a climate that's about four degrees centigrade warmer than now. So, that's a pretty good indication that we're looking at something that's a warming that's global in extent. Well, you want to take a quick break? Sure. We can all think about that. Four degrees centigrade warmer than now. 8,000 BC? Between six, the date here on this study was 6,000 to 8,400 years ago. Ago. Okay. So, now, I mentioned the cold snap at 8,300, but I've noticed there's up to a century or two variability in the dating of that cold spike. And then, with the neoglaciation, the onset of that, I said around 6,000. But, again, there are multiple centennial variability, like you said there in reading from Wikipedia, which I would agree with. It was not uniform everywhere. Yeah. There was a general overall climate shift, but it affected different regions at different times. Yes. Yeah. Yes. All right. Let's take a break, and we'll be right back. Okay. And we're back, ladies and gentlemen. Cosmographia, the Randall Carlson Podcast returns. Continuing on, we got more stuff on this period you've been talking about? Yeah. Well, you know, I'm very, you know, in fact, after meeting you guys four years ago, you know, I was already shifting over to, like, taking a deeper look at the Holocene. And I've continued to do that, because now we begin to see, you know, I was primarily looking at these really outsized geological events. So, I mean, you know, at a time, I was looking at the great mass extinction episodes that, you know, KT, the Permian Triassic, the late Ordovician, the late Devonian, all of those, then coming into, you know, the latest catastrophic episode at the end of the last ice age, and how that might have affected the long-term, you know, evolution of human culture that goes back to the beginning of humans, which, of course, is still a question in an area of, you know, strong interest. But I've also been now thinking more about what has gone on in the Holocene, more so than I was, you know, a decade or two ago. And what I'm finding, you know, is that there's just this amazing material coming out now that, you know, so we're just, what we've been just talking about is Holocene events. You know, we have the climatic optimum, the idea that you might have had periods that were multiple degrees warmer than now. What are the implications of that? And yeah, should we be looking at that in the context of, well, you know, the concern now is we're, you know, what is it, 1.2 degrees warmer now than the start of the industrial evolution, right? So we're still well within the range of natural variability, at least according to a whole bunch of studies that suggest there have been much warmer periods during the Holocene. But the Holocene is, you know, up to this point, if we're talking about civilization, we've got hard evidence now of civilizations that have risen and fallen or come and disappeared that reigned for hundreds, if not thousands of years, and then they've gone. Now, this is all pretty much within the Holocene, right? I mean, we could almost say that the history of civilization as we currently understand it is pretty much a Holocene phenomenon. And anything back when we get into the Pleistocene, of course, is more speculative and not even considered a plausible scenario by mainstream academia, mainstream archaeologists. So leaving aside the question of civilization that may have existed in the Pleistocene, pre-Younger Dryas, back into the late glacial maximum and beyond, is a whole separate question. Then there's the question of this amazingly rich and complex story of efforts to create civilization as we know it during the Holocene. And even in the Holocene, we discover that it's been enormously variable. And there's a lot of evidence suggesting that, you know, there have been multiple efforts to establish civilization, and they've been interrupted by things that have happened. There's one here. Let me pull this up. This is a report that appeared in the Journal of Archaeological Science. This was in 2011. And it is the 9th century before the Common Era destruction layer at Tel Es-Safi-Gath. Safi, S-A-F-I. And then it has a back, a forward slash, G-A-T-H. But this was in Israel. Okay. A 9th century before Common Era destruction layer. Okay. And then this is what they say in their abstract. Destruction events in multi-period sites are valuable marker horizons that represent time-synchronous events across the site and sometimes between sites. Destruction layers often preserve rich finds that provide insights into site use. Here we use both macro and micro-archaeological methods to study a destruction event from the late 19th, late 9th century at Tel Es-Safi. Anybody want to try to look this up? So, it's a Tel, P-E-L-L. And then it's small case. I got it. You got it? Yeah. I'll see if I can find a pronunciation. Cool. Okay. So, get this. A major conflagration at this specific location resulted in the consolidation of parts of the roof construction materials. roof construction materials, thus enabling us to differentiate between roof walls and floor materials. We could reconstruct the events which led to the formation of an approximately 80 centimeter thick layer. The base of this layer that overlies the floor surface is a thin, charred, organic material-rich ash layer. As the clays in this layer were not altered by heat and the ceramics still have preserved residue, we conclude that the ash was produced elsewhere and was redistributed to this location. However, there are ceramics that are associated with burnt roof sediments that do not have preserved residues. So, that's interesting. So, the roof. The roof was apparently burned extensively. Let's see. So, we identify an unusual bin and dissociated stone pavement in a corner rich in artifacts, spider lifts, and charred organic material. So, okay. And then it goes on into the introduction. It says that the remains of violent destructions are often pivotal points of archaeological stratigraphic sequences in multi-period complex society sites. Destruction layers in the Levant, at least, are up to a meter or so thick. Hmm. The stratum often contains collapsed wall and roof remains, abundant artifacts, a well-defined floor surface, all buried in a generally non-stratified mass of sediment. Destruction layers are thus thought to represent time capsules that preserve assemblages of material culture characteristic of a particular period and region that enable archaeologists to correlate strata within and between sites, which is interesting and valuable. But, of course, to me, the more important and interesting question is, what was the nature of this destruction event? What happened? So, like, in the Southern Levantine Iron Age, typical examples of such destruction layers are at sites such as Lashish, Bersheba, and Tel Halif, and the sites of Timna, Ashkelon, and Ekron. Now, the length of time required for the formation of a destruction layer is not well documented. According to written sources, there were Assyrian and Babylonian campaigns, but in the Iron Age, is that what caused the destruction? So, okay, so that raises the question, was this a natural event, or was it human? Yeah, I was going to say, did somebody burn the place down, or did, you know, natural disaster? Right. So, a study of the formation processes of the 7th century before the Common Era stratum at Ekron suggested that the sequence of events that brought about the end of the site in 604 BC was followed by a period of abandonment before the Babylonian destruction. The interpretation of the destruction and abandonment of Canaanite Hazor represents another such case. Okay. The time span that a destruction horizon represents needs to be better understood. This is a major objective of this study. Here, we examine the case of a short-term violent event, the destruction of Telesafi, Gath, Israel. Yeah, Telesafi. Telesafi. Telesafi. Okay. And then Gath, I think, is a, you know, nickname. Okay. Telesafi. Telesafi, Israel, dated to the mid-late 9th century before Common Era. And then they assume that it's probably the result of a military campaign, which, of course, could be. But, you know, that's, I think, an important question. But if the, but see, here's the thing. They said that there was an ash layer that looked like the ash came from somewhere else. So. Yeah, that's strange. Yeah, I don't, how would you explain that according to, you know, a military campaign? A babble. Unless it was volcanic or something else. Right, right. So the approximately 80 centimeter thick distinct destruction layer that characterizes the last Philistine settlement at the site yielded a rich assemblage of artifacts, including hundreds of complete ceramic vessels deposited amongst collapsed architectural features. Uh, so let me jump to their, uh, so let me jump to their, that's some interesting pictures that we won't analyze here. But, uh, there's a photograph of the northeast corner of the excavation area showing the sediments with blocks of angular chalk, which bury various broken vessels. Uh, note too, that the chalk containing sediment surface slopes to the west. I'm going to have to study this to make sense out of it, but we could look at the. It also seemed to be saying that there were ceramics in the ash that came from somewhere else that were not burned, but that then there were other ceramics associated with the ash from the roof materials that were burned. Okay. Right. That's what it sounded like. Yeah. That's what it, that's what I thought it was saying. So it was a bunch of guys came in with pots that were on fire and they threw them and burned the whole place down. I think I've heard a story like that. It's like a guy named Gideon, maybe burned down entire army with pots on fire. So it says here, an isolated human skull and several non-articulated human bones were found at one location under a pile of collapsed building materials just to the west of wall. One, two, three, double oh seven. These bones appear to belong to a person who died during the initial phase of the destruction and was subsequently buried under the collapsed walls. Several additional human skeletons were found on stratum A3 floors under the destruction debris in an adjacent area of the excavation outside the presently examined area. A concentration of burnt animal bones was found about a meter away from the human skull and also adjacent to the brick wall. All these human and animal bones were clearly lying in the black fine-grained sediment on the floor. Okay. So something happened and I'm going to do it. Let's see. I'll do a share screen here and we'll look at this one of the wall here. Uh, I mean the area, the walls of this corner. Okay. So let me get it lined up. So we've got the photo of the northeast corner of the excavation area showing the sediments with blocks of angular chalk. That's this over here on the left, which bury various broken vessels. Uh, note two, that the chalk containing sediments, surface slopes. To the west and the interface with the light brown roof sediment in the lower part of the section is almost vertical. Let's see. So the, so A, this up here with this black, this is topsoil. So this would have been deposited later. B, which is, okay. So this is right here, this is B and that is, uh, let's see. A is topsoil. B is roof consolidated and unconsolidated sediment. C, which is this over here is part of the remnants of a wall. The terra paisae wall. D down here is the upper part of the floor. And E down here is the surface part of the floor. So this must have been an upper part of a floor material that maybe collapsed down. And with these blocks of chalk, I guess they would have been the walls. Let's see. If we go up here, there's other pictures you can see of the, of the area and like areas. Let's see here. You can see there's, uh, let's see. Okay. Yeah. Look, here's artifacts and things like one, uh, surface exposed. Exposed at the beginning of the excavation after the topsoil was removed, the stone mortar and burnt sediment slab are indicated by an arrow and arrow head respectively. Okay. So something happened here. Uh, and I haven't fully digested this report yet. Uh, yeah. First indications that excavation square 89 C could be of particular interest. Uh, the results are divided into two sections, the layer by layer analysis of the destruction horizon, followed by the analysis of macroscopic and microscopic artifacts that relate to the use of the site at this location. So, uh, I'll stop the chair there. So that's, that's one event in the Holocene. Then we've got, uh, you know, the bronze age collapse. There's a lot of studies on that. Uh, let's see. Here's another very interesting study. This is, uh, from, uh, 2023. So it's very recent. And the title of the article, which appeared in earth science reviews is abrupt climate change in arid central Asia during the Holocene, a review, uh, and in their abstract, they say abrupt, unlike the long-term, that is earth orbital scale climatic trends, abrupt climate changes, uh, dominated arid central Asia during the Holocene and their origin remains unclear. We present the first comprehensive synthesis of centennial scale climatic events in this region based on nine rigorously selected Holocene paleoclimate records. The results show that mega regional abrupt climate events were consistently recorded during the middle to late Holocene. Uh, strikingly such mega regional climate events were rarely indicated in the record. records before 5.5,000 years ago. Interestingly, because what they're doing is they're showing up after the neoglaciation climate deterioration. Okay. So they go on to say, uh, this pattern of mega regional wet and dry events, although unevenly distributed in time is ascribed to the intensification and southward movement of the westerlies. Since the late middle Holocene, which favored the establishment of climatic teleconnections across the entire region. By comparing climatic events in the arid central Asia region with classical records of Holocene abrupt climate events, we particularly found that five centennial scale wet events were broadly consistent with North Atlantic cooling events and a global synthesis of cold periods supporting a cold, wet climatic configuration in arid central Asia. analysis of the mechanisms responsible for these events suggests that these abrupt events were forced mainly by decreased sea surface temperatures in the North Atlantic and negative phases of the North Atlantic oscillation. Um, so that's interesting that what we see, and this is consistent with other evidence that shows with the global cooling that occurred in the way along with the, uh, the neoglaciation, you now have a deterioration of climate and more extreme and abrupt events occurring. Um, abrupt, and in the introduction, they say abrupt climate changes and extreme synoptic events have always significantly affected the human living environment. Extreme synoptic and climatic events such as flood and droughts may last from several days to several years. Uh, so, so yeah. And then moreover, abrupt climate changes on multi-decadal to centennial timescales may have been an important factor in the rise and fall of past civilizations, including the classical Maya civilization, social changes in ancient Mesopotamia, and the development of cultures and civilizations in China. So consequently, the documentation of past abrupt climate changes on centennial to decadal timescales has become a focus of paleoclimate research. So, uh, so yeah, they're looking at, uh, deep sea sediment cores, which revealed a cyclicity in ice rafted debris events, um, you know, records of glacier advancements and recessions. Uh, that sounded like something you were going to get into that was not the Miyake events. That's what I was about to bring up too. Yeah. Uh, it'd be interesting if some of those indicators in the dendrochronology would line up, like for example, with that archeological site, you could tell. Right. Telesophy. Hello. Telesophy. Yeah. Uh huh. So based in, in, in their conclusions and perspectives, they say that, um, based on a comprehensive analysis of nine high quality Holocene paleoclimate records, a series of mega regional abrupt centennial scale climate events in the, uh, ACA or, you know, the air, the, the, what was it again? The, uh, the, uh, the Asia, the arid central Asia, arid central Asia is the ACA. They always like to abbreviate things. Um, so the, uh, conclusions and perspectives, comprehensive analysis of nine high quality Holocene paleoclimate records, a series of mega regional abrupt climate scale events are statistically identified for the first time. Uh, and these are dating at 6.5 thousand years ago, 4.7, 3.3, 1.8 and 0.4. So that's 400 years ago. And then in parentheses, they have corresponding to the little ice age and they alternated these cold, wet events, then alternated with four dry events, one at around 5.3, the next one at 3.9 thousand years ago, the next one at 2.6. And then finally one at 1.1. And this was corresponding to the, uh, medieval warm period. Um, ah, 0.2 mega regional abrupt climate changes occurred more frequently after the approximate, 5.5 thousand years ago than before, uh, this change is primarily attributed to the intensification and southward shift of the westerly circulation since the late middle Holocene, possibly linked to an increase in the Northern hemisphere LTG and the transition to an NAO North Atlantic oscillation negative phase. So they're talking about then changes in atmospheric current movement and in oceanic, and they're associating it with that. Now, is that the cause or is that something just correlated? I don't know. Um, but it does say, it goes on to say that the wet events, uh, are broadly, broadly coherent with North Atlantic cooling events and cold periods in a global synthesis study, uh, supporting the cold, wet climatic configuration. Um, so this is interesting. So I don't have the timeline perfect in my head, but it sounds to be like when the climate was warmer, it was more stable. Yes. And then as it started to cool down and it got much colder again, then you start having these crazy outsized events. That's exactly right. Yes. Uh, that's exactly right. Yes. Um, that's exactly the opposite of what they're claiming today. Oh yeah. The weather's going to get worse and all the, it's going to be more erratic, crazy. Yeah, we've been through episodes of that where the hurricanes were much more severe. Oh yeah. It's colder. Yeah. Here's another interesting thing. This is back from 2006, uh, was published in, uh, get this back up here. It was published in the journal of quaternary research. It's entitled tripartite climate reversal in central Europe, 5,600 to 5,300 years ago. And this is from the study of variations in water level at Lake Constance, which is in Italy, right? I believe it is. Um, so they did a history of variations in water level of Lake Constance as reconstructed from sediment and pollen analysis of a sediment sequence from the archeological site of Arbonne-Blachet 3. And it shows an abrupt rise in lake level, dendrochronologically dated to 5,375 years ago. Uh, this event paralleled by the destruction of the Neolithic village by fire provoked the abandonment of this prehistoric lakeshore location established in the former shallow bay of Arbonne-Blachet and was the last of a series of three episodes of higher lake level. The first occurring at 56 to 5,500, uh, years before present, the dendrochronologically dated rise event was synchronous when, with an abrupt increase in atmospheric carbon 14. Hmm. Well, that certainly suggests what? Solar variability, right? Indeed. So carbon 14 is going to increase when the sun decreases in activity and more cosmic ray bombardment occurs in the upper atmosphere. And then that creates beryllium 10 and carbon 14. Ah, well, okay. So here's the next sentence. This supports the hypothesis of an abrupt climate change, change forced by varying solar activity. Hmm. Uh, yeah, I guess the Miyake event stuff is saying that you can also get increased amounts if the sun has a huge flare. Yeah. Because then that could also cause. Yeah. Yeah. The sun itself puts out, uh, fast, heavy particles that cause cosmic rays. Uh, Lake Constance is a central European lake that borders Germany, Austria, and Switzerland. It's in Switzerland. Right. Not by the Rhine. Yeah. Okay. Moreover, the three successive episodes of higher lake level between 5,600 and 5,300 years before present at Arbonne-Blachet III coincided with climatic cooling, uh, in various regions of both hemispheres. This period corresponds to the mid-Holocene climate transition or the onset of the neo-glaciation and suggests inter-hemispheric linkages for the climate variations recorded at Arbonne-Blachet. Wow. This mid-Holocene climate reversal may have resulted from complex interactions between changes in orbital forcing, ocean circulation, and solar activity. Uh, yeah. Over the past 30 years in the introduction, now European paleoclimate reconstructions based on glacier variations, river and lake level fluctuations, uh, and pollen and plant macro fossils have shown the complexity of the Holocene climate punctuated by successive century scale cooling events. More recently, records from the Greenland ice sheet and the North Atlantic Ocean have given additional support for a complex Holocene climatic pattern. Moreover, there is growing evidence that Holocene climatic oscillations reflect solar forcing. Here we present paleoenvironmental and archaeological evidence for an abrupt tripartite climate change between 5550 years before present and 5,320 years before present. Uh, Lake Constance, Switzerland linked to a variation in solar activity. Um, oh, interesting. These climatic reversals induced glacier expansion in the Alps and lake level rises of Lake Constance which led to the abandonment of the Neolithic pile dwellings of Arbonne-Blaché. This may also explain the sudden burial of the Neolithic Alpine ice man, Otzi, recently found in the Tyrolean Alps, a contemporary of the Arbonne-Blaché people. So there, I mean, that's, again, that's, you know, consistent with the fact that the climate becomes more extreme as the climate cools and tends to become more stable in the warmer times. I mean, that's, that's what the data is pointing to. It's not just a conclusion that I'm coming to, it's what the data is suggesting over and over again. So, again, you know, this is the stuff that, that's being neglected in the mainstream media about climate change. But all this stuff... If you want to study, if you want to understand climate change, you've got to look at the history of climate. But these papers you're reading today are all recent, right? Oh, yeah. These, you can see sometimes how they, you know, they're not studying global warming. They're not getting funded for climate change research necessarily. And they'll, you know, people will produce these papers that don't directly have anything to do with modern climate change. But they almost negate the, I mean, they almost defeat the argument. Well, they do. They're not coming from American scientists. They're coming from around the globe. And it's the Americans that want to lead that scare tactic. Well, the money is in, you know, anthropogenic global warming. And I mean, now you can see how they're ramping up the narrative. Everything now, everything is unprecedented and everything is a result of fossil fuels. And ignore the fact that no matter what you're talking about, and we've talked about it a whole lot on this show, it's all happened before. What's happened before is happening now and will continue to happen, regardless of what we do and how many SUVs we drive. It's not going to matter. These things have been happening since this planet has had a climate. And we can provide extensive documentation showing that many of these events have far exceeded anything we've experienced in recent centuries or recent historic times. Yet, we're not really talking about that. And people who do talk about this stuff are labeled climate change deniers, which is unbelievable. So, you know, it's just, it's very disconcerting to me when I see all of these now, you know, these young people in there, you know, mashing, throwing stuff on works of art, you know, interfering, you know, gluing themselves to the roadways, marching down, blocking traffic, all of these things, these tactics that they're doing are utterly meaningless. And if you talk to any of these people, do they know any of the stuff we're talking about here? No. Have they read these reports and these studies that we're referring to here, every episode that we're doing? No. They know nothing of this. What they know is what they've been spoon-fed, the propaganda they've been spoon-fed since they first started into the public school system and now into college, you know, and I told you how Julie, in order to graduate, she had to watch, this is back, you know, 10, 12 years ago, but in order to graduate from Emory and get her degree in Middle Eastern studies, she had to watch, she was required to watch Al Gore's Inconvenient Truth twice, not just once. Once is not enough. Once is not enough. But yeah, that would be. Earth in the balance, like mid-90s. Yeah. Right? So there's like a whole generation now, 25, 28 years of young people that have been fed this, fed this, fed this, fed this again and again. That's right. And they totally believe it. And they totally believe it. Doom-born. It's time for your brain. Send your kids to the public spoon-feeding. Yeah. The public what? The public spoon-feeding place. Yeah. Oh, the public spoon-feeding. Yes. Yeah. Okay. So then this is, we won't talk about this tonight. We, but this is from actually going back to 2000, but from the Journal of Archaeological Science, it's called Poseidon's Horses. I might've mentioned this in a previous show we did, but it's Poseidon's Horses, plates, tectonics, and earthquake storms in the late Bronze Age Aegean and Eastern Mediterranean. I like that. Earthquake storms. Poseidon's Horses. What an interesting name. I remember that term. Interesting name. Yeah. Earthquake storms. So it seems like, you know, there is a whole, a whole mass of evidence showing that there's a variety of these different things that are happening. You know, we're seeing that, you know, what is it now that the, um, you know, the number of say impacts, uh, asteroid and comet bolide impacts in the Holocene is far greater than anybody had, had previously imagined. You know, look at the work of Bruce Massey and others, you know, uh, Mike Bailey, uh, Victor Klub, uh, William Napier, uh, Duncan Steele. So, I mean, all of these guys are looking and going, yeah, it looks like there's been a whole lot more impact events. There's also been really big volcanic eruptions, sometimes even appear to be correlated in time. And then we have, now we're talking about major atmospheric changes in atmospheric circulation, major changes in oceanic, uh, circulation, uh, North Atlantic oscillation, the ENSO events. All of these things are now, you know, we're, we're learning about and realizing all of these are very critically important factors in what's driving the climate of the earth to change. We started talking and we've only, again, scratched the surface of the emerging evidence for the involvement and responsibility of the sun, right? So, yet, in spite of all of this, in spite of all of this, we've got millions of people now that are now emotionally and psychologically invested in this scenario of, of climate, anthropogenic climate induced doom. Even to the point now, I've got, I don't have them in front of me, but I've pulled up several articles that have been in the press within the last few months to a year or two where there's a new sub-genre of the psychiatric profession that is now existing just to address climate anxiety amongst people. Shouldn't be laughing. That's terrible. No, you shouldn't. This, this is, this is, uh, but I know you can't help it. Uh, but yeah, I mean, this is a thing and there are now growing number of, this is where something that's definitely not worth laughing at, the growing number of suicides amongst young people because of climate, climate despair, believing now that there's no future and it's going to be due to global warming and they're committing suicide. This is a thing now that's happening, um, which is crazy. I mean, so these people out there, you know, if we're coming along and we're presenting, well, here's evidence that look, look, four degrees warmer. We just showed, okay, two, two think about what we just did this evening. We showed two separate references, one from British Columbia, one from, uh, where was it in the Alps? Can't. Oh, yeah. British Columbia is Canada. Yeah. I think it was the Italy. Yeah. Uh, right. Showing that during the mid, during the Holocene, there've been times when it was four degrees centigrade warmer. Tree lines were significantly higher than now. So why is none of that being talked about? I read an article earlier today. I was going to pull it up on my, I saw it on my phone. I was on a feed and I couldn't find it, but it was basically talking about taking, uh, you know, the reference was that, are we going to be prepared for climate change? You know, because, and, and really here's the thing. If we project the probability of the climate changing in future, I'd say it's almost a hundred percent certain that the, yeah, the climate is going to change again. I mean, it's unless of course, and this is a possibility to consider by us increasing the carbon dioxide, uh, in the atmosphere by a few hundred parts per million, it might actually be having a stabilizing effect. And that's something we can return to in another discussion because it's definitely worth considering. Um, but anyways, you're, well, I would have, I'd have to, I don't know about that. You know, I don't just seems like we've looked at all this stuff about how little effect, like increasing the carbon dioxide has once you get over the first 180 parts per million. Right. And I just, I find it a little hard to believe that we can stave off a coming ice age by warming the atmosphere, like 0.1 or 2 degrees. I agree. I would agree. I mean, it would have to be. It seems more likely that we're just not having that much of an effect at all, at least with CO2. Like we may have, be having effects in other ways. Yeah. But CO2, I don't know. I mean. Maybe I'm being over optimistic. You're trying to give these people hope. I don't. There's, there's no hope, Randall. The climate is going to change. We just got to burn more fossil fuels. The climate is going to change. It's not going to have anything to do with stuff we do. And we're going to have to adapt to it. And that was the point of this article. Okay. That, yeah, we're going to have to adapt. And I agree with that. I mean, but here's my, my concern is, okay, let's say we shut down fossil fuel use and all of the technology and industry that would then also have to, to, to disappear. And the materials. Yeah. And what? All the materials. Yes. Like so much stuff aside from burning fuel is, is, comes from the, you know, the petrol industry. Well, yeah. So, so what would that do to our adaptability and our ability to respond to a natural climate change? I can't see that it would be anything other than drastically inhibit our ability to respond effectively. Yeah. We'd go back to living in heap houses or whatever. Right. Yeah. Pile, pile, neolithic pile houses. Pile houses. And most of us are going to be Ootie. Yeah. Frozen in the glacier for 5,000 years. Man. Well, I mean, even a return to little ice age conditions could be really, I mean, that could require some major efforts to adapt to because there were times when the Northern Hemisphere saw like a couple of years in a row of agricultural collapses. But look, we, we could build greenhouses. We need plastics. We need, uh, you know, we could keep the farming going in a little ice age scenario today with fossil fuels. Yeah. Plastics. It's fossil fuels. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. And possibly now, you know, we'll have to see again. And we, and another discussion we've got to have, I think further, the time has come to discuss plasma energy because there are independent sources besides the, you know, the Malcolm Bendel source. There's also, you know, there's, there's this, have you guys seen this, this book here? Oh yeah. I did. Robert Temple's book. You know, Robert Temple, he did was the serious mystery guy. Yeah. Remember that? So I'm, so I'm, I'm reading this, I'm about this far into it and, uh, yeah, I mean, it's very interesting stuff. And, and the argument he's making is that, yeah, that it very well could be the, you know, the basis for where technology could evolve to. And, uh, if that happens, you know, if you look at the, the, the thunderstorm generator, the, the technology that's now being tested in several laboratories, including a major one, Eastern laboratory and in a German laboratory. Now, what do we see happening there is that, um, yeah, it looks like several things. One is that, okay, when you, to, to, you have to get the requisite temperatures to cause the disassociation of electrons and protons, which creates this ionization in this stream of plasma. That's the first thing. Then the second thing is to stimulate that plasma to self-organize into these, into these elegant geometries that now emit energy in a nutshell, if I'm understanding how it works, right? Well, a couple of things there. For one, you need fossil fuels or some way of generating the initial temperatures. So there would still be a function for fossil fuels. Just, you wouldn't be using it to the extent that we are now. Um, and, you know, I think that we talked about this in the live stream about how rapidly, um, cooling global cooling can cause the oceans to start sucking out carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. Yes. I think we did that. Yeah. We have talked about it before. I don't know if it was in the last live stream, but we have discussed that. But we have talked about that. It becomes a carbon sink. Yeah. Yes. It becomes a massive carbon sink. Like a big, once it goes into the, into the oceans, it's pretty much going to get, end up in the. Sequestered in the rock. Exactly. Sequestered in the rock. And then that's it. We don't, it's gone out of the atmosphere for a hundred thousand or a million years or more. So, yeah, I mean, the important thing I think we need to do now is to try to, you know, just counter this manufactured narrative. I mean, there's a lot of people that aren't buying it, but you know, the idea is absolutely. We, we need to be very cognizant of our footprint and how we interact with nature. We're all, of course, we don't want to pollute. I mean, you know, what drives me crazy is when I see people, uh, throwing trash out the windows of their cars. You know, I've noticed something very interesting in, in the travels. When we get into poor counties where, for example, and I don't mean to be, you know, bigoted or whatever here, but when you get into the poor counties, which usually means less educated, you see more trash when you come into the counties where, oh, for example, like drive through whatever the counties that, that, uh, that the, the bluegrass region of Kentucky and you're driving through those fairly upscale counties with the beautiful white fences and the pastoral, you don't see any trash. I don't, you know, you go into the other, other counties where it's a lot of trailer parks and things. Yeah. Then you see, and I've seen this over and over again. It's not just something that I've seen one time. I've, I've noticed it a lot. Yes. I would suggest though, that it's not because there's less trash being thrown out. Yeah. It's because there's, there's more money for people picking it up and cleaning it up. Yeah. There's more resources and people that will dedicate resources cleaning. Yeah. Well, I generally think that I bet you that if you looked at more educated people, they're going to be less inclined to throw their trash out windows of their car. I would just think that maybe I'm wrong. Um, you know, I like, look, here's four of us and I get, I bet I could say a hundred percent that none of us throw trash out the windows when we're driving. No, we don't, we don't have the window. No, me either. I never have, like you said, apple cores. Yeah. Anything that an animal will eat. Like apple cores. Yeah. So banana peels. Orange peels. I know. I just, yeah. Some of my earliest memories of my dad was him ranting and raving about trash. Yeah. Yeah. Well, see your, your dad and my, myself would be exactly in line with that. He's a, he's a preservationist. He, he loves nature. So yeah, we learned that I feel the same way about trash. I hate it. Yeah. And now, and, and then I think about the tours we do. I could almost declare that a hundred percent of those people are not going to be throwing trash out the windows. There's a couple of times when whoever was riding in the passenger seat of my van left a lot of trash in my van, in the van. Yes. The vans are full of trash by the time we're done with our tours, but there's none in the forest and places we went to visit. Okay. Yeah. Yeah. He's seen the cigarette butts getting thrown out. That's, you know, that's just so common. Oh man. That's, that's, that's the, that's the economy. Yeah. Yeah. And you know, a lot of these big fires, you know, what was it, the fires in a lot of these fires that happened, you know, in fact, some studies are showing that up to three quarters of them are caused by humans directly or indirectly campfires, cigarette butts or indirectly because power lines are being knocked over or, you know, whatever it might be. Um, the rest are going to be natural, mostly lightning strikes. Yeah. Yeah. So I, with the, with the cigarette butts, I was a smoker for a long time. And when I was younger, I did throw butts out the window, but I stopped that a long time ago and always. Oh yeah. I, I, I smoked for a year when I was 15, 16, I'd quit by the time I was 17, but yeah, I remember I even have a picture of Brian with some of my buddies and I'm sitting there smoking a cigarette and we picked up this hitchhiker and one of the guys that I was with threw something out the window and myself and the hitchhiker were just totally getting on his case about, you know, Hey, you know, don't, Hey man, don't throw your shit out the window, don't throw cigarette butt. I'll be like, don't throw trash. No, I'm like, Hey man, that's what we got an ashtray for. Cause you, you may remember the days when cars came equipped with ashtrays. Yes. And cigarette lighters. Yeah. Yeah. But it's totally cool to throw your roaches out. Right. Right. Cigarette smokers. You can't throw your cigarette butts down, but it was a road. Yeah. You got a road. That was not something I would ever do. I'm like, I would smoke that thing down until it was microscopic. I was not about to throw a roach out the window. That was the best part. So there we go. Oh, Brad's like, I just let the cat out of the hole. Do some editing. Oh my God. What's going to happen now? People realize, Oh, Randall Carlson once smoked some pot. All credibility gone. Randall, completely credibility gone. Oh, he's just another stoner. Yeah. That's out. All right. Well, we, we better wrap it up. Yeah. That was a fun show. Wrap it up. Randallcarlson.com. Yeah. Right. Yep. You guys working on some revamps for the website too. That coming up. Maybe. Yes. Always ideas of revamps. Yes. That's coming up. And, uh, yeah. So I guess expand, expand, expand more, more, more, more, more. So before you go, no, you guys still looks like you're on for Egypt in February. Yes. Yes. Right. Okay. Six weeks. Yes. Because we're now we're doing the February tour and then, and then we're doing another one in March right after. Good Lord. So it's going to be two of them back to back. Yeah. Uh-huh. Yeah. They had quite the waiting list. So you are. Yeah. We had to, we had to cancel the extension of Lebanon and now, and, and we talked about possibly doing an extension in Egypt where we just decided like there's so many people on the waiting list. We'll just. So the two tours will be back to back, but they'll basically be the same tour. That's right. Yeah. Yeah. Uh-huh. Well, maybe you can finagle a little bit to get, see some sites. Yeah. I mean, with six. Yeah. There's really always a little variability. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. The sea. I mean, there's so much to see. Yeah. And you could spend days at one place. You know, when I was there for 10 days, that was not enough. No. Right. Oh, no. What do you want us to see? We are going to go to some places we haven't seen yet. Okay. We've been twice and we're going to get to go to some new places. So getting to go to those new places twice. Uh-huh. Going to be great. Yeah. Yeah. Um, but yeah, we'll be going back to other sites we've already seen, but still, I mean, each one is just so, they're, they're so enormous. It's like, you always see something new anyway. Yep. Yeah. And I mean, we have multiple of these sites. We, I already know multiple things I want to check again, get better pictures or footage of, uh, new, you know, things that I noticed later after we got home that I saw in the photos that I didn't see while I was there. Well, I'm like, I need to go look at this girl. There's this one joint in this one block. Well, right. Fifth level. It's on the left. By that thing. On the North wall. I need to look at that closer. Bring your magnifying glass. And they know they run right to it. Yeah. Well, that's awesome guys. I'm taking all my time. Well, all right. It was fun. Yep. All right. All right. Covered some stuff. Yeah. And I'll see you guys next week, I guess. That's right. All right. Thanks guys. Good night. We'll see you. Good night. Good night, everybody.