SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
What caused the rapid disappearance of a vibrant Native American agrarian culture that lived in urban settlements from the Ohio River Valley to the Mississippi River Valley in the two centuries preceding the European settlement of North America? In a new study, researchers from Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis reconstructed and analyzed 2,100 years of temperature and precipitation data—and point the finger at climate change.
Employing proxies of prehistoric temperature and precipitation preserved in finely layered lake sediments, somewhat analogous to tree-ring records used to reconstruct drought and temperature, the IUPUI scientists have reported on the dramatic environmental changes that occurred as the Native Americans—known as Mississippians—flourished and then vanished from the Midwestern United States. The researchers theorize that the catastrophic climate change they observed, which doomed food production, was a primary cause of the disappearance.
"Abrupt climate change can impose conditions like drought. If these conditions are severe and sustained, as we have determined that they became for the Mississippians, it is virtually impossible for societies, especially those based on agriculture, to survive," said paleoclimatologist Broxton Bird, corresponding author of the new study. "From the lake records, we saw that the abundant rainfall and consistent good weather—which supported Mississippian society as it grew—changed, making agriculture unsustainable." Bird is an assistant professor of earth sciences in the School of Science at IUPUI.
This failure of their principal food source likely destabilized the sociopolitical system that supported Mississippian society, according to archeologist Jeremy Wilson, a study co-author. He is an associate professor of anthropology in the School of Liberal Arts at IUPUI.
Other theories have suggested they exceeded their environment's carrying capacity, or that disease wiped out large numbers of people.
(Score: 3, Funny) by bob_super on Thursday February 02 2017, @01:41AM
We all know that tobacco will kill you, but how hard were they smoking those ceremonial pipes to cause climate change?
Next time I see a coal roller, I'll thank him for honoring the memory of the natives.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 02 2017, @03:42AM
What if there was an ancient matriarchial society that spanned the globe, living in harmony with mother nature? Then, as is apt to occur every now and then, a natural disaster of epic proportions hit. This altered the climate and ecosystem so much the civilization could not adapt, and so it was destroyed. The survivors were those who did not trust mother nature, and they vowed never to build a civilization based around trusting her again.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by butthurt on Thursday February 02 2017, @07:17AM
Perhaps memorialised in the myths of the garden of the Hesperides and the garden of Eden?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Garden_of_Eden#Parallel_concepts [wikipedia.org]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hesperides [wikipedia.org]
(Score: 3, Insightful) by khallow on Thursday February 02 2017, @11:14AM
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 02 2017, @02:09AM
Now we have trade so people can eat, even when they live in drought conditions. If California gets too warm and dry for agriculture, it can buy food from Canada.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 02 2017, @02:32AM
Yay for logistics you mean. We can and have fed millions of people across continents in normally unsustainable conditions without any trade involved, notably during the world wars.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 02 2017, @01:53PM
If they have the ₩ampum we have the grain.
(Score: 2, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 02 2017, @02:27AM
It's those damn Indians driving their big SUVs that wiped them out. If they had only embraced renewables we'd all be speaking Algonquin right now.
(Score: 5, Interesting) by Runaway1956 on Thursday February 02 2017, @03:32AM
Decades ago, I found and read a biography of Tecumseh. I was in fourth grade, so, about ten years old. I don't remember now whether I found it in the school library, the city library, or someone's pile of books, I only remember the story.
In the book, Tecumseh discussed with some white people why his people wouldn't live in Kentucky. Tecumseh's grandfather's generation had finally succeeded in wiping out a tribe of death worshipping cannibals who live in Kentucky. It was believed that the cannibal's evil spirits haunted Kentucky, and no Shawnee was willing to stay on the land after sunset.
Genocidal warfare may have had more to do with depopulating the region, than climate change.
I can't speak for the accuracy of the story, after all these years - I can only relate what I accepted as truth back then. Hell, I can't even remember the title or author of the book now.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by wisnoskij on Thursday February 02 2017, @03:56AM
I think that is included. When people say famine killed X people, or toppled civilization Y, they do not literally mean all those people died of starvation. In any famine, you will have wars, and in any war you will have disease. Very very few of the people likely died as a direct result of a reduction in yields, they died because of the disease they caught, from the war that started over reduced yields.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 02 2017, @06:19PM
I think that is included. When people say famine killed X people, or toppled civilization Y, they do not literally mean all those people died of starvation. In any famine, you will have wars, and in any war you will have disease. Very very few of the people likely died as a direct result of a reduction in yields, they died because of the disease they caught, from the war that started over reduced yields.
Citation needed.
I'm prepared to believe this, but do actually have facts to back it up? The two biggest famines I know of were the Great Leap Forward [wikipedia.org] in China, and the Great Famine [wikipedia.org] in Ireland... and neither of them had substantial death-from-war.
Can you give any proof behind your very reasonable sounding logic? After all, it's very reasonable sounding that the Sun orbits the Earth as well.
(Score: 0, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 02 2017, @05:31AM
Genocidal warfare may have had more to do with depopulating the region, than climate change
Or, . . . it may have not. You know what I, in my infinite Anonymous Coward wisdom, think it was? Yes, they allowed someone using the handle runaway to start commenting on the smoke signal boards, and within half a decade, everyone had left. The groundless speculation, the uneducated guesses, the abysmal fear of Islam, and the anti-abortion positions, it was all too much for the Mississippians. And what Tecumseh forgot to mention was that the cannibal tribe? They left Kentuck and moved to Arkansas. True story!!!
(Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 02 2017, @06:39AM
OR maybe, there is something in the Soil in Arkansas, like ringworm, that saps the energy and intelligence of the residents? Could it not have been something like that that wiped out the Natives, and then just lay in wait to infect the European invaders, who thought they were just walking into vacant ground, but then they in turn were infected, so they sided with slave owners, against their own interests. And they sided with Southern Democrats, against Civil Rights and against their own interests. And finally, they sided with Trump, who is going to sell each and every one of these worm-infested Southern Strategy (Courtesy of Tricky Dick, y'all!) down the fucking river. So it is true, the curse Tecumseh spoke of has come true. Do you know who elected Trump? Yes, the Voters of the Dark and Bloody Ground, Kentucky.
(Score: 2, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 02 2017, @07:06AM
But in Kentucky's defense, Mark Twain always said the when the end of the world comes, he would want to be in Kentucky, because everything gets there two years late.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 02 2017, @07:56AM
Yeah, but the Mississippiians were the Mound Builders! So why would climate change be an issue at all, since they were building mounds? It it just like our Feckless Leader, the Donald of the Tiny Hands, who has built so many towers to stave off the effects of global warming! The problem these Native Americans had was that they had no Donald Trump! So if they had had a Donald, they might still be here today, and they would be banned from re-entering the country, since even though they are permanent residents of the Mississippi valley, they are not white, or Christian.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 02 2017, @08:06AM
First, wow, Runaway says he can read! Let me pick my jaw up off the floor.
Second, can't remember. How convenient! I recall someone else using the same ploy recently! https://soylentnews.org/comments.pl?sid=17747&cid=461516#commentwrap [soylentnews.org]
Third: What the fuck does this have to do with anything? Is Runaway saying that these scientists, with data and geologic records, are just wrong because of some book that he cannot identify but may have read when he was ten years old? Is this the same year that Runaway had the "science teacher" that said that global cooling was a real thing? So we put both of these together, and we get: Runaway! He Remembers stuff! Just like Reagan remembering when he was at Guadalcanal! Yeah! So don't listen to these "science" types! They are all SJW Scientits, anyway. Part of the Mainstream Media! It was the ghosts of Cannibals, and someone who ended up being the middle name, of someone named Sherman . . . so shirley you see this, right? Got to be true! Runaway says! And Runaway, well, Runaway is Runaway.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Thursday February 02 2017, @09:35AM
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 02 2017, @11:22PM
This sort of comment is why I am not a big fan of khallow posting. Signed, AC.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by MostCynical on Thursday February 02 2017, @09:30AM
Doesn't fit with the Gaia/ earthmother-vengence thing the true "humans are a virus on the planet" types like to peddle.
"I guess once you start doubting, there's no end to it." -Batou, Ghost in the Shell: Stand Alone Complex
(Score: 2) by DeathMonkey on Thursday February 02 2017, @07:00PM
Doesn't fit with the Gaia/ earthmother-vengence thing the true "humans are a virus on the planet" types like to peddle.
It does fit the scientific theory that rapid climate change can fuck shit up, though.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Thursday February 02 2017, @09:39AM
In the book, Tecumseh discussed with some white people why his people wouldn't live in Kentucky. Tecumseh's grandfather's generation had finally succeeded in wiping out a tribe of death worshipping cannibals who live in Kentucky. It was believed that the cannibal's evil spirits haunted Kentucky, and no Shawnee was willing to stay on the land after sunset.
Genocidal warfare may have had more to do with depopulating the region, than climate change.
OTOH, a bunch of nasty cannibals is the sort of Mad Max thing you're expect to linger after a collapse of civilization.
(Score: 2, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 02 2017, @08:21AM
This is a place and time without: refrigeration, rodent-proof storage, seed banks, wheels, or long-distance unified language.
If a seed can survive years without being planted, it's probably a weed. In the first bad year, you lose your crop. Got any seed left? OK, waste that in the second bad year. How long can you go on? Pretty soon, if you haven't eaten or planted your seed, it's just dead. It won't sprout.
Meanwhile, your tribe isn't suffering alone. Other tribes will be inspired to fight. The rodents will be hungry. The bears will be hungry -- maybe you can turn the tables on a few of them, but that isn't safe and you won't get a reliable supply of bears.
Suppose the weather gets better after a few years. Well, you still have no seed. You still starve.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Phoenix666 on Thursday February 02 2017, @12:44PM
The thing is, those complex mound-building societies arose long before the introduction of maize agriculture in North America. The Adena and Hopewell cultures preceded the Mississippians by a long ways. They made do with native plants like marsh elder, ragweed, ground nut, milkweed, etc., and hunted & fished for meat. Some archaeologists have argued that they had a form of permaculture, food forests and such, and that they extensively managed the land with controlled burns and deliberate sowing of food plants. A lot of the plants they ate are now called "-weed" because they grow like weeds. (I recently learned that the pernicious weeds I've been trying to eradicate in my Long Island garden is actually purslane and is one of the tastiest and most nutritious greens you can eat). It's hard to imagine climate change dimming the prospects of fodder like that, short of an ice age or desertification.
Mound builders, apart from building mounds, built along the major watersheds (Mississippi, Ohio, etc) and maintained an extensive trading network. Archaeologists have found copper from the Upper Peninsula of Michigan in mound-builder sites as far south as the now state of Mississippi. Obsidian from Yellowstone was found all over the place. Also the riparian land always gives you access to the water you need, with the fish, waterfowl, and game that go with it.
So to me climate change aka drought doesn't seem so compelling there, as it would for the collapse of Anasazi societies in the high plateaus of the Southwest.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 2) by Joe Desertrat on Thursday February 02 2017, @10:35PM
There is serious speculation that the Little Ice Age was at least partly caused by the rapid reforestation [phys.org] of the Americas due to the sudden die-off of Native Americans after the Europeans arrived, so it is not a stretch to suppose that prior to that the activities of the Native Americans themselves were in fact responsible for causing the localized climate change that led to the decline of the Native American agrarian cultures. The idea that the Native Americans were primitive savages that lived in quiet harmony with the land is a myth.
(Score: 2) by Phoenix666 on Friday February 03 2017, @03:07PM
Exactly. I've been doing a lot of research on pre-Columbian Americans for a project, and several of my received ideas about how they lived and why they failed to repel European incursion have been dispelled.
First, that they were primitive. Their societies were as complex as any out there, based on analyses of their public works (mounds, pyramids, causeways, etc).
Second, that they had no tradition of scientific inquiry or engineering prowess. The Maya had a very good grasp of mathematics; most people know they invented zero but somehow it never sunk in that Maya were mathematicians on par with anything in the Old World. The Wari in the Andes built irrigation systems and aquaducts that were exceptional feats of engineering, and couldn't have been done with solid mathematics and social organization. Tiwanaku in South America was built of stones so massive that it would be quite difficult to replicate with today's modern machinery.
Third, they were weaker. The tribes the Pilgrims and other early settlers contacted were stronger, taller, and better fed than they were.
Fourth, their weapons were so inferior they lost every encounter. After the initial shock of exploding gunpowder, the Indians lost their fear of matchlock weapons because they really weren't more effective than what they had in war clubs, bows & arrows, and atlatls.
Fifth, Europeans easily defeated Indians wherever they fought them. False--the Spanish tried to conquer North America with their armor and guns, but the Natchez, the last of the Mississippian empire, easily repelled them with their "primitive" weapons. The French and English had an easier time in Canada and New England because 90% of the natives had died of disease, perhaps contracted through contact with Basque fishermen or Vikings in Newfoundland, before they arrived. To put that in perspective, imagine Indians showing up in Europe right after the Black Death had peaked, and then been succeeded by the flu of 1918, and only 1 in 10 people was left; it would have been as much a foregone conclusion as it was in America.
Sixth, the Indians were peaceful. In fact they fought constantly among themselves.
Seventh, the Indians had no trade networks or significant economic activity. Archaeologists have found items thousands of miles from where they were sourced. The Mississippi regularly sourced obsidian from Yellowstone and copper from the Upper Peninsula of Michigan. The Inca had enormous twin-hulled trade canoes that ran up and down the western coast of South- and MesoAmerica. The Tainu had trade routes from the coast of Brazil to Florida.
In short, we've been sitting on the ruins of ancient Rome, China, Egypt, and Mesopotamia this whole time and hardly anyone knows it or cares. It's exceptional.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 02 2017, @06:22PM
If a seed can survive years without being planted, it's probably a weed.
A "weed" is just a plant which humans don't like. For example, dandylions can be either a pretty flower or a weed in the lawn. Witer lilys are a beautiful plant, or a weed which chokes out your pond. Bamboo can be a great food source, or a weed which takes over the garden.
Weeds are not a technical definition... and in fact if people used native plants rather than trying to force all landscape to look identical everywhere, there would be far fewer "weeds" all around.
(Score: 2) by Aiwendil on Thursday February 02 2017, @10:36AM
I miss the old days when "climate variance" or "changes in climate" (as used in the lead) or even "changes in rainfall patterns" was used instead of "climate change".
"Climate change" has started to feel so buzz-wordy that I put it in with "synergize", "the cloud" and "paradigm shift".
Just yet another gripe.
(Score: 2) by mcgrew on Thursday February 02 2017, @03:16PM
I agree about "the cloud"; that word was coined out of technological ignorance. But I see no difference between "climate change" and "changes in climate".
"synergize" is from synergy, "the interaction or cooperation of two or more organizations, substances, or other agents to produce a combined effect greater than the sum of their separate effects", or a whole that is greater than the sum of its parts. The word is ancient, so synergize would be to cause synergy, making it a proper word.
"Paradigm shift" is likewise a viable concept that's been around a very long time. Look those words up in a dictionary, they are all useful when used correctly. Except "the cloud" which is simply storing your data on someone else's system.
There are some newly coined words I abhor. One is "blog"; it sounds like someone vomiting. The worst is BOGO. That's a brain-dead stupid word. If I buy one I GET EXACTLY ONE. Buy one, get one free" would be BOGOF. But of course, that one was coined by advertisers. To get into the ad industry you have to take an IQ test. If you score over 70, you're disqualified to work in the field. Advertisers need to bog off!
mcgrewbooks.com mcgrew.info nooze.org
(Score: 2) by Aiwendil on Thursday February 02 2017, @04:06PM
I dislike 'synergize' due to only hearing and seeing it in marketing speak - at all other times I see "mutual advantage", "cooperative benefits" or "economy of scale" - so its modern use in marketing I consider a buzzword.
"Paradigm shift" is also a phrase I only see to generate buzz, in other context I tend to see "coup d'etat", or just "major change" instead. (Also - excepting in historical reviews I've never seen the phrase "paradigm shift" used properly, but I've seen it a lot to describe very minor incremental changes and almost never in regards to science)
"The cloud" I actually find hilarious, due to in my job a cloud on a drawing simply means "unknown/irrelevant" - so I tend to do a mental 's/the cloud/I have no idea where/g', but non-the-less a buzxword.
Ahh, "blog" - which I tend to take perverse issue in pointing out it is "an online diary" (as it was called in the pre web2.0 [another abhorrence] days).
The entire notion of "let's do initalisms" is a thing I agree on being horrible in non-casual settings.
Regarding the "buy one marked up item and get both that you shelled out for" I rather consider being a blatantly fun instance of perceived value abuse.
(I actually am in the habit of looking up words, including "buzzword" (word du jour) - no need for a word to be new to be a buzzword)
(Score: 2) by Hawkwind on Friday February 03 2017, @12:02AM
Paradigm shift, Frank and Ernest had a great take on this when the phrase was starting to get hot in academia: http://aphelis.net/frank-ernest-paradigm-shift/ [aphelis.net].
Personally, I rarely hear it used in a "serious" way now.
(Score: 2) by Reziac on Friday February 03 2017, @03:53AM
My personal unfave is "leverage". As soon as I hear a marketer say "leverage", I know I'm about to hear bullshit.
And there is no Alkibiades to come back and save us from ourselves.
(Score: 2) by FatPhil on Friday February 03 2017, @12:29PM
I didn't know where you were seeing with BOGO, I've never seen it in the context you seem to be using. I initially presumed you meant bogo- the prefix meaning "imbued with the property of bogosity" (as in bogosort). I agree, it seems a dumb contraction (but no dumber than the regular misuse of "I could care less" to mean "I could not care less"). The equivalent we have here is clever because it's language neutral (useful, as we're a bilingual city that gets lots of tourists that speak a 3rd language, and of course English is a bloody useful fallback 4th language for dealing with everyone else) - our local bars will just have signs saying "2=3", with a price. That's what you pay, the normal price for 2, but what you get for that price is 3. Buy two, get one free, condensed down to 3 characters. 2=3, so stupid it's brilliant.
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 03 2017, @12:33AM
...means more dead Injuns? How many degrees before there are no more casinos?