Skip to: Content
Skip to: Site Navigation
Skip to: Search

SUNDAY, NOVEMBER 22, 2009

RSS |

Twitter

Climate Skeptics:
Hacked Emails
Prove We're Right

Scientist talks about adding a 'trick' to graph

Nov 21, 09 10:37 AM CST
College Threatens to Fail Students for Obesity

Twenty-five seniors must prove they've lost weight to graduate

Nov 21, 09 11:25 AM CST
Fla. Man to Smoke
115,000th Joint

Feat earns him world record for cannabis consumption

Nov 20, 09 10:32 AM CST
Hadron Collider
Restarts Briefly

After 14 months of repairs, proton beams circulate

Nov 20, 09 6:06 PM CST
Peru Gang Accused
of Killing to Harvest Fat

Cosmetics firms said to pay $60K/gallon; experts skeptical

Nov 19, 09 10:00 PM CST
The Tuna on Your Plate May Be Endangered

Nov 20, 09 4:27 PM CST
40% Bare Is
How Women
Best Attract Men

But too much flesh smacks of infidelity

Nov 19, 09 4:36 AM CST
This Bud's for You:
Pot Cafe Makes
the Grade

Marijuana mist, croissants on tap in 1st legal establishment

Nov 20, 09 4:27 AM CST
h1n1 outbreak

Swine Flu Mutation Worries Norway Scientists

CDC official says it's no cause for alarm

Nov 20, 09 1:37 PM CST
PALEONTOLOGISTS SAY

100M Years Ago, Africa
Was Crocodile Central

3 new species unearthed from Sahara include DogCroc

Nov 20, 09 1:12 PM CST
Calif. Buffalo Go on
Birth Control

State thins Santa Catalina Island herd humanely

Nov 20, 09 1:00 PM CST
h1n1 outbreak

Flu Pandemic Slacks Off, But 'It's Not Over'

Tamiflu-resistant cluster crops up in NC; 3 of 4 patients dead

Nov 20, 09 4:25 PM CST
Soccer Stars' Fave New Cure: Horse Placenta Massage

It's injected into injured area, then massaged

Nov 18, 09 9:30 PM CST

|NEXT STORY »

Climate Change, Not Humans, Killed Mammoths

New tests suggest humans aren't to blame for extinction of prehistoric pachyderms

By Rob Quinn| Posted Jun 18, 09 9:46 AM CDT|

(Newser) – British scientists believe climate change did more than spear-wielding humans to wipe out the woolly mammoth in Europe, the Guardian reports. New tests have revealed that the mammoths roamed northern Europe until 14,000 years ago, much later than had been thought. Researchers believe the animals died out as the warming post-Ice Age climate slowly turned the grasslands they thrived in into forests.

"We think our research shows that climatic change, particularly working through its effect on the vegetation, was largely responsible for the extinction," one scientist said. "It was certainly responsible for squeezing the range of this species right down."

[Images (3)]

[Quotes (1)]

A Russian man examines bronze sculptures of mammoths in the Siberian city of Khanty-Mansiysk. (AP Photo/Dmitry Lovetsky)

A Russian family enjoys a snowy day by bronze sculptures of mammoths. (AP Photo/Dmitry Lovetsky)

Archeologists are seen by the recently unearthed skeleton of a mammoth at an open pit coal mine in Serbia. (AP Photo/Srdjan Ilic)

« Prev« Prev | Next »Next » Slideshow

They came back into Europe for a few thousand years on this rich grassland until the forests arrived and it got really warm, and that's when they died out completely. - Adrian Lister of London's Natural History Museum

« Prev« Prev | Next »Next » Slideshow

11.20.09

The Health-Care Wars Have Just Begun

11.19.09

Sarah Palin Deserves Some More Attention

35 comments

VIEWING:

Clarke
Jun 18, 09 10:06 AM CDT

Somebody get Al Gore....WTF? How did this happen? How did our industrialization in the 18th and 19th century reach so far back in time and kill these beautiful creatures? Oh my God!!!!! The horror! The horror!! Reply

IN RESPONSE:

riffran
Jun 20, 09 4:49 AM CDT

now thats funny as hell...rofl

| 0 minutes ago

doingtherightthing
Jun 18, 09 10:18 AM CDT

there still pushing that global warming crap on us. Hey Al, cut us a break we know your a moron......big lie! Reply

| 0 minutes ago

Clarke
Jun 18, 09 10:24 AM CDT

No, no, it must be. The climate cannot change without our interference. I mean, it was stable thoughout history until we industrialized. Never fluctuated. No ice ages, no periods of increased warmth....it was the same weather, same climate, day in and day out. Didn't you know that? Reply

IN RESPONSE:

jbuberel
Jun 19, 09 8:35 PM CDT

But keep in mind that the earth is only 4000 years old. So all this talk of 'fossils' is just silly anyways. Old bones are were planted by the Great Spaghetti Monster to trick us into thinking the planet is actually 4 Billion years old.

| 0 minutes ago

Reader64481089
Jun 18, 09 10:25 AM CDT

Damn it, well clone the damn things and give humans a chance, hell we can kill everything else including our own so why not kill these mammoths as well. I demand we are given the opportunity as it is our manifest destiny to sterilize the entire globe!!! Reply

| 0 minutes ago

Reader75326015
Jun 18, 09 10:27 AM CDT

Someone left out their sock puppet... Reply

-1

| 0 minutes ago

hungrydave
Jun 18, 09 10:56 AM CDT

But that doesn't mean that we don't have to curb our emissions. And even though many scientists have agreed that the earth has normal climate change, the amount of carbon(and other gases) that we are pumping into the atmosphere have increased green house gases, helped destroy parts of the ozone layer and has accelerated the rate of the climate change. Reply

IN RESPONSE:

Clarke
Jun 18, 09 11:08 AM CDT

Actually hungrydave, the last part is only a guess. Science shows how carbon has increased throughout history AFTER the earth warms....about 500 years after. We actually don't know WHAT our increase in carbon is going to do to the earth. Of course its a concern, but hell, we have disrupted everything else, watersheds, vegetation, etc., and we are still here. I am not saying not to advance our technology so that we can curb our emissions, or even eliminate them. I am just saying that this whole global warming debate is a joke that has been politicized by the left, then rubber stamped by the mainstream media, and now they act to subvert any attempt to provide the other side of the debate, which, if you read up on it, is gaining more backing by the scientific community as the alarmists are losing the scientists and gaining the politicians and lawyers. Check out this link for some of the other side's story... http://blog.heritage.org/2008/12/11/scientists-make-their-anti-global-warming-case/ Now that is not proof in either direction. But don't take this whole global warming thing and our role in it as gospel. It could be that it is natural, and if it is, why stop it. In fact, in earlier periods when global warming occurred people lived longer, healthier lives. Science supports this. So why is global warming bad? Because it will disrupt the society we have built? Aren't you arguing for us to be more in tune with nature? IF global warming is natural, then by trying to circumvent it, aren't we then fighting nature? I know this sounds extreme, and I am only playing devil's advocate, but seriously, the whole premise that the debate is over and we have to accept that we are ruining the earth is ridiculous. I am all for conservation, of our forests, our waterways, and our resources. I am for making industries use the best available technology to ensure that they limit their impact on the environment. I am not for forced changes due to an incomplete or false science.

IN RESPONSE:

2-bits
Jun 18, 09 11:46 AM CDT

"Science shows how carbon has increased throughout history AFTER the earth warms....about 500 years after." Actually, the data shows the opposite. The temperature change follows an increase or decrease in carbon dioxide. I don't know of any reputable textbook or university that would say otherwise. Also where is hungrydave arguing that the goal is to be "more in tune with nature?" The fact is, man made global warming is virtually undisputed in scientific communities. A recent poll shows that 90% of scientists and 97% of active climatologists agree that not only is global warming happening, but that human activity has greatly accelerated it. Those most likely to disagree are, tellingly, petroleum geologists and, surprisingly, meterologists. Even then, 47% and 64% respectively agree with the majority.

-2

IN RESPONSE:

2-bits
Jun 18, 09 11:51 AM CDT

Further more, I think the overriding worry is that humans have evolved to survive in a certain environment. For the entirety of our existence we have existed in these periods of cooling and warming. That fact that we are disrupting this cycle could have consequences that we are simply not prepared for (disruption of crops that local populations depend on, desertification, spread of tropical diseases, etc.)

-1

IN RESPONSE:

hungrydave
Jun 18, 09 12:28 PM CDT

Clarke, I'm arguing that we should pollute less (or not at all but that's not possible) because it will benefit us too. In Beijing, traffic cops aren't expected to live past 50. If you're not going to do it for the benefit of nature, at least do it for other people. Did I say anything about stopping global warming or being in touch with nature? No, I said we need to cut down on our emissions.

| 0 minutes ago

Altoecko
Jun 18, 09 11:13 AM CDT

Study science, like Al Gore and any intelligent person would do. Reply

| 0 minutes ago

Clarke
Jun 18, 09 12:16 PM CDT

Actually 2-bits, I was at a lecture not 2 weeks ago listening to a climatologist, a Professor at University of Penn, who was saying that as the climate temperature increases, then the Carbon temperature increases. And if you look at the link I provided above ( http://blog.heritage.org/2008/12/11/scientists-make-their-anti-global-warming-case/ ) and you will see that your 90% of scientist claim is pure and utter nonsense. Reply

IN RESPONSE:

2-bits
Jun 18, 09 12:28 PM CDT

1) You're citing a BLOG POST from the HERITAGE FOUNDATION (hardly an unbiased source) which paraphrases a really, really long document (a lot of room for taking things out of context). 2) My study is from 2009. The numbers aren't that different from similar polls taken 5 and 10 years ago. 3) The blog post doesn't even talk about the opinions of scientist worldwide or in the united states. In fact, all it says is that 650 scientists have organized to present their case to the UN. It also notes that 650 > 52. Brilliant. To claim that this is representative of all scientists is disingenuous. In reality these numbers have nothing to do with this discussion.

-2

| 0 minutes ago

Clarke
Jun 18, 09 12:22 PM CDT

2-bits....this article is a little older, but I assume this guys credentials are a little bit better than yours or mine....interesting how he linked this debate to the one of 30 years ago when we were heading to an ice age, or at least that was the public cry in the 70s when I was a kid....and for many of the same pollutants. http://www.canadafreepress.com/2007/global-warming020507.htm Reply

IN RESPONSE:

2-bits
Jun 18, 09 4:42 PM CDT

Why are you showing me this? He cites no studies, he just makes claims and complains that nobody listens to him and his buddies. Tell you what: show me a source that doesn't have the word "conservative" plastered all over it and I'll believe it. Until then, I'm going to stick with my professor.

-1

| 0 minutes ago

Observer
Jun 18, 09 12:48 PM CDT

It took a brave, hungry caveman to rush up to a Mammoth and spear it. No doubt that they killed a lot of the large mammals leading to their extinction especially in North America. The appearance of humans was parallel to the disappearance of many large mammals. Go look it up jerks. Reply

-2

IN RESPONSE:

2-bits
Jun 18, 09 12:58 PM CDT

This is true, Humans are the #1 cause of megafauna extinction. But that doesn't mean climate doesn't play a factor. I haven't been responding to the article in general, just to clarkes assertions.

-3

IN RESPONSE:

Clarke
Jun 18, 09 1:03 PM CDT

Calling people names does not support your argument. Many large mammals disappeared due to the appearance of humans? Is that your claim? Lets see, 2.5 million years ago the appearance of the genus "Homo", 200,000 years since humans started looking like they did today, 14,000 years ago the mammoth died off. What other evidence do you have, because your claim so far is not holding up.

IN RESPONSE:

2-bits
Jun 18, 09 4:36 PM CDT

Did Mrs. Beable tell you about the evolution? If she had, you might know that people did appear instantly everywhere in the world. They left Africa in waves and appeared on different places in the world at different times. Since you apparently don't believe that me, read this : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holocene_extinction_event. If you don't trust Wikipedia, you can look it up in any elementary paleontology or environmental science book.

-3

| 0 minutes ago

Clarke
Jun 18, 09 12:58 PM CDT

2-bits, not claiming that it represents all scientists, just claiming that your 90% claim does not hold water. As an engineer I have to take a certain amount of "classes" every year to maintain licensure. Seminars and lectures count. I can tell you, without a doubt, that the majority of the technical people and the scientific people believe that the absoluteness of this debate that you and the media are trying to claim is b.s. The fact is most of us do not argue the existance of global warming. We argue the science being used to promote a political agenda. The scientific data being gathered refutes many of the global warming advocates claims, which is why IPCC downgraded their claims 20 fold a year ago. And other alarmists have followed. If this were strictly a scientific debate it would be over, global warming would not be a real issue. But it has been politicized and too much money thrown into 1 arena to let it die. But just because the political machine is stronger and louder than the real scientists does not make the political machine that Al Gore has behind him the correct side. It just makes them louder. Just like in the 70s, when they were claiming we were going to an ice age due to our pollution. Just like when there were claims in the 30s of global warming, polar ice caps melting, and catastrophic flooding. The debates are not new. We will be arguing about the coming ice age in about 25 years. I offered testimony and numbers that support my opinion. You say that they don't matter. What does matter then? How are we to know that this is it? I mean, in the last century there has been claims of the coming ice age (pre-1930s), global warming (30s to 50s), the coming ice age again (60s-70s) and now global warming again. Or are you going to refute what I have seen in historic papers as lies? Nobody ever made these claims? Mr. Radcliffe in my 8th grade conservation class did not teach us of the coming ice age? Seriously, with all the alarms going off, no wonder many of us are skeptical. Reply

| 0 minutes ago

Clarke
Jun 18, 09 1:05 PM CDT

2-bits, responding to my assertions? That we need more scientific data, unbiased, non-politicized data, before we draw conclusions and announce case closed? No, you have been making arguments based solely on your opinion and passing it off as facts without any supporting data. Reply

| 0 minutes ago

Clarke
Jun 18, 09 1:11 PM CDT

Oh, as for us being the #1 cause for megafauna extinction, megafauna is not mammal only, and I believe the Cretaceious-Tertiary extinction event was slightly before our time. In fact, there were 3 distinct extinction events during the dinosaur era, and I do believe that I remember Mrs. Beable in my kindergarten class back in 1975 telling us that people were not on earth at the time of the dinosaur. Reply

IN RESPONSE:

2-bits
Jun 18, 09 4:28 PM CDT

In your excitement, you failed to notice I was using the present tense. Those events you refer to happened long ago and are not currently happening. Humans, however, are still around. When mammoths were roaming the earth, Humans were (and still are, although really it's just a mass extinction event at this point) responsible for killing off many species of megafauna outside.

-2

| 0 minutes ago

TerrifiedCitizen
Jun 18, 09 1:16 PM CDT

I like how headlines about theories are always stated like they're fact. They don't know much of anything about it for sure and need to make it plain these scenarios are strictly guesses. Reply

IN RESPONSE:

Clarke
Jun 18, 09 1:44 PM CDT

Thank you! I think I have been saying something very similar to this. But because I am a Republican I must be wrong.

| 0 minutes ago

Clarke
Jun 18, 09 1:51 PM CDT

Hungrydave, you said "And even though many scientists have agreed that the earth has normal climate change, the amount of carbon(and other gases) that we are pumping into the atmosphere have increased green house gases, helped destroy parts of the ozone layer and has accelerated the rate of the climate change" as if it were a fact. I argued this "fact". I did not say that we should not try to limit our pollutants. We cannot stop it, nor do I want to, because we cannot go back to living in caves and eat raw meat that we killed with our bare hands (because we can't cook it if we can't pollute, and we cannot shoot it, because use of gunpowder, to a small extent, causes pollution, and to make spears would mean killing trees, which decreases the amount of oxygen in the air....). But conservation I believe in. Personally, I don't care about the traffic cop in Beijing. He chose to do that job. Life is about choices. But I do care about protecting the environment and having clean air and clean water. But I don't believe in extremism. I am alright with the fact that mankind is here and many of our advances in science and technology come at a cost to the environment. I also believe that we should try and limit that impact and better our technology to that affect. But name me an available alternative fuel and I will name you how it will adversely affect the environment. We are not there yet, and we can't stop the world until we do get to that point. Reply

| 0 minutes ago

Forderon
Jun 18, 09 2:05 PM CDT

Since when did global warming become a Dem/Rep issue? Republicans are really shooting themselves in the balls by making this a partisan issue Reply

-2

IN RESPONSE:

Clarke
Jun 18, 09 2:07 PM CDT

Al Gore made it a partisan issue.

| 0 minutes ago

Mad
Jun 18, 09 4:09 PM CDT

Clarke shows that republicans think blogs or bumper stickers are evidence; if they heard it on the radio, it's proof positive! Reply

-2

IN RESPONSE:

Clarke
Jun 19, 09 1:55 PM CDT

Actually, I read. I don't listen to guys like Newt Gingrich or Sean Hannity because they are too rigid. I believe in hearing both sides of the stories, and deciding for myself. But of course, with regards to global warming, seeing how I am in a field that is of a technical nature, and all of my clients are trying to "go green", I have to keep up with it, and so I don't need your bumper stickers to know the truth. I understand the facts, something most of you probably cannot fathom, and only because it is not your job to be able to talk about it intelligently. So most people, I find, get their scientific news from USA Today, or Newsweek, or NY Times. I talk to the people actually doing the experiments (when I am fortunate enough to go to their lectures). I read their papers that are submitted for publication in journals. And I hear their frustrations because it has gotten so politicized that even a point of view that says "we need more time to look at the data and determine what mankind's role in this equation is" gets buried or ridiculed by some lackey at these newspapers whose last science class was in 11th grade. So no, MAD, you are clueless about where I get my information from.

| 0 minutes ago

ClearSight
Jun 18, 09 9:46 PM CDT

I'm still holding out for a planet killing asteroid to hit and shut everyone one up....... Reply

-1

| 0 minutes ago

Clarke
Jun 19, 09 1:58 PM CDT

2-bits, I am not even sure what you are saying about evolution. No, Mrs. Beable did not teach me about that....this was 1975 or 76, we did not learn about such things in Kindergarten. I think it was Mrs. Smiley in 2nd grade or Mrs. Jackson in 3rd grade. Maybe, just maybe Miss Wilson, 1st grade, but I doubt it. She lives up the street, so I will ask her next time I see her. Reply

IN RESPONSE:

2-bits
Jun 19, 09 4:52 PM CDT

"Many large mammals disappeared due to the appearance of humans? Is that your claim? Lets see, 2.5 million years ago the appearance of the genus "Homo", 200,000 years since humans started looking like they did today, 14,000 years ago the mammoth died off. What other evidence do you have, because your claim so far is not holding up." You said this in response to Observer. I assume that if you knew of the Holocene Extinction, you wouldn't have said that. Apparently you're going to pretend that you do know, however. That's cool.

| 0 minutes ago

View all 35 comments »

climate change • extinction • woolly mammoth • prehistoric mammals • Mammoth • ice age

from our news partners

Celebs' Most Anticipated TV Season Finales
(Nov 21, 09 12:15 PM CST)
What If Twitter Existed When...
(Nov 21, 09 12:00 PM CST)
Miley Cyrus 'Deeply Saddened' by Bus Driver's Death
(Nov 21, 09 9:39 AM CST)
Investigation Into Michael Jackson's Doctor to Continue Through 2010
(Nov 21, 09 9:30 AM CST)

If you are receiving monthly insurance checks because you have...
(6 minutes ago)
Radiation leak reported at Three Mile Island nuclear plant, no...
(39 minutes ago)
Fun-loving San Francisco cable car decides to give passengers an...
(1 hour, 47 minutes ago)
Photoshop this flagrant foul [Photoshop]
(2 hours, 9 minutes ago)

First Look At Xeno Lovegood From The Deathly Hallows
(Nov 21, 09 8:48 PM CST)
New Moon Has Best Opening Day Of All Time
(Nov 21, 09 11:41 AM CST)
Writer Hired For Underworld 4
(Nov 20, 09 4:44 PM CST)
Brad Pitt Producing Dark Void Video Game Adaptation
(Nov 20, 09 4:36 PM CST)

Associated Press

Turmoil from climate change poses security risks
(Oct 29, 09 12:10 AM CDT)
Turmoil from climate change poses security risks
(Oct 28, 09 8:09 PM CDT)
UN signals delay in climate change treaty
(Oct 27, 09 8:46 AM CDT)
Denmark urges agreement on climate change funds
(Oct 23, 09 8:46 AM CDT)

What is Newser?

Face it: there's too much news. At Newser, we choose the most important stories from hundreds of US and international sources and reduce them to a headline, picture, and two paragraphs. And we do it 24/7—you can come back morning, noon, night (and in between) for something new that matters. Read less, know more.

Learn more »

Climate Change, Not Humans, Killed Mammoths