hate these ads?, log in or register to hide them
Page 1510 of 1524 FirstFirst ... 510101014101460150015071508150915101511151215131520 ... LastLast
Results 30,181 to 30,200 of 30463

Thread: (UK EURO WAFFLE) Limey Civil War

  1. #30181
    Malcanis's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 12, 2011
    Posts
    14,056
    Quote Originally Posted by Joe Appleby View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by erichkknaar View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Joe Appleby View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by erichkknaar View Post
    None of the ancients had deep water navies, and therefor could not, by definition, be global powers.
    Depends on how you define "global". Known world? The Romans sure ruled most of what was known back then (and traded with the rest - side note: a friend from uni was part of an archeological research project into the possibility of a Roman settlement/colony/permanent trade post in India).
    "The sun never sets on..."

    Known World is an extremely Eurocentric concept, so no. I disagree. I mean, Phoenicians most likely reached Cape Town, because we've found *some* slight evidence (http://melkbos.net/phoenicians-in-ancient-langebaan/), but thats very different to like, taking Hong Kong with gunboats.
    History is not what happened but how we interpret the remnants of what happened. So accusing an European of eurocentrism is to me a bit superfluous.

    You are attributing modern standards on past eras, which is a fallacy that historians try to avoid. So to say just because the Roman Empire didn't rule everything they knew about, it wasn't a world power is lazy. However to truly ascertain whether the Romans ruled the world, you need to look at what areas they did know and what they knew about those regions.

    Take a look at this map of Ptolemy. It shows us the extent to which the Romans knew the world. As you will notice, they only have a map of the Mediterranean Sea, Arabian Peninsula, British Isles and a decent idea of what Jutland looks like. So with regards to that knowledge, one can safely say that they ruled the world.

    And when you compare the extent to which the Romans ruled what they knew with the extent of the British Empire and their known world, I think that the Mongols come out ahead anyway.

    Yeah but 90% of that mongol empire was trackless wasteland that no one wanted
    Quote Originally Posted by Keieueue View Post
    I love Malcanis!

  2. #30182
    Joe Appleby's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Location
    in front of the class
    Posts
    13,769
    Quote Originally Posted by Malcanis View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Joe Appleby View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by erichkknaar View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Joe Appleby View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by erichkknaar View Post
    None of the ancients had deep water navies, and therefor could not, by definition, be global powers.
    Depends on how you define "global". Known world? The Romans sure ruled most of what was known back then (and traded with the rest - side note: a friend from uni was part of an archeological research project into the possibility of a Roman settlement/colony/permanent trade post in India).
    "The sun never sets on..."

    Known World is an extremely Eurocentric concept, so no. I disagree. I mean, Phoenicians most likely reached Cape Town, because we've found *some* slight evidence (http://melkbos.net/phoenicians-in-ancient-langebaan/), but thats very different to like, taking Hong Kong with gunboats.
    History is not what happened but how we interpret the remnants of what happened. So accusing an European of eurocentrism is to me a bit superfluous.

    You are attributing modern standards on past eras, which is a fallacy that historians try to avoid. So to say just because the Roman Empire didn't rule everything they knew about, it wasn't a world power is lazy. However to truly ascertain whether the Romans ruled the world, you need to look at what areas they did know and what they knew about those regions.

    Take a look at this map of Ptolemy. It shows us the extent to which the Romans knew the world. As you will notice, they only have a map of the Mediterranean Sea, Arabian Peninsula, British Isles and a decent idea of what Jutland looks like. So with regards to that knowledge, one can safely say that they ruled the world.

    And when you compare the extent to which the Romans ruled what they knew with the extent of the British Empire and their known world, I think that the Mongols come out ahead anyway.

    Yeah but 90% of that mongol empire was trackless wasteland that no one wanted
    But it also included the whole Chinese Empire, the Euphrates and Tigris basin, Persia, the Silk Road and managed to beat in 1241 the Holy Roman Empire in battle but didn't exploit that due to a war of succession at home. Moscow only rose to importance due to being granted the right to collect taxes for the Mongols.
    nevar forget

  3. #30183
    Donor erichkknaar's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Posts
    10,269
    Quote Originally Posted by Malcanis View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Keckers View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by erichkknaar View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Lancehot View Post
    Adopting the Chinese model is a quick way to find your fields covered in concrete & rivers catching fire.
    Also when they dam the river and drown Nottingham.
    This is the start of a good policy platform
    Yeah I think this guy has ideas we need to hear
    If you get me a pad near Knightsbridge and a British Racing Green E-type with “Shaguar” vanity plates, I’ll come and sort out Brexit for y’all...

  4. #30184
    Movember 2012 Stoffl's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 10, 2011
    Location
    The original viennese waffle
    Posts
    21,504
    Quote Originally Posted by Malcanis View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Joe Appleby View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by erichkknaar View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Joe Appleby View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by erichkknaar View Post
    None of the ancients had deep water navies, and therefor could not, by definition, be global powers.
    Depends on how you define "global". Known world? The Romans sure ruled most of what was known back then (and traded with the rest - side note: a friend from uni was part of an archeological research project into the possibility of a Roman settlement/colony/permanent trade post in India).
    "The sun never sets on..."

    Known World is an extremely Eurocentric concept, so no. I disagree. I mean, Phoenicians most likely reached Cape Town, because we've found *some* slight evidence (http://melkbos.net/phoenicians-in-ancient-langebaan/), but thats very different to like, taking Hong Kong with gunboats.
    History is not what happened but how we interpret the remnants of what happened. So accusing an European of eurocentrism is to me a bit superfluous.

    You are attributing modern standards on past eras, which is a fallacy that historians try to avoid. So to say just because the Roman Empire didn't rule everything they knew about, it wasn't a world power is lazy. However to truly ascertain whether the Romans ruled the world, you need to look at what areas they did know and what they knew about those regions.

    Take a look at this map of Ptolemy. It shows us the extent to which the Romans knew the world. As you will notice, they only have a map of the Mediterranean Sea, Arabian Peninsula, British Isles and a decent idea of what Jutland looks like. So with regards to that knowledge, one can safely say that they ruled the world.

    And when you compare the extent to which the Romans ruled what they knew with the extent of the British Empire and their known world, I think that the Mongols come out ahead anyway.

    Yeah but 90% of that mongol empire was trackless wasteland that no one wanted
    Who gives a shit, they built mountains out of Chinese skulls that looked like a snow tipped mountain from a distance.

    #justMongolthings
    2/10/17 Greatposthellpurge never forget
    23/10/17 The Greatreposteninging ?

  5. #30185
    GeromeDoutrande's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 10, 2011
    Location
    Fakefrenchistan
    Posts
    1,996
    Paul Dacre stepping down as Daily Mail editor
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-44391449

  6. #30186
    Joe Appleby's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Location
    in front of the class
    Posts
    13,769
    Quote Originally Posted by Stoffl View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Malcanis View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Joe Appleby View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by erichkknaar View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Joe Appleby View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by erichkknaar View Post
    None of the ancients had deep water navies, and therefor could not, by definition, be global powers.
    Depends on how you define "global". Known world? The Romans sure ruled most of what was known back then (and traded with the rest - side note: a friend from uni was part of an archeological research project into the possibility of a Roman settlement/colony/permanent trade post in India).
    "The sun never sets on..."

    Known World is an extremely Eurocentric concept, so no. I disagree. I mean, Phoenicians most likely reached Cape Town, because we've found *some* slight evidence (http://melkbos.net/phoenicians-in-ancient-langebaan/), but thats very different to like, taking Hong Kong with gunboats.
    History is not what happened but how we interpret the remnants of what happened. So accusing an European of eurocentrism is to me a bit superfluous.

    You are attributing modern standards on past eras, which is a fallacy that historians try to avoid. So to say just because the Roman Empire didn't rule everything they knew about, it wasn't a world power is lazy. However to truly ascertain whether the Romans ruled the world, you need to look at what areas they did know and what they knew about those regions.

    Take a look at this map of Ptolemy. It shows us the extent to which the Romans knew the world. As you will notice, they only have a map of the Mediterranean Sea, Arabian Peninsula, British Isles and a decent idea of what Jutland looks like. So with regards to that knowledge, one can safely say that they ruled the world.

    And when you compare the extent to which the Romans ruled what they knew with the extent of the British Empire and their known world, I think that the Mongols come out ahead anyway.

    Yeah but 90% of that mongol empire was trackless wasteland that no one wanted
    Who gives a shit, they built mountains out of Chinese skulls that looked like a snow tipped mountain from a distance.

    #justMongolthings
    They also brought the Black Death to Europe, killed between 30 and 80 million people, halved China's population (120m to 60m), caused the death three quarters of the Iranian people (Iran only reached pre-Mongol numbers in the 20th century, 800 years after the invasion), killed half of the Russian population, killed half of the Hungarians, killing every inhabitant of every city that did not submit to the Mongols and if you didn't provide enough provisions to the Mongols, not even submission may have saved you, they even returned after a few days to kill anyone who was away during the massacre, destroyed all of Chinese literature of the Jin Dynasty, threw enough books into the Tigris after the Battle of Baghdad that the river turned black from the ink, destroyed the intricate irrigation systems of Iran and Iraq causing a famine that the Persian culture did not recover from until after the Middle Ages, and caused a reduction of 700 million tonnes of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere causing a minor ice age and a regrowth of deforested areas.

    The Mongols.
    nevar forget

  7. #30187

    Join Date
    April 13, 2011
    Posts
    6,184
    Quote Originally Posted by GeromeDoutrande View Post
    Paul Dacre stepping down as Daily Mail editor
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-44391449
    #missionaccomplished

  8. #30188
    Djan Seriy Anaplian's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Location
    London (Silphe ingame)
    Posts
    3,134
    Quote Originally Posted by GeromeDoutrande View Post
    Paul Dacre stepping down as Daily Mail editor
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-44391449
    Stepping up

  9. #30189
    Movember 2012 Elriche Oshego's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 21, 2011
    Posts
    7,132
    Based Hungary defending the heart of Yurop from Mongol cunts.
    Last edited by Elriche Oshego; June 6 2018 at 10:55:03 PM.

  10. #30190
    Joe Appleby's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Location
    in front of the class
    Posts
    13,769
    Quote Originally Posted by Elriche Oshego View Post
    Based Hungary defending the heart of Yurop from Mongol cunts.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongol...central_Europe

    More like thanks Ögedei for kicking the bucket just when your armies finished kicking in Europe's skull.

    The Hungarian army, their Croatian allies and the Templar Knights were beaten by Mongols at the banks of the Sajo River on 11 April 1241. Before Batu's forces could continue on to Vienna and northern Albania, news of Ögedei's death in December 1241 brought a halt to the invasion.
    nevar forget

  11. #30191
    Movember 2012 Elriche Oshego's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 21, 2011
    Posts
    7,132
    Ladislaus 4

  12. #30192
    Movember 2012 Stoffl's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 10, 2011
    Location
    The original viennese waffle
    Posts
    21,504
    Quote Originally Posted by Joe Appleby View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Stoffl View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Malcanis View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Joe Appleby View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by erichkknaar View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Joe Appleby View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by erichkknaar View Post
    None of the ancients had deep water navies, and therefor could not, by definition, be global powers.
    Depends on how you define "global". Known world? The Romans sure ruled most of what was known back then (and traded with the rest - side note: a friend from uni was part of an archeological research project into the possibility of a Roman settlement/colony/permanent trade post in India).
    "The sun never sets on..."

    Known World is an extremely Eurocentric concept, so no. I disagree. I mean, Phoenicians most likely reached Cape Town, because we've found *some* slight evidence (http://melkbos.net/phoenicians-in-ancient-langebaan/), but thats very different to like, taking Hong Kong with gunboats.
    History is not what happened but how we interpret the remnants of what happened. So accusing an European of eurocentrism is to me a bit superfluous.

    You are attributing modern standards on past eras, which is a fallacy that historians try to avoid. So to say just because the Roman Empire didn't rule everything they knew about, it wasn't a world power is lazy. However to truly ascertain whether the Romans ruled the world, you need to look at what areas they did know and what they knew about those regions.

    Take a look at this map of Ptolemy. It shows us the extent to which the Romans knew the world. As you will notice, they only have a map of the Mediterranean Sea, Arabian Peninsula, British Isles and a decent idea of what Jutland looks like. So with regards to that knowledge, one can safely say that they ruled the world.

    And when you compare the extent to which the Romans ruled what they knew with the extent of the British Empire and their known world, I think that the Mongols come out ahead anyway.

    Yeah but 90% of that mongol empire was trackless wasteland that no one wanted
    Who gives a shit, they built mountains out of Chinese skulls that looked like a snow tipped mountain from a distance.

    #justMongolthings
    They also brought the Black Death to Europe, killed between 30 and 80 million people, halved China's population (120m to 60m), caused the death three quarters of the Iranian people (Iran only reached pre-Mongol numbers in the 20th century, 800 years after the invasion), killed half of the Russian population, killed half of the Hungarians, killing every inhabitant of every city that did not submit to the Mongols and if you didn't provide enough provisions to the Mongols, not even submission may have saved you, they even returned after a few days to kill anyone who was away during the massacre, destroyed all of Chinese literature of the Jin Dynasty, threw enough books into the Tigris after the Battle of Baghdad that the river turned black from the ink, destroyed the intricate irrigation systems of Iran and Iraq causing a famine that the Persian culture did not recover from until after the Middle Ages, and caused a reduction of 700 million tonnes of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere causing a minor ice age and a regrowth of deforested areas.

    The Mongols.
    https://www.livescience.com/11739-wa...n-climate.html

    Mongol Invasion in 1200 Altered Carbon Dioxide Levels

    The Mongol invasion of Asia in the 1200s took enough carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere to offset a year's worth of the world's gasoline demand today, according to a new study. But even Genghis Khan couldn't create more than a blip in atmospheric carbon compared to the overwhelming effect of agriculture.

    The study, published online Jan. 20 in the journal The Holocene, looked at land use and carbon dioxide in the atmosphere between the years 800 and 1850. Globally at the time, humans were cutting down forests for agriculture, driving carbon into the atmosphere (vegetation stores carbon, so trees and shrubs are what scientists call "carbon sinks"). But in some regions during certain times, wars and plagues culled the population, disrupting agriculture and allowing forests to regrow.

    The question, said Julia Pongratz, a postdoctoral researcher at the Carnegie Institution's Department for Global Ecology at Stanford University, was whether this regrowth could have locked up enough carbon to make a difference in global atmospheric carbon dioxide.

    "We wanted to check if humans had an impact on carbon dioxide by increasing it by deforestation, but also by decreasing it," Pongratz told LiveScience.

    Catastrophes and carbon

    Pongratz and her colleagues used a detailed reconstruction of historical agriculture to model the effect of four major wars and plagues in the 800 to 1850 time period: the Mongol takeover of Asia (from about 1200 to 1380), the Black Death in Europe (1347 to 1400), the conquest of the Americas (1519 to 1700) and the fall of the Ming Dynasty in China (1600 to 1650).

    All of these events led to death on a massive scale (the Black Death alone is thought to have killed 25 million people in Europe). But Mother Nature barely noticed, the researchers found. Only the Mongol invasion had a noticeable impact, decreasing global carbon dioxide by less than 0.1 part per million. This small amount required that the forests absorb about 700 million tons of carbon dioxide, which is the amount emitted annually by worldwide gasoline demand today. But it was still a very minor effect, Pongratz said.

    "Since the pre-industrial era, we have increased atmospheric CO2 [or carbon dioxide] concentration by about 100 parts per million, so this is really a different dimension," she said.

    The effect of all of the events was small or nonexistent for a few reasons, Pongratz said. For one, disasters such as the Black Plague or the fall of the Ming Dynasty are too short to allow for full forest regrowth. It can take a century or more for a tree to get to its full carbon storage capacity, Pongratz said, and populations were recovering by then. Plus, rotting roots and felled vegetation continued to release carbon into the atmosphere for decades as the fields lay fallow.

    Another factor was that while one part of the world burned, the rest planted. In the case of the conquest of the Americas in particular, Pongratz said, native people with a minimal agricultural footprint were dying, while deforestation continued across the globe.

    The role of agriculture

    Studies of Antarctic ice cores suggest that carbon dioxide dropped much more during these eras than the models by Pongratz and her team revealed. That may mean that natural factors, such as changes in solar radiation, played a larger role in atmospheric carbon dioxide than reforestation during this time, Pongratz said.

    But agriculture's proportional role isn't certain yet. The researchers may have underestimated the effect of forest regrowth, said Richard Nevle, an instructor at Bellarmine College Preparatory in San Jose who has investigated environmental change surrounding the conquest of the Americas. Some of the team's assumptions about the amount of carbon released from rotting vegetation in the soil were more conservative than necessary, Nevle (who was not involved in the study) told LiveScience. Nonetheless, he said, the study provides a "new, sophisticated tool" to advance the understanding of climate change in the pre-industrial era.

    "I think it will eventually help us nail down a more definitive answer to the mystery of the large drop in atmospheric CO2 concentration that occurred during the 16th and 18th centuries," Nevle said. "I look forward to seeing this work evolve."
    #JustMongolThings

    Also, this: https://www.dancarlin.com/product/ha...-khans-series/

    If anyone needs the audiobooks pm me. Or you know just buy it or whatever.
    2/10/17 Greatposthellpurge never forget
    23/10/17 The Greatreposteninging ?

  13. #30193
    Donor erichkknaar's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Posts
    10,269
    Quote Originally Posted by Stoffl View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Joe Appleby View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Stoffl View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Malcanis View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Joe Appleby View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by erichkknaar View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Joe Appleby View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by erichkknaar View Post
    None of the ancients had deep water navies, and therefor could not, by definition, be global powers.
    Depends on how you define "global". Known world? The Romans sure ruled most of what was known back then (and traded with the rest - side note: a friend from uni was part of an archeological research project into the possibility of a Roman settlement/colony/permanent trade post in India).
    "The sun never sets on..."

    Known World is an extremely Eurocentric concept, so no. I disagree. I mean, Phoenicians most likely reached Cape Town, because we've found *some* slight evidence (http://melkbos.net/phoenicians-in-ancient-langebaan/), but thats very different to like, taking Hong Kong with gunboats.
    History is not what happened but how we interpret the remnants of what happened. So accusing an European of eurocentrism is to me a bit superfluous.

    You are attributing modern standards on past eras, which is a fallacy that historians try to avoid. So to say just because the Roman Empire didn't rule everything they knew about, it wasn't a world power is lazy. However to truly ascertain whether the Romans ruled the world, you need to look at what areas they did know and what they knew about those regions.

    Take a look at this map of Ptolemy. It shows us the extent to which the Romans knew the world. As you will notice, they only have a map of the Mediterranean Sea, Arabian Peninsula, British Isles and a decent idea of what Jutland looks like. So with regards to that knowledge, one can safely say that they ruled the world.

    And when you compare the extent to which the Romans ruled what they knew with the extent of the British Empire and their known world, I think that the Mongols come out ahead anyway.

    Yeah but 90% of that mongol empire was trackless wasteland that no one wanted
    Who gives a shit, they built mountains out of Chinese skulls that looked like a snow tipped mountain from a distance.

    #justMongolthings
    They also brought the Black Death to Europe, killed between 30 and 80 million people, halved China's population (120m to 60m), caused the death three quarters of the Iranian people (Iran only reached pre-Mongol numbers in the 20th century, 800 years after the invasion), killed half of the Russian population, killed half of the Hungarians, killing every inhabitant of every city that did not submit to the Mongols and if you didn't provide enough provisions to the Mongols, not even submission may have saved you, they even returned after a few days to kill anyone who was away during the massacre, destroyed all of Chinese literature of the Jin Dynasty, threw enough books into the Tigris after the Battle of Baghdad that the river turned black from the ink, destroyed the intricate irrigation systems of Iran and Iraq causing a famine that the Persian culture did not recover from until after the Middle Ages, and caused a reduction of 700 million tonnes of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere causing a minor ice age and a regrowth of deforested areas.

    The Mongols.
    https://www.livescience.com/11739-wa...n-climate.html

    Mongol Invasion in 1200 Altered Carbon Dioxide Levels

    The Mongol invasion of Asia in the 1200s took enough carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere to offset a year's worth of the world's gasoline demand today, according to a new study. But even Genghis Khan couldn't create more than a blip in atmospheric carbon compared to the overwhelming effect of agriculture.

    The study, published online Jan. 20 in the journal The Holocene, looked at land use and carbon dioxide in the atmosphere between the years 800 and 1850. Globally at the time, humans were cutting down forests for agriculture, driving carbon into the atmosphere (vegetation stores carbon, so trees and shrubs are what scientists call "carbon sinks"). But in some regions during certain times, wars and plagues culled the population, disrupting agriculture and allowing forests to regrow.

    The question, said Julia Pongratz, a postdoctoral researcher at the Carnegie Institution's Department for Global Ecology at Stanford University, was whether this regrowth could have locked up enough carbon to make a difference in global atmospheric carbon dioxide.

    "We wanted to check if humans had an impact on carbon dioxide by increasing it by deforestation, but also by decreasing it," Pongratz told LiveScience.

    Catastrophes and carbon

    Pongratz and her colleagues used a detailed reconstruction of historical agriculture to model the effect of four major wars and plagues in the 800 to 1850 time period: the Mongol takeover of Asia (from about 1200 to 1380), the Black Death in Europe (1347 to 1400), the conquest of the Americas (1519 to 1700) and the fall of the Ming Dynasty in China (1600 to 1650).

    All of these events led to death on a massive scale (the Black Death alone is thought to have killed 25 million people in Europe). But Mother Nature barely noticed, the researchers found. Only the Mongol invasion had a noticeable impact, decreasing global carbon dioxide by less than 0.1 part per million. This small amount required that the forests absorb about 700 million tons of carbon dioxide, which is the amount emitted annually by worldwide gasoline demand today. But it was still a very minor effect, Pongratz said.

    "Since the pre-industrial era, we have increased atmospheric CO2 [or carbon dioxide] concentration by about 100 parts per million, so this is really a different dimension," she said.

    The effect of all of the events was small or nonexistent for a few reasons, Pongratz said. For one, disasters such as the Black Plague or the fall of the Ming Dynasty are too short to allow for full forest regrowth. It can take a century or more for a tree to get to its full carbon storage capacity, Pongratz said, and populations were recovering by then. Plus, rotting roots and felled vegetation continued to release carbon into the atmosphere for decades as the fields lay fallow.

    Another factor was that while one part of the world burned, the rest planted. In the case of the conquest of the Americas in particular, Pongratz said, native people with a minimal agricultural footprint were dying, while deforestation continued across the globe.

    The role of agriculture

    Studies of Antarctic ice cores suggest that carbon dioxide dropped much more during these eras than the models by Pongratz and her team revealed. That may mean that natural factors, such as changes in solar radiation, played a larger role in atmospheric carbon dioxide than reforestation during this time, Pongratz said.

    But agriculture's proportional role isn't certain yet. The researchers may have underestimated the effect of forest regrowth, said Richard Nevle, an instructor at Bellarmine College Preparatory in San Jose who has investigated environmental change surrounding the conquest of the Americas. Some of the team's assumptions about the amount of carbon released from rotting vegetation in the soil were more conservative than necessary, Nevle (who was not involved in the study) told LiveScience. Nonetheless, he said, the study provides a "new, sophisticated tool" to advance the understanding of climate change in the pre-industrial era.

    "I think it will eventually help us nail down a more definitive answer to the mystery of the large drop in atmospheric CO2 concentration that occurred during the 16th and 18th centuries," Nevle said. "I look forward to seeing this work evolve."
    #JustMongolThings

    Also, this: https://www.dancarlin.com/product/ha...-khans-series/

    If anyone needs the audiobooks pm me. Or you know just buy it or whatever.
    So what you are saying, is that if we organize another Mongol horde, we could fight climate change?
    meh

  14. #30194
    Movember 2012 Stoffl's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 10, 2011
    Location
    The original viennese waffle
    Posts
    21,504
    Quote Originally Posted by Joe Appleby View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Elriche Oshego View Post
    Based Hungary defending the heart of Yurop from Mongol cunts.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongol...central_Europe

    More like thanks Ögedei for kicking the bucket just when your armies finished kicking in Europe's skull.

    The Hungarian army, their Croatian allies and the Templar Knights were beaten by Mongols at the banks of the Sajo River on 11 April 1241. Before Batu's forces could continue on to Vienna and northern Albania, news of Ögedei's death in December 1241 brought a halt to the invasion.
    Based Mongol Hit & Run tactics
    2/10/17 Greatposthellpurge never forget
    23/10/17 The Greatreposteninging ?

  15. #30195
    Movember 2012 Stoffl's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 10, 2011
    Location
    The original viennese waffle
    Posts
    21,504
    Quote Originally Posted by erichkknaar View Post

    So what you are saying, is that if we organize another Mongol horde, we could fight climate change?
    Yeah and we should send em over the bering straigt to 'Murica for starters.
    For having the largest carbon footprint.
    2/10/17 Greatposthellpurge never forget
    23/10/17 The Greatreposteninging ?

  16. #30196
    Donor erichkknaar's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Posts
    10,269
    Quote Originally Posted by Stoffl View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by erichkknaar View Post

    So what you are saying, is that if we organize another Mongol horde, we could fight climate change?
    Yeah and we should send em over the bering straigt to 'Murica for starters.
    For having the largest carbon footprint.
    Have at it. Have them follow the map to the red states.
    meh

  17. #30197
    Keckers's Avatar
    Join Date
    July 31, 2012
    Posts
    16,070
    Quote Originally Posted by Paul Mason
    It is absurd that we are capable of witnessing a 40,000 year old system of gender oppression begin to dissolve before our eyes yet still see the abolition of a 200 year old economic system as an unrealistic utopia.

  18. #30198

    Join Date
    April 13, 2011
    Posts
    6,184
    Almost all services provided by Carillion continued uninterrupted after the firm's collapse
    Makes you wonder why they needed to exist, really

  19. #30199
    Keckers's Avatar
    Join Date
    July 31, 2012
    Posts
    16,070
    Quote Originally Posted by elmicker View Post
    Almost all services provided by Carillion continued uninterrupted after the firm's collapse
    Makes you wonder why they needed to exist, really
    You mean there isn't a social value in bidding on projects based on margin speculations about the future cost of labour?
    Quote Originally Posted by Paul Mason
    It is absurd that we are capable of witnessing a 40,000 year old system of gender oppression begin to dissolve before our eyes yet still see the abolition of a 200 year old economic system as an unrealistic utopia.

  20. #30200

    Join Date
    April 11, 2011
    Posts
    4,381
    There's lots of speculation that David Davis will resign today.

    He won't though.

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •