Spain and Portugal are at their driest for 1,200 years

Although completely off topic for this section, could you please show me an example of the new demonstration that the Earth moves through space and around the central/stationary Sun by using modelling and predictions for interpretative purposes only? A handy YouTube video would be my first preference please? If none currently exists, perhaps you could do everyone here a courteous favour and create your own video to demonstrate your message in the best way possible for your intended audience here. Many thanks in advance and warm regards to you.

Preponderance of goat farming is causing overgrazing and deforestation across much of the Sahal and other areas in Africa

I am guessing they do it from tree rings if there are species that live long enough, as there are in the southwest U.S., where some go back over two thousand years. Fixing actual dates to tree ring sequences can sometimes be improved with reference to clues left by known solar disruptions. Other correlations are available from timber used in architectural relics. There may be anecdotal historical reference points to correlate further. Radiocarbon dating in the vicinity of the Anasazi ruins was one way to locate them in the 11th century, and their rock paintings include depictions of what is suspected to be the supernova event that left behind the Crab Nebula which from Chinese sources we reliably know to be 1054 AD. Apparently they also had a total eclipse of the Sun very soon after that so there are some examples of both events in proximity in the rock art.

However all of this comes with inherent uncertainties too. The point of saying "worst drought in 1200 years" can mean more like, we don't think there has been anything worse from any evidence going back 1200 years which is not quite the same as saying there was a bad drought 1200 years ago, maybe there wasn't one. They may mean they can't find anything worse since 800 AD but have no reliable way of assessing anything earlier from a complete lack of all sorts of evidence. If there are no tree rings or written records, what else might they use? Pollen sediments possibly.

One thing that the Chaco canyon ruins (from the largest Anasazi remains) illustrates is that they stopped using timber that had been dragged in from fifty miles away (the Chuska Mountains) and went more to all-masonry construction late in their occupation, something that could be partly due to climate change but also partly due to various difficulties in moving wood that was still there to harvest. For example, maybe they couldn't raise sufficient labour, or the Chaco River had fewer times with any water for rafting (it would have been dragging rafts upstream if so given the direction the river takes away from Chaco to reach the San Juan), or more frequent wildfires made it difficult to complete the task. Or it could have been a cultural shift where for whatever reason builders preferred not to use timber any longer. These are the challenges that cultural anthropolgists face and I think climate scientists at least attempt to follow their lead on such issues but as we know, it often comes out that "climate change did this or that" at all sorts of intervals in history, whether it's actually true cause and effect is surely a legitimate subject for debate.

Big problems in Italy too, rivers drying up and irrigation of crops not possible. Sh*t will start to get real when Europe starts experiencing food shortages.

Pretty sure you're a farmer so it's in your interest not to believe in man made climate change, but why do you think the vast majority of scientists think it's a thing? I just don't get it, do you think it's a scam to take your money or something?

Because from what I can tell, farmers in Ireland seem to think climate change is just some made up thing by Eamon Ryan and the D4 Wokerati to use as a stick to beat rural Ireland with. Real measures to reduce emissions would hit Ag hard in Ireland, so it seems to me you all try and become experts on climate change and go against the general scientific consensus that says climate change is real, in order to fight your corner.

I don't think it's a weak argument to say pretty much every climate scientist in the world believes man made climate change is real.

Anyway these discussions on climate change are kind of pointless on boards I've realised, farmers and the usual posters believe one thing, others believe another thing, and no conclusion ever comes of it.

You're correct on that one.

Aside from some nonsense about planetary rotation, most of the posters here engage in good faith and present well detailed arguments. Only yourself and someone else post with a head-in-the-sand attitude that you are 100% right and anything else is not to be considered, because of the scientific consensus (the appeal to authority argument). And its also you who engages in name calling and strawmanning about the farmers(?) and others. You seem to have a real bugbear against farmers certainly, I havent seen any in this thread.

Climate is defined meteorologically as the average weather patterns in a region over a period of 30 years, which until the recent past was about the same as the average life expectancy for a human. The changes around the 'medieval warm period' happened over 300 years and was not a global phenomenon

The Roman warm period spanned 7 centuries and only affected parts of Europe and the North Atlantic

The current GLOBAL changes in climate are happening much faster and at a much greater scale than either of these two events you mentioned

https://weather.com/science/environment/news/2019-07-25-earth-warming-faster-climate-change-study

Most farmers understand climate change better than most.

Unpredictable weather for harvesting

Flooding during winter

No rainfall in spring

And i say that as a part time farmer

The green economy agenda is driven too much by urban living politicians and civil servants.

The green party needs to get some rural TDs asap