> some humans, even though they look like adults to you, are indeed irresponsible children in the body, as if in the costume, of an adult. They aren’t. Sadly, globally, we have lots of them

You say don’t punch down, but this attitude of yours comes through clearly when you deal with people, and being patronising is, as you demonstrate very well, a self-deceiving form of ‘punching down’.

You haven’t achieved a higher plane of consciousness to other people. You’re expressing a patronising attitude to keeping people you feel are lower than you safely in their place, to be looked after so that you can feel more adult than them. Which is very convenient for their addictions.

Americans with the idea that no one with other approaches could be as civilised and intelligent as their approach to public health allows is pretty laughable. As your circular, self-congratulatory logic demonstrates.

You could just have written that we continue to do nothing serious about climate change. That will disrupt society enough that history disappears as people use their energy trying to survive in a world that has fallen apart.

The society that results will use its energy to look forward, not back, as it’s resources don’t allow for all the effort required for the upkeep of historical records.

Just going off what has happened in the previous examples of society breaking down; and this one will be much, much worse.

Except the technology means they don’t need to rub a pencil over 1,200 + year old manuscripts hoping to see if they find anything on each of the many pages.

That’s so clear for a complete laymen who is fascinated, thank you. It makes perfect sense.

> They suggest that the islands could be the remnants of a low-lying landscape underlain by soft glacial deposits laid down during the last ice age. Since then, forces of erosion have worn away the land, reducing it to islands, before these too were worn away and disappearing by the sixteenth century.

Since they say the tech is innovative, I guess they used a modern boat that is old enough to be affected by sitting in water, but which any mistakes in lifting it wouldn’t matter.

Better to start unproven methods with something relatively inconsequential than a real ancient wreck.

Next time you’re on the Internet, take a look at climate science.

The Earth is literally changing to become an environment where humans will struggle to survive.

Reduce demand, reduce supply, the first law of economics.

Companies and governments fear boycotts more than anything.

And your idea that the problem is poor people who have no choices is ridiculous.

Stop using the poorest as a human shield for the large sector of the population that is wealthy enough to consume irresponsibly. It’s obscene.

Reduce demand, reduce supply, first law of economics.

The one thing that scares companies and governments is a well-organised boycott - it’s the one thing they can’t deal with, as has been long-demonstrated.

You just don’t want to give up your lifestyle, and have excuses that have been astroturfed for you to use.

Climate scientists disagree with you, and say that the only way to deal with climate change is for a significant reduction in peoples consumption. You’re just playing the game where you say that companies have to do it, so that they can say that consumers have to prompt them to do it, and you all carry on as though you’ve addressed the question, as the planet burns harder each year.

You’re the idiots people look back on in history and say, why didn’t they just stop doing the unnecessary social things that caused the disaster?

No, because other oils aren’t produced in such a rapaciously destructive manner.

The answer is between the two extremes you offer as a way of making it seem impossible.

And it demonstrates why we need people who care about working, not people who are just trying to find any way to strip costs from industries they’ve seen people like to consume and so have bought the rights to in order to skim money easily.

Work to live well, not to profit easily.

Petrified trees would be stone, not organic matter capable of storing moisture.

But for how long would a buried forest continue to retain enough cohesion in its matter to create an analogous pattern above?

And how would a forest be buried intact with no destruction or disruption of its matter, so that it could create a pattern that looks like upright tree trunks?

After the Ice by Steven Mithin is a great book for exactly this kind of information.

He tells you about archeological research around the world for the period 20,000 to 5,000 bce, but he also then tells you a story about a time traveller watching the people in the settlements or areas live their lives, as revealed by the archeological evidence.

It’s a really great way to think your way into the landscape they lived in and exploited. And it spans the globe.