My View on Climate Change Part 4 - The Maps!!!
If 500 year old maps of the world show Antarctica without an ice cap what does that mean for modern climate science? In this video, I discuss four old maps that were supposedly compiled from even older source maps. If you have never heard of these maps before they just might blow your mind!
The Maps
Piri Reis Map of 1513 / As mentioned in the video, this is the least convincing of the old maps. Antarctica is just a small piece of land in the bottom righthand corner. Why is this the map that everyone focuses on?
Orontius Finaeus map of 1531 / Not bad for a 500 year old map, eh? This map was drawn when Antarctica hadn't been officially discovered yet, at least according to modern history books. Note that there are details of Antarctica such as mountains and rivers that are now under ice.
Mercator Map of 1538 / Another, nearly 500 year old, map showing North and South America and Antarctica. This one also features longitude which hadn't even been invented until the 1700's. Well, at least according to the official story.
Buache Map of 1754 / Yet another map showing Antarctica before it's official discovery. This one is interesting in that it shows Antarctica as two separate land masses. Note that this map lacks the mountain detail of the Orontius Finaeus map. However, the water portion between the two land masses says,"Glaciale." Does this mean that the ocean between the two land masses was ice?Sources:
https://historyrunamok.blogspot.com/2013/07/antarctica-mapped-before-it-was-ever.html?=1
My video is at DLive
Mind BLOWN! This is astonishing, regardless of climate change! I have a history degree and I've done a lot of my own research - for a while I was almost obsessed with studying merchant and colonial sea voyages of the 16th to 18th centuries. I've read some parts of the original copies of the works of Captain Cook and Joseph Banks, in libraries - they were using longitude effectively for the first time, in the 1780s, and... this just doesn't make sense! How could Antarctica have been mapped so relatively accurately at a time when ships could barely find their way across the Pacific Ocean, never mind make their way through pack ice! I'm reading this late at night, so I'll have to look into it further tomorrow.
If the maps really are authentic 16th century maps (not fakes or hoaxes) I might actually go for your second theory - ie, that humans may have been much more advanced than we think thousands of years ago. Maybe they were advanced in some ways - for example, maybe they had electricity, but maybe they also used different powers that we haven't recognised or discovered yet. I'm not a fan of the "ancient aliens" theories.
I've done a wee bit of research and have found this interesting article from the New York Times in 1984, which you may have already read. Just fascinating!
I'm glad I got your gears turning! I know this sort of stuff gets me thinking.
As far as I know these maps are legit. The author of the Piri Reis map (which doesn't have longitude) claims that he used 25 older maps as sources. I am pretty sure the author of the Orontius Finaeus map also mentioned older source maps.
It's simply astonishing and will make me rethink many things. And one of them is climate change and the melting of the polar ice caps. This is why I love real history. When I studied history we weren't told that these things were wrong - they were just never mentioned in the books and sources we were steered towards.
I feel like a lot of the misleading that is done to us is through intentional omission. A few facts can vastly alter ones perception of reality.
You're probably right. I studied Scottish history at school and university, yet I escaped learning about the Radical War of 1820, where people were hung, drawn and quartered for campaigning for independence and a fair democratic system of one man, one vote.
Great find on that article by the way. I have not seen it before.
Laying it down.. Global Warming is a scam of the worst kind.. I like it !!
It says your video it still processing but its a cool idea no doubt
Sometimes it takes awhile. Might be worth the wait!
500 year old maps also show sea serpents lurking in the furthest reaches of the oceans
I don't believe these ones do. If you haven't looked into these maps before it may be interesting. I have updated the article to include the maps and sources.
Will do. But was the larger point received? That there isn't good reason to suppose the ancient cartographers responsible for that map were more knowledgeable about the planet than modern scientists?
It is the sort of thing that would only be compelling to somebody looking for anything at all which aligns with their perspective.
They are showing details of the land mass that are under 100's of feet of ice now. We only know they are there due to seismic surveys. The maps themselves aren't that accurate. Perhaps I didn't do a good job of presenting the information. Admittedly I was pretty rushed putting this together and I didn't have a very good outline for my video.
I wouldn't go that far. It's a fine video, we just disagree about the significance of a 500 year old map.
It also bears repeating that AGW does not consist of the claim that it has never been warmer in Earth's history, we already know it has. Rather it's that the current warming is anomalously rapid, and coincides in a causally established way with the industrial revolution. We don't have to guess at how or why, because we know what the greenhouse effect is and how it works.
You have to remember that this is just one point of data in my overall view of the subject. Hence the series. Is the warming anomalously rapid? If the coast of Antarctica didn't have ice 500 years ago then that would sort of be proof that the earth could cool, and warm rapidly would it not?
Yes, it's been warmer overall in the past but records show it's never increased so quickly.
500 years isn't especially rapid. Recent climate change is happening on the scale of decades.
This is sort of my point of contention though. Our actual accurate records only go back maybe 170 years? Further then that and the temperatures are basically a best guess using other data like tree rings, coral growth, ice cores etc. So do we really know that the temperature changes are anomalous or are we just being told that due to a political agenda?
The people that create the temperature data from those sources also claim that the south pole has been covered in ice for tens of thousands if not millions of years. So if this area was charted 500 years ago or even several thousand years ago and didn't have full ice sheets then clearly something is wrong with their predictions.
Also, one of the strongest arguments against anthropogenic global warming is the Medieval Warm Period which had warmer temperatures then we do now. This weather during this period is well documented and there is a historical written record that it was very warm in Europe and North America.
The counter argument to this from the climate scientists is that this warming was only in the northern hemisphere and that during that time period the southern hemisphere was colder so global temperatures were still colder then now. However these maps would potentially debunk that theory, they seem to be proof that Antarctica was warmer as well. Which would mean that both northern and southern hemispheres were warm and therefor global temps were higher then they are today.
Additionally, the maps bring into question almost all of our modern history teachings. Clearly Antarctica wasn't discovered in 1840. Yet, if you google "when was Antarctica discovered" that is what you are told. Should you trust information from people that are either stupid or lying?
For a good friend. In which you can create data. It works like a steemit.
signup