The Woolly Mammoth is extinct because of global warming. Yea the globe is warming, something that "Ice Man" would have loved to have lived to see; too bad he lived in an inter-desert cooling period. He lived millennia before the battle of the Vikings on the frozen north sea. Geologically speaking that was last night and the earth is warming up as this geologic day dawns.
THE SECOND ARTICLE WAS REMOVED FROM THE WEB
One line from the latter is copied here: We see pictures of huge blocks of ice crashing into the sea from the Antarctic Peninsula, which comprises about 2 percent of the continent. The fact that the remaining 98 percent of Antarctica is growing by 26.8 gigatons of ice per year is ignored.
For those of you who never studied araeochology let me explain the meaning - The earth wobbles on its axis thus Greenland and Antarctica are showing signs of this activity that at several times have resulted in the American continent being covered in ice and the Saraha becoming a blooming paradise.
Next time someone mentions "global warming" tell them that Krakatoa released more ash and acid fumes than ALL modern machinery from 1700 to the present, ditto with St. Helens and other volcanoes. Add to that fact that Krakatoa exploded during the industrial revolution and that the earth has cleaned itself of Krakatoa's smoke and fumes in addition to our own, and you can see that man has no impact on climate change.
Some people believe that men could not have been smart enough to invent all those fascinating things we find in the past; they claim that extraterrestrials gave knowledge to ancient men. I know a guy who claims we aren't smart enough now (he thinks aliens built the Stealth planes) Their claim would be easier to believe if "Stargate" was the reality in which we lived but I haven't seen any Asguard spaceships lately.
It is my belief that Piri Reis' Map proves that men have seen a virtually ice free Antarctica and mapped it.
Here is some research on Piri Reis' Map. The first writer contradicts the conclusion of mapmakers who have studied this map for decades and they have said that Admiral Reis' map shows part of Antarctica without ice.
Steven Dutch is debunking the stupidity of people who claim that the map was made from space by aliens and he over reaches. I include him because he gives a good history of Piri Reis' Map:
Here is an excerpt from the conclusion on that page. I find it interesting that in 1513 Muslims called Non-Muslims "infidels" even when speaking of fellow sailors AND the subject at hand is geography and not religion.
Some Real Mysteries About the Map
There's also a marginal note opposite South America that says "It is related by the Portuguese infidel that in this spot night and day are at their shortest of two hours, at their longest of twenty two hours. But the day is very warm and in the night there is much dew." That would indicate a far southern latitude, but note that the report explicitly comes from the Portuguese, not from arcane ancient sources. It's possible that some Portuguese expedition was blown very far south, not to Antarctica where the days are rarely "very warm," but perhaps to 50 degrees south or so.
To me, it sounds like the Portuguese may have been stranded on the Sandwich Islands or on one of those other Islands that trail off the tip of South America. I doubt they would have been rescued from the latter. Another possibility is that the Portuguese made a base camp on that island from which to sail for the purpose of exploring further south and mapped part of ice free Antarctica. Only to be captured by the Turks before arriving home.
This second source has some good info:
My final source is this; on the mini ice age of Europe during the 1600's:
Admiral Reis may have been in possession of maps of very ancient origin which would indicate that there are civilizations that were very great in pre-history. It would be easier to believe that this map had been handed down beginning 4000 years ago when we know the ice caps had melted. Unfortunately the tendency of men to destroy things in war would preclude this possibility. The only other explanation is that the Portuguese saw Antarctica partially ice free which would mean that fluctuations in global temperatures occur in cycles that are far shorter than previously believed. That would be supported by the recorded mini cold snap of Europe. It would also explain some of the anomalies seen in the fossil record during known times of glaciation that indicate periods of warmer weather.
Thus, geologically, today we would be in a time of warmer weather with short periods of glaciation and it appears that the present cooling cycle is coming to an end, thus the caps are melting as has happened before. During my research for this blog I changed my opinion and now believe that there are many short lived changes in global temperatures much like the line on a stock market chart. Disconcerting but I hold to truth in spite of my dislike for what the truth is.
Check-out the last sentence from the Illinois State Museum:
http://www.museum.state.il.us/exhibits/ice_ages/when_ice_ages.html
VEeeeryy interesting {as Laugh-in would say} is the following I found on 6/18/09 at the following URL http://www.science-frontiers.com/sf049/sf049p01.htm I shall explain what you may not know about "Skeptical Inquirer" which is that their purpose has been to debunk junk science but unfortunately, as in this case, they simply act like a school debate team that comes up with an opposite opinion regardless of weather or not there is any basis to it.
Mr. Jolly's assertion "Our knowledge of early cartography is limited, since much of the material from the sixteenth century is now lost." is absolutely false. Cartography has been protected for thousands of years. As noted above Piri Reis' Map was created from maps pirated from the Portuguese. The knowledge of how maps were drawn and attached to one another to form larger maps has been well documented by Army and Navy cartographers for millennia.
Secondarily, the maps shown on the "Science Frontiers" web page are being incorrectly compared by the writer of the article. The number one thing you do when comparing maps is to locate the object in question on both maps. If both islands are south of South America and Africa then its Antarctica regardless of the discrepancy in scale.
The old maps, heck even some maps from the 1800's, of Florida show it to be far wider {East to West} than it actually is but the guys from "Science Frontiers" would not claim they were not showing Florida just because the scale was off. Likewise the map of Antarctica that is out of proper scale doesn't make it "not Antarctica". Would they say the same of Greenland on a modern map? Maps were improved greatly after satellites took pictures of the earth but that does not negate the object on a map previous to satellite photography.
Another point to add is that Greenland was named that by Vikings because it was very fertile and "green" The glaciers that are melting today formed during the last 1000 years and we are about to see Greenland the way the first Vikings found it, ditto with Antarctica. I hope i am the first man to surf Antarctica's channel after all the ice melts off.
WHILE SEARCHING THE ORIGINS OF THE AINU PEOPLE OF JAPAN I FOUNDTHE FOLLOWING:
The Early Jomon is characterized by the high sea level (2 to 3 meters higher than the modern day) and a significant population increase. That was 4000BC folks!!
Men do not cause global warming Al Gore's mouth does.
BLOGOSPHERE 
For a concrete illustration as to how far we’ve already gotten up that “hockey stick” exponentially rising slope, one might consider the manner in which many anti-AGW folks often express skepticism with regard to the theory by asserting that any great volcano, such as Mt. St. Helens, Fig. 7. Phreatic eruption, during spring 1980, at Mt. St. Helens, Washington state, USA (Wikipedia) f7 or Mt. Pinatubo of late dramatic vintage, must, “of course,” vent many times more carbon dioxide and other such greenhouse gases into the atmosphere than all man’s activities put together.
While observing the monumental spectacle of incredible volcanic eruptions such as these might make that seem obvious, in actuality, however, the reverse is true. It turns out that all “subaerial” (surficial) volcanoes on the planet put together only spew forth some one four-hundredth (!) the rate of present-day anthropogenic CO2 emissions into the Earth’s air.
(Getting into the nitty-gritty of comparative numerology, according to this research report 2 [see also 3], “subaerial” [surficial] volcanoes on Earth annually produce an average of 34 × 1012 grams of carbon dioxide from “passive degassing,” together with 31 × 1012 grams per year resulting from active eruptions, for a total volcanic emission rate of 6.5 × 107 [65 million] metric tons of CO2 per year. That sounds like a lot, but per the indicated piece that amounts to a mere 0.22% of present levels of human-caused emissions of carbon dioxide — which annual anthropogenic contributions may therefore be calculated to lie in the vicinity of 29 or 30 gigatons of CO2.
We may bring forth another value for anthropogenic CO2 emissions, according to this source, to wit: “Fossil fuels account for most of the 6.5 billion tons [gigatons] of carbon — the amount present in 25 gigatons of CO2 — that people around the world vent into the air every year.” 4 Twenty-five gigatons is 2.5 × 1010 metric tons of carbon dioxide released every year as a result of human activities, indicating via this figure that volcanoes produce a mere 0.26% of the CO2 that mankind vents into the Earth’s atmosphere.)
According to either value we see that modern-day anthropogenic activities exhaust into the air something like 400 times as much CO2 as all the surficial volcanoes of the world put together.