Tree rings tell the tale, as do lake sediment cores (looking at pollen grain). I don't know how many records from back then commented on the weather. Besides, they were in the middle of it and may not have realized they were in an epoch of nice weather. Unless events happen fast enough, we don't necessarily see the pattern. The people who shifted from hunting and gathering to agriculture almost certainly didn't know that's what they were doing. It was too slow a process.

There are beautiful winter scenes painted. Very romantic. — Cartuna

Hendrick Avercamp 1585–1634 painted this. It is charming and romantic, but it was pretty cold and the growing season was shortened, which wasn't quite so romantic.

Wise words! It's us who see patterns. Are there trees that old?

Good old Hendrick Lovely not? Dutch skating. On friese doorlopers. Fun in hard times. People were happy though, I guess.

Try this:

Command economies

Are there trees that old? — Cartuna

There are trees that old (probably not in Europe where trees tended to get cut down for lumber and were replaced by new trees). Actually you don't need the tree in the ground. There is a "Dendrochronological Database" that has been put together over the years which covers about 11,000 years into the past. You can take a core from a beam in a building and look it up in the database, to see what the climate was like from year to year -- wet, dry, warm, cold. During warm wet years the trees grew more, so the rings are wider. Cold dry seasons produce narrow rings.

I don't actually know anything about this, I just come across it in books about... medieval or ancient history.

BTW, there is a specific tree, a great basin bristlecone pine, that is over 5,000 years old. No, you can't go see the tree; it's location is secret. If the assholes of the world knew where the tree was, it wouldn't be there anymore.

I was thinking about aggregate growth, GDP... but sure, presumably you could shift available energy from one sector to another. — ChatteringMonkey

In command economy, yes.

Here

I recall now. The baobab 6000 years old!

Dendrochronological. What a nice word! Expresses nicely how I feel.

We're drifting of here...

GDP tracks energy consumption.

Rise in energy consumption has mainly been a rise in fossil fuels.

The idea that fossil fuels can - for intents and purposes of the kind of economy we have - just be replaced by renewables seem wishful thinking at best.

Ergo, If we want/have to cut out fossil fuels, GDP will decline... one way or another.

As a generalization, there have been periods of real growth. For instance, the post WWII boom brought real growth (increases in real income) for about 30 years. During the last 45 years, real wages have decreased by a minimum of 25% for most working class people. The cause has been stagnant wages and inflation.

Now, if you want a period of time when economic growth was a real drag, take the period between the collapse of the Roman Empire (say, 600 a.d. to around 1400 a.d. for a round figures) the annual growth rate was 1/100th of a percent. People could look forward to a 1% increase in income per century. As it happens, those 800 years were not terrible for everyone. Life was just very stable. — Bitter Crank

So, net zero growth is not gonna be as problematic as some of us would think. After all if a growth rate of 1/100th of a percent can be maintained over roughly a millennia, it doesn't seem to be all that bad for us.

From a societal and psychological/epistemic point of view, the problem is we have been living exclusively on the sharp end of the hockey-stick.

Our experiences, and the socio-economic structures we build thereupon, are literally fully contained within the couple of centuries that are the exception.

We are geared to expect the future to resemble the past, but have no real right to it dixit Hume. In most cases that kind of wiring has served us well... in this case maybe it won't?

That's exactly what I meant by increasing linearly in the exponential.

any country that burdens its free market with too much regulation will get surpassed by another country that doesnt

any country that burdens its free market with too much regulation will get surpassed by another country that doesnt — Miller

Not true. The US has a lot of business regulation.

Not true. The US has a lot of business regulation. — Caldwell

i didnt say any regulation, i said too much regulation

too many rules of any kind stifles freedom, which weakens a nation

BTW, there is a specific tree, a great basin bristlecone pine, that is over 5,000 years old. No, you can't go see the tree; it's location is secret. If the assholes of the world knew where the tree was, it wouldn't be there anymore — Bitter Crank

:rofl: :up: