XPost: talk.politics.guns
From: countrywagon@gmail.com
In article
R Kym Horsell wrote:
>
> [Sock home groups cut:]
> In sci.environment sock #71 wrote:
> > You wake up to a dark, dreary, glum morning. For the 547th consecutive
> > day. Just 18 months prior, you were a hard-working farmer gearing up for
> > another bountiful crop season.
> >
> > But then the skies went dark. And they stayed dark?day after day, month
> > after month?from early 536 to 537. Across much of Eastern Europe and
> > throughout Asia, spring turned into summer and fall gave way to winter
> > without a day of sunshine. Like a blackout curtain over the sun, millions
> > of people across the world's most populated countries squinted through dim
> > conditions, breathing in the chokingly thick air and losing nearly every
> > crop they were relying on to harvest.
> >
> > This isn't the plot of a dystopian TV drama or a fantastical "docufiction"
> > production.
> >
> > This was a harsh reality for the millions of people who lived through that
> > literally dark time or, as some historians have declared, the very "worst
> > year ever to be alive."
> >
> > "For the sun gave forth its light without brightness, like the moon,
> > during this whole year, and it seemed exceedingly like the sun in eclipse,
> > for the beams it shed were not clear nor such as it is accustomed to
> > shed," was the grim account Procopius, a prominent scholar who became the
> > principal Byzantine historian of the 6th century, gave in History of the
> > Wars. "And from the time when this thing happened men were free neither
> > from war nor pestilence nor any other thing leading to death."
> >
> > Some 1,500 years later, Harvard University medieval historian Michael
> > McCormick has reached a similarly grim conclusion about not just 536, but
> > the dreadful decade that followed. For people living across Europe in 536,
> > "it was the beginning of one of the worst periods to be alive, if not the
> > worst year," McCormick said.
> >
> > As McCormick told AccuWeather, it was all set off by rapid, drastic
> > climate change. In the spring of 536, he noted that a volcanic eruption
> > triggered the Late Antique Little Ice Age (LALIA). Its ramifications, on
> > top of ensuing eruptions in 540 and 547, were devastating.
> ...
>
> Objectively, we can check out any of these historical things on
> the population.
>
> I have a database of the avg age at death for people born in
> the N Hem ad1-ad1000.
>
> We can set up the hypothesis that something in 540ad affected
> health so much that the age at death for people born before that time
> and those born after that time are different.
>
> But both the T-test and Spearman rank test say there is no significant
effect.
>
> Data:
> People born in year After 539 Avg age Model predicts
> (1==yes) at death
> 376 0 35 65.3182*
> 387 0 77 65.3182
> 390 0 88 65.3182*
> 406 0 48 65.3182*
> 410 0 76 65.3182
> 455 0 72 65.3182
> 465 0 47 65.3182*
> 480 0 54.5 65.3182
> 483 0 83 65.3182*
> 505 0 61 65.3182
> 521 0 77 65.3182
> 540 1 65 66.5
> 560 1 77 66.5
> 570 1 63 66.5
> 585 1 49 66.5*
> 598 1 63 66.5
> 635 1 53 66.5
> 673 1 63 66.5
> 675 1 80 66.5
> 721 1 95 66.5*
> 735 1 70 66.5
> 742 1 73 66.5
> 763 1 47 66.5*
>
> So the regr predicts age at death before and after the event are
> very very similar 65.3 years and 66.5 years.
>
> Turns out the different is not statistically significant:
>
[continued in next message]
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
