I think it's more that people who study the past ascribe violence (such as revolutions) to people going hungry, and they also associate hunger with short term (on the scale of a few years) climate.
Then on top of that, the largest volcanic eruptions (e.g. Tambora [1]) are known to impact the global climate in ways that are measurable, and indeed even observable to the layperson, over the scale of a few years.
It seems like it might be a legitimate line of scientific inquiry.
The problem with the concept of volcanic climate change is that it tends to be one of the strongest instances of confirmation bias. You can see this in the phrasing: "They found that eight of ten large uprisings happened within two years of a volcanic eruption." You can make a game of it: pick a climatic change and find the volcanic eruption that causes it. But that ignores the flip side; volcanic eruptions are so frequent that you can usually find sufficiently close, especially if you're willing to be very open with proximity and scale.
When you start by picking large-scale volcanic eruptions and then try to find the climatic fallout, the link seems far less clear. Of the four largest eruptions in modern times, only the 1815 eruption of Mount Tambora is clearly linked with severe fallout (the Year Without a Summer). The eruptions of Novarupta, Krakatoa, Pinatubo, and Santa Maria don't show anywhere near that level of disruption, dispute being only somewhat less powerful.
I find this problem with most science reporting where the hypothesis is never correctly stated either because the research wasn't done correctly or the reporting failed to ask the right questions. Why does it seem like even the NYT has issues with this?
2000+ years later same place - Arab Spring as a result of the drought caused higher bread prices. For all the tech and society development we are still so much dependent on the climate. I remember living in the USSR in 80-ies, end of the 80 year cycle, cold and wet, lower harvests coupled with lower oil prices - resulted in lower ability to import grain and this is what did the Empire from inside.
9 comments
[ 3.7 ms ] story [ 31.2 ms ] threadPeople who doing boring true but important things can have a harder time.
(Upvoting stories like this means we are part of the problem, but not sure of a solution)
Then on top of that, the largest volcanic eruptions (e.g. Tambora [1]) are known to impact the global climate in ways that are measurable, and indeed even observable to the layperson, over the scale of a few years.
It seems like it might be a legitimate line of scientific inquiry.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1815_eruption_of_Mount_Tambora
When you start by picking large-scale volcanic eruptions and then try to find the climatic fallout, the link seems far less clear. Of the four largest eruptions in modern times, only the 1815 eruption of Mount Tambora is clearly linked with severe fallout (the Year Without a Summer). The eruptions of Novarupta, Krakatoa, Pinatubo, and Santa Maria don't show anywhere near that level of disruption, dispute being only somewhat less powerful.
Either way awesome NYT article title.