>One difference between the climate changes you referred to and the one
>revealed in the tree ring studies is their duration. Major changes
>normally last for long periods of time. This change was apparently
>large and quite brief, leading some to conclude it may have been
>caused by a
>cataclysm from which the area soon recovered.
This is not entirely true. Each of the oddly numbered decades in the 20th
century represented about, and I emphasize about, 10 years of aridity in the
mid continent. In the 30's was the dust bowl, in the 50's Dallas nearly ran
out of water, The 70's were not as bad as the 50's but they weren't great.
And the 90's were not very wet years either. A friend of mine with a ranch
in Texas complained for several years about how bad the water situation was.
Don't forget about the 4 year El-nino cycle either.
Weather changes are of variable length. If you have a reference that says
they must be long, I would like to hear it.
for lots of creation/evolution information
personal stories of struggle
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed May 01 2002 - 17:23:34 EDT