I'll post only those excerpts but the full article can be found HERE
Two Smithsonian scientists, Charles Schuchert and David White, have just returned from the wilds of west Greenland, bringing back valuable collections. In a region of everlasting ice and snow they have been exploring luxuriant tropical forests. Far to the north of the Arctic circle they have been studying a flora consisting of palms, tree ferns, and other plants belonging properly to the neighborhood of the equator. These forests, however, and the trees and varied forms of plant life which compose them are exceedingly ancient. In fact, they disappeared from the face of the earth several millions of years ago, and only their fossil remains are found buried in the strata of the rocks. It was these remains that Messrs, Schuchert and White went to investigate. They wanted to get specimens for the National Museum, and other objects of a geological nature were in view.
Greenland was once upon a time a tropical country. That is proved absolutely by the remains of an extensive tropical flora which are found there. Where now a sheet of solid ice over a mile thick covers mountain and valley, and mighty frozen rivers called glaciers make their way to the sea and hatch icebergs, there was in earlier days a verdure-clad wilderness of luxuriant vegetation. Together with the palms and tree ferns, there were trees related to the giant sequoias of our own west coast; also representatives of the "gingko," the sacred tree of Japan and of the Eucalyptus family, which today is restricted to Australia. Climbing vines festooned the trunks of these monarchs of an ancient forest with draperies of foliage, while close to the ground grew those curious dwarf trees called "cycads," somewhat resembling palms in miniature, in the midst of a tangled undergrowth of ferns and other flowerless plants that carpted the densely wooded areas.
2nd last paragraph
On the coast of Greenland are found the long-abandoned ruins of many buildings erected by the ancient Norsemen, of rock, and very substantial. According to tradition, a Norse navigator named Gunnibiorn landed in the country in the year 872 A. D. The Norsemen certainly went as far as 75 degrees north latitude, which cannot be reached by the stoutest modern ship without serious risk. These voyages were accomplished, too, in half-decked, open boats. A stone found near Upernavik, in latitude 72 degrees and 30 minutes, bears an inscription in Runic dated 1135. In the old sagas and chronicles there is little mention of ice as an obstruction to navigation, and it is evident that the climate in those days was much warmer than it is now. Since then the glaciers have filled the fiords and have made the country uninhabitable, save in a few spots along the coast. The aboriginal Eskimo of the region were known as Skraellings, or "Little People," by the Norsemen, who treated them barbarously. But if tradition does not lie, the Skraellings got ample revenge in the end, totally wiping out the last of the Norse colonies. They built an immense raft of boats, over which they erected a low and irregular scaffolding, covered with tanned and bleached skins, so that when afloat the affair looked like an iceberg. It was turned adrift on the fiord, being permitted to float with the tide to the shore, where the Norse settlement was located. The inhabitants were taken by surprise, and all of them were killed.
I guess GREENLAND wasn't always white!
Now what is "INGSOC" and their "warmers" to do now that they've missed this piece of oldspeak???
the Medieval warm periodlasting from around AD 950–1250 and the striking correlation to the the castle and cathedral building era in Europe? Isn't the historic evidence sufficient to at least consider the possibility that warmer average temperates are a GOOD thing for human civilization in as much as it has in the past greatly assisted crop yields? In a day and age where air conditioning exists and water can be pumped to where it needs to be how can warmer temperatures be considered necessarily bad?
As for pollutants NO one is in favor of those and we should obviously concentrate our collective efforts on making sure that organizations such as the American EPA ( great mandate, no funding) and their international counterparts gets the money they need to do the things we originally campaigned for. The real issue is why our collective attention is being focused on Co2 which is NOT a pollutant and in fact assists biomass growth. How does that happen when heavy industry still gets away with pumping REAL toxins, stuff that kills or slows biomass growth, into our atmosphere and rivers?
This history is also EXCEEDINGLY relevant in pointing out data can be manipulated to form 'hockey-stick' graphs that were constructed by simply igoring, or reducing the influence of, data sets that contained evidence of the medieval warm period. If the scientist who were aware of this travesty got equal air and media time we could debate the merits of each but since it was ignored and covered up it's clear that the agenda is political and self serving and that they refuse to 'trust us' ( at best) with their most accurate assessment of past events.
If people deny the holocaust, a historic reality, they are sent to jail in many European countries and yet when scientist rips out 300 years of temperature data that may lead to wide ranging misunderstanding and economic reforms that will lead to death and destruction on holocaust scales in dozens of countries we are just expected to ignore it because it's so very unlikely to seriously affect the standard of life of those who are discussing it here?
We may not be first to suffer the consequences of this undermining of and attack on modern industrial society but we should not forget that hundreds of millions WILL and that their comparative silence is the result of a lack of access and means of sharing data. Ideally that seems to be where the majority of us are supposed to stay in this corporate globalization drive but since i actually understand and know that we can all live the way the two of us do without the current environmental destruction i will continue to occasionally mention this.