The Little Ice Age as described by Behringer and Degroot highlights just how interconnected climate phenomena are to human activity. Having not read much about this previously I was struck by the number of similarities between what was described during the Little Ice Age and what we are seeing today in terms of political unrest and scapegoating. While it didn't surprise me per se, I think it's always striking to see history repeating itself so blatantly. The thing I found most interesting in Degroot’s writing, especially as it relates to earth systems models and historical climatology, is the difficulty in determining cause and effect between human action and the environment. It's clear that rather than there being a singular causal flow the actual relationship between humans and the environment is far more complex. I really appreciated the ways in which Tapiador and Navarro attempted to name all of the variables of human behavior which would be needed to create an earth systems model capable of approximating reality; however, I do seriously question the availability of some of the data they want to include. For example, as an anthropology major, I am highly critical of the idea that they could model culture in a meaningful way. This is not to say I don't think it should be attempted, I'm just not sure it's possible in the ways they imagine.
I think most of what I have seen on social media about the little ice age is people using it as proof that the earth goes through natural cycles of climate change and therefore anthropogenic climate change is not real. While I understand the rationale behind this I think the narrative could easily be shifted to one focused on the ways in which societies were affected and able to build resilience. I felt like in particular, Degroot’s piece highlighted the extent to which the Little Ice Age impacted human society in spite of them not necessarily understanding what was going on from a climate change perspective. Currently, it seems like a lot of climate change media is focused on convincing people of the existence of anthropogenic climate change but I wonder if perhaps the study of climate history can be an avenue to understand impact and resilience building regardless of peoples 'beliefs' about climate change?