https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/what-really-tu...
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/what-really-tu...
https://medcraveonline.com/IJH/is-atlantis-related-to-the-gr...
We do know that up until ~20kya there were millions of square miles of rich river valley land, now under the sea, that could have supported tens or hundreds of millions population. And, in most of the world, we have no idea how many people lived there throughout most of prehistory, with isolated exceptions.
[1] https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/what-really-tu...
We exited an ice age, which created conditions which helped to create pastures. Climate change has been happening far longer than humans have impacted it (not saying humans aren’t impacting it).
Further, grazing makes fields more robust if done property. Grasses will grow faster to compensate and the poop enhances the conditions to create fields.
Who's to say that there wasn't more grazing (by area) back then?
> Further, grazing makes fields more robust if done property.
I'm not a farmer, but I know that this depends a lot on what is doing the grazing. Sheep for example apparently graze the grass down really far, and prevent the growth of bushes and tree saplings that are otherwise important for balancing the ecosystem.
In the US in the 1800s, there was outright armed conflict between sheep and cattle ranchers over this issue: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sheep_Wars
And as far as I know, England and Scotland lack trees specifically because overgrazing prevented forests from regenerating after being cut for timber: https://youtu.be/nAGHUkby2Is
It did not happen in Africa.
In North America, megafauna (dire wolf, saber-tooth cat, cheetah, horse, camel, mammoth, mastodon, giant sloth, 30+ genera) were killed off not by human activity but by a comet strike c.10818 BCE. It did in the Clovis culture, too. There were simultaneous extinctions in South America and Africa.
For many decades anthropologists and archaeologists earnestly insisted the Americas were barely populated, pre-Columbus. Now we have found major earthworks projects in both North and South America that required societies in, at minimum, tens of millions to have built and maintained.
We know appallingly little about the recent history of our species beyond ~6000 ya, with only tiny, isolated digs at older sites.
A major earthwork in Java, Gunung Padang (previously assumed to be a natural feature because of it size), dated to 22 kya has had excavations halted since 2014.
I would hardly be surprised if rural population density was significantly higher than in the past, with more farms as well as more grazing herds, even if they were much smaller than what we have today.
But I also don't really know if this squares with the sheer amount of meat and dairy that modern humans consume. How much does factory farming offset the need for open grazing land?
Basically, this is a subject area where intelligent clever people get themselves into trouble by thinking they know more than they do. I'd rather see what the experts say.
Recent decades have seen population estimates forced to be raised by orders of magnitude in many places.
My impression has been that the Sahara, North Africa, the Middle East, and eastern Mediterranean were all gradually becoming dryer anyway. Is that wrong?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/African_humid_period
It is true that the Holocene extinction and other events are caused by humans, and that, in the larger scheme of things, life on Earth would thrive better without us. But it is a fallacy to pretend everything is caused by us, and such claims only make conversations about real change caused by us more muddy than they need to be.
At any rate, don't take "facts" from a magazine.