The timeline figures look a bit convenient. How can humans reach North America earlier than 14,500, but take over 3,500 years to get to Argentina, instead of a couple hundred, maybe 500-1000 years. Humans settle Abu Hureyra before 11,500 years, but take over 1500 years to settle Jericho. Now this is harder to estimate, as it is not one of reaching a large area, but one of likely side movements in an area, and preferences. But, some other things look conveniently placed, and expanded in time. We have just come out of a dark scientific period, Troy suddenly exists for real, the widely held historical time lines, and the limits of human civilisation, of earlier last century that were used to persecute other researchers, are eroding away. All based on scientific method.
Before the 6th century BC, things are as yet poorly attested, very poorly the further you move from centers of civilisation that have forms of visual record making, like Egypt. There are civilisations we know little about. Hopefully the Indus Valley civilisation script will eventually lead to discoveries of more concise testaments to the histories of civilisations between Egypt, China and Indonesia.
However, before the approximate 6th century date of wider parallel testaments, we should think of the possibility of human history being overexpanded by several times, and more as we get less attestation. Of scientific history, who knows how expanded. Isn’t that the history of the human race, and science, all over, convenient alignments and exaggerations. If the movements of temperature happened over much shorter periods, shouldn’t we be much more worried? We live in a dream world of ego centric stability, where everything, including scientific interpretation, revolves around ourselves and our preferences as to truth.
So, the temperature rise levels maybe progressively accurate science, but the time line, is that real science?
1. Be open-minded and be willing to alter your beliefs with new evidence.
2. Strive to understand what is most likely to be true, not to believe what you wish to be true.
3. The scientific method is the most reliable way of understanding the natural world.
4. Every person has the right to control over their body.
5. Gods are not necessary to be a good person or to live a full and meaningful life.
6. Be mindful of the consequences of all your actions and recognize that you must take responsibility for them.
7. Treat others as you would want them to treat you, and can reasonably expect them to want to be treated. Think about their perspective.
8. We have the responsibility to consider others, including future generations.
9. There is no one right way to live.
10. Leave the world a better place than you found it.
Science or not? 
The timeline figures look a bit convenient. How can humans reach North America earlier than 14,500, but take over 3,500 years to get to Argentina, instead of a couple hundred, maybe 500-1000 years. Humans settle Abu Hureyra before 11,500 years, but take over 1500 years to settle Jericho. Now this is harder to estimate, as it is not one of reaching a large area, but one of likely side movements in an area, and preferences. But, some other things look conveniently placed, and expanded in time. We have just come out of a dark scientific period, Troy suddenly exists for real, the widely held historical time lines, and the limits of human civilisation, of earlier last century that were used to persecute other researchers, are eroding away. All based on scientific method.
Before the 6th century BC, things are as yet poorly attested, very poorly the further you move from centers of civilisation that have forms of visual record making, like Egypt. There are civilisations we know little about. Hopefully the Indus Valley civilisation script will eventually lead to discoveries of more concise testaments to the histories of civilisations between Egypt, China and Indonesia.
However, before the approximate 6th century date of wider parallel testaments, we should think of the possibility of human history being overexpanded by several times, and more as we get less attestation. Of scientific history, who knows how expanded. Isn’t that the history of the human race, and science, all over, convenient alignments and exaggerations. If the movements of temperature happened over much shorter periods, shouldn’t we be much more worried? We live in a dream world of ego centric stability, where everything, including scientific interpretation, revolves around ourselves and our preferences as to truth.
So, the temperature rise levels maybe progressively accurate science, but the time line, is that real science?