Thread: Any doubts about Climate Change?

EPIC FAIL !



Tries to ridicule the messenger whilst ignoring the meat and bones. I had already posted up the report; the "peer reviewed SCIRO paper. I notice you ignored that and instead launch ad hominem attacks instead. Could it be that your own house is built upon sand? I think so.

Originally Posted by S Landreth

and about the author; Mike Adams, of the piece (of crap) you sent us to,..

Adams is an AIDS denialist, a 9/11 truther, a birther and endorses conspiracy theories surrounding the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting. He has endorsed Burzynski: Cancer Is Serious Business, a movie about Stanislaw Burzynski. Steven Novella characterises Adams as "a dangerous conspiracy-mongering crank"

Originally Posted by pseudolus

Elevated carbon dioxide making arid regions greener

31 May 2013
AGU Release No. 13-24

WASHINGTON, DC—Scientists have long suspected that a flourishing of green foliage around the globe, observed since the early 1980s in satellite data, springs at least in part from the increasing concentration of carbon dioxide in Earth’s atmosphere. Now, a study of arid regions around the globe finds that a carbon dioxide “fertilization effect” has, indeed, caused a gradual greening from 1982 to 2010.

Focusing on the southwestern corner of North America, Australia’s outback, the Middle East, and some parts of Africa, Randall Donohue of the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization (CSIRO) in Canberra, Australia and his colleagues developed and applied a mathematical model to predict the extent of the carbon-dioxide (CO2) fertilization effect. They then tested this prediction by studying satellite imagery and teasing out the influence of carbon dioxide on greening from other factors such as precipitation, air temperature, the amount of light, and land-use changes.

The team’s model predicted that foliage would increase by some 5 to 10 percent given the 14 percent increase in atmospheric CO2 concentration during the study period. The satellite data agreed, showing an 11 percent increase in foliage after adjusting the data for precipitation, yielding “strong support for our hypothesis,” the team reports.

“Lots of papers have shown an average increase in vegetation across the globe, and there is a lot of speculation about what’s causing that,” said Donohue of CSIRO’s Land and Water research division, who is lead author of the new study. “Up until this point, they’ve linked the greening to fairly obvious climatic variables, such as a rise in temperature where it is normally cold or a rise in rainfall where it is normally dry. Lots of those papers speculated about the CO2 effect, but it has been very difficult to prove.”

He and his colleagues present their findings in an article that has been accepted for publication in Geophysical Research Letters, a journal of the American Geophysical Union.

The team looked for signs of CO2 fertilization in arid areas, Donohue said, because “satellites are very good at detecting changes in total leaf cover, and it is in warm, dry environments that the CO2 effect is expected to most influence leaf cover.” Leaf cover is the clue, he added, because “a leaf can extract more carbon from the air during photosynthesis, or lose less water to the air during photosynthesis, or both, due to elevated CO2.” That is the CO2 fertilization effect.

But leaf cover in warm, wet places like tropical rainforests is already about as extensive as it can get and is unlikely to increase with higher CO2 concentrations. In warm, dry places, on the other hand, leaf cover is less complete, so plants there will make more leaves if they have enough water to do so. “If elevated CO2 causes the water use of individual leaves to drop, plants will respond by increasing their total numbers of leaves, and this should be measurable from satellite,” Donohue explained.

To tease out the actual CO2 fertilization effect from other environmental factors in these regions, the researchers first averaged the greenness of each location across 3-year periods to account for changes in soil wetness and then grouped that greenness data from the different locations according to their amounts of precipitation. The team then identified the maximum amount of foliage each group could attain for a given precipitation, and tracked variations in maximum foliage over the course of 20 years. This allowed the scientists to remove the influence of precipitation and other climatic variations and recognize the long-term greening trend.

In addition to greening dry regions, the CO2 fertilization effect could switch the types of vegetation that dominate in those regions. “Trees are re-invading grass lands, and this could quite possibly be related to the CO2 effect,” Donohue said. “Long lived woody plants are deep rooted and are likely to benefit more than grasses from an increase in CO2.”

“The effect of higher carbon dioxide levels on plant function is an important process that needs greater consideration,” said Donohue. “Even if nothing else in the climate changes as global CO2 levels rise, we will still see significant environmental changes because of the CO2 fertilization effect.”

This study was funded by CSIRO’s Sustainable Agriculture Flagship, Water for a Healthy Country Flagship, the Australian Research Council and Land & Water Australia.

Notes for Journalists
Journalists and public information officers (PIOs) of educational and scientific institutions who have registered with AGU can download a PDF copy of this accepted article by clicking on this link: CO2 fertilisation has increased maximum foliage cover across the globe's warm, arid environments - Donohue - Geophysical Research Letters - Wiley Online Library

Or, you may order a copy of the final paper by emailing your request to Peter Weiss at [email protected]. Please provide your name, the name of your publication, and your phone number.

Neither the paper nor this press release are under embargo.

Title:
CO2 fertilisation has increased maximum foliage cover across the globe's warm, arid environments

Authors:
Randall J. Donohue and Tim R. McVicar
CSIRO Land and Water, Canberra, Australia;
Michael L. Roderick
Research School of Biology, The Australian National University, Canberra, Australia; Research School of Earth Sciences, The Australian National University, Canberra, Australia; and Australian Research Council Centre of Excellence for Climate System Science;
Graham D. Farquhar
Research School of Biology, The Australian National University, Canberra, Australia.
Contact information for the author:
Randall Donohue, Email: R****@csiro.au, Phone: +61-2-6246****

Dare you to call up this dude and say "you're full of shit". Go on, I dare you. More C02 = more food for the ever increasing population.

Just highlighting in the space of a few hours, another epic failure by the Sons Of Goreicle fear campaign - The fear mongering media says "The Sign is not visable - highest for 20000000 years" (I paraphrase) and another report says it might get as deep as 2002, but not there yet.

Originally Posted by pseudolus

Originally Posted by Rainfall

Central Europe experiences the worst flood in history at present. Here a picture of Passau at the Danube in Southern Germany.



The water level is at it's highest ever. The previous record was in the year 1501. So the next image can't be taken at the moment, it's under water.

Jing lor?

BBC News - Central Europe on alert for flooding
3 June 2013
The German cities of Passau and Rosenheim have declared a state of emergency.

Authorities in Passau, which lies at the confluence of three rivers in Bavaria, said waters could rise above the record levels of 2002.

Climate change denialists don't even realize they are being played by those who wish to maintain the status quo and keep on polluting.



Billionaire oilman David Koch used to joke that Koch Industries was "the biggest company you've never heard of." Now the shroud of secrecy has thankfully been lifted, revealing the $67 million that he and his brother Charles have quietly funneled to climate-denial front groups that are working to delay policies and regulations aimed at stopping global warming, most of which are part of the State Policy Network.

Today, the Kochs are being watched as a prime example of the corporate takeover of government. Their funding and co-opting of the Tea Party movement is now well documented.

Charles G. Koch and David H. Koch have a vested interest in delaying climate action: they've made billions from their ownership and control of Koch Industries, an oil corporation that is the second largest privately-held company in America (which also happens to have an especially poor environmental record). It's timely that more people are now aware of Charles and David Koch and just what they're up to.

Climate change: how a warming world is a threat to our food supplies

Global warming is exacerbating political instability as tensions brought on by food insecurity rise. With research suggesting the issue can only get worse we examine the risks around the world.


Climate change: how a warming world is a threat to our food supplies | Environment | The Observer

Originally Posted by pseudolus

Just highlighting in the space of a few hours, another epic failure by the Sons Of Goreicle fear campaign - The fear mongering media says "The Sign is not visable - highest for 20000000 years" (I paraphrase) and another report says it might get as deep as 2002, but not there yet.

Originally Posted by pseudolus

Originally Posted by Rainfall

Central Europe experiences the worst flood in history at present. Here a picture of Passau at the Danube in Southern Germany.



The water level is at it's highest ever. The previous record was in the year 1501. So the next image can't be taken at the moment, it's under water.

Jing lor?

BBC News - Central Europe on alert for flooding
3 June 2013
The German cities of Passau and Rosenheim have declared a state of emergency.

Authorities in Passau, which lies at the confluence of three rivers in Bavaria, said waters could rise above the record levels of 2002.

I'm sure you know better than the German news.

Flooding rages on in parts of central Europe | News | DW.DE | 04.06.2013

Only a complete simpleton would conclude that more CO2 means more food.


Farmed Out: How Will Climate Change Impact World Food Supplies?

A new study attempts to estimate the effects of climate change on global agriculture--and outline ways to mitigate its most dire consequences.

"the benefits of better plant growth, thanks to higher carbon dioxide concentrations (plants use CO2 for photosynthesis) are more than offset by the impact of higher temperatures and differing precipitation.

"If you grow a plant in a bell jar in a lab and increase the CO2 inside, the plants will perform better. [But] will those results translate into farmer's fields? Evidence that we've been getting from farmer's fields suggests perhaps not," Nelson says."


Source: Farmed Out: How Will Climate Change Impact World Food Supplies?: Scientific American

Originally Posted by Rainfall

I'm sure you know better than the German news.

Flooding rages on in parts of central Europe | News | DW.DE | 04.06.2013

So, let's look at the picture you posted.

Worlds tallest woman stand next to wall looking at a mark supposed to be 12m +

Then lets look at a quote from your "Authoritative german news article" who we must all believe.

The Danube River, which is one of three that join in Passau, rose to a level of 12.8 meters (42 feet) late on Monday, leaving much of the city under water.
This is considerably higher that the worst flood in living memory, when the Danube in Passau reached 12.2 meters in 1954, and the worst the city has experienced in more than 500 years, according to Germany's DPA news agency.

And then, using all of the above, lets reassess your little claim.....

Originally Posted by Rainfall

The water level is at it's highest ever. The previous record was in the year 1501. So the next image can't be taken at the moment, it's under water.

That person stood next to that mark must be some sort of 5 meter tall freak, for a start.

Secondly, that is not under water. Water rose 60 cm from the 1954 mark, so that is about where the 1501 one is then?

Anyway, all this flooding has more to do with land and water management than a changing climate. Poor bloody evidence if you ask me, it's not accurate for a start relying on a lin drawn on an old building and expected to be believed? lol

Anyway, carry on with your dreaming.

Are you stupid or do you pretent to be stupid? The embedded video says "The Danube broke the previous record set more than 500 years ago". It's 12.8 metres from the bottom of the river, and this building, naturally, is not located in the river.

Ohhh thats ok then.

tell me again how it is more than 60 CM from the mark in the 1950's to the top of that then? That was a good one as well

Note to self - climate scam believers have no sense of humour/.

Oh, and just out of interest, what Co2 was man making in the 13 and 14th century to cause all that flooding? Cow farts? Maybe Gore's great great great great grand daddy had invented the combustion engine back then and was working up a storm.

I also look forward to your commentary on the other 490 separate years when there was not flooding. How is that? Was their especially bad climate chance in 1954, nothing for 60 years and then it happens again?

Seriously - what planet are you one to try and use something like this to support taxation of life giving Co2?

Originally Posted by S Landreth

Plants cannot live on CO2 alone; a complete plant metabolism depends on a number of elements. It is a simple task to increase water and fertilizer and protect against insects in an enclosed greenhouse but what about doing it in the open air, throughout the entire Earth? Just as increasing the amount of starch alone in a person's diet won't lead to a more robust and healthier person, for plants additional CO2 by itself cannot make up for deficiencies of other compounds and elements.

Hell, you might as well raise the white flag now and just admit that you are clutching at straws. Did you actually read what you posted?

All things being equal, plant life grows bigger and faster in a Co2 enriched environment. Fact. No shades of grey. No "oh but what if". Just a simple fact. Your little website then says "Oh, but if you cut off all water and if you take nutrients out of the ground then more Co2 will not help the plant grow" (paraphrase) well that is true, but are you suggesting that there will be LESS water and LESS nutrients then? Aren't you getting all confused? Did you not see the faked Biggest flood ever picture from your buddy?

Is the reverse true then -if there was less Co2, and less water and less nutrients, would plants grow faster and bigger? Of course not. they would die quicker and be slower and smaller because of a lack of Co2. All things being equal, more Co2 = bigger and faster growing plant life.

Give up mate and accept you are being duped.


Oh, and that report was not written by some hocus pokus ouitfit - SCIRO - They don't hire fakers.

Title: CO2 fertilisation has increased maximum foliage cover across the globe's warm, arid environments

Authors:
Randall J. Donohue and Tim R. McVicar
CSIRO Land and Water, Canberra, Australia;
Michael L. Roderick
Research School of Biology, The Australian National University, Canberra, Australia; Research School of Earth Sciences, The Australian National University, Canberra, Australia; and Australian Research Council Centre of Excellence for Climate System Science;
Graham D. Farquhar
Research School of Biology, The Australian National University, Canberra, Australia.
Contact information for the author:
Randall Donohue, Email: R****@csiro.au, Phone: +61-2-6246****

^ This numpty obviously doesn't know a thing about agriculture.

Agriculture is extremely vulnerable to climate change.

Higher temperatures reduce yields of desirable crops while encouraging weed and pest proliferation.

Increasingly erratic precipitation and drought patterns increase the likelihood of short-run crop failures and long-run production declines.

The overall impacts of climate change on agriculture are expected to be negative, threatening global food security.

Only a complete moron will assume that increased CO2 will lead to increased agricultural output.

Originally Posted by TonyBKK

^ This numpty obviously doesn't know a thing about agriculture.

Agriculture is extremely vulnerable to climate change.

Higher temperatures reduce yields of desirable crops while encouraging weed and pest proliferation.

Increasingly erratic precipitation and drought patterns increase the likelihood of short-run crop failures and long-run production declines.

The overall impacts of climate change on agriculture are expected to be negative, threatening global food security.

Only a complete moron will assume that increased CO2 will lead to increased agricultural output.

Best you let CSIRO know that are complete morons though. After all, they only did a few years of testing, where as you have made a few assumptions from GoReicle.com posters you flash around.

Randall J. Donohue and Tim R. McVicar
CSIRO Land and Water, Canberra, Australia;
Michael L. Roderick
Research School of Biology, The Australian National University, Canberra, Australia; Research School of Earth Sciences, The Australian National University, Canberra, Australia; and Australian Research Council Centre of Excellence for Climate System Science;
Graham D. Farquhar
Research School of Biology, The Australian National University, Canberra, Australia.
Contact information for the author:
Randall Donohue, Email: R****@csiro.au, Phone: +61-2-6246****


Give him a call then - tell him they are a bunch of numptys.

Anyone reading this little exchange should see it for what it is. I bring independent science from the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO), Australia's national science agency, saying exactly the opposit of what he and Ladreth is banging on about. He doesn't address or read the article or the comments and just calls me a numpty and pumps out the same garbage that was just proven to be incorrect.

What a fool you are mate. An A Grade, top of the line, fool.

Originally Posted by pseudolus

What a fool you are mate. An A Grade, top of the line, fool.

Love the smell of liberals heads exploding in the morning, evening - any time of day!

Originally Posted by S Landreth

Plants cannot live on CO2 alone

True , luckily nature has a mechanism whereby nutrients are washed from the hills and placed evenly over the arable land .
The method ?
You guessed , via river floods,
you see it floods over the area around it , which is called a flood plain, and works it's magic.

Originally Posted by Rainfall

"The Danube broke the previous record set more than 500 years ago". It's 12.8 metres from the bottom of the river, and this building, naturally, is not located in the river.

haha
since when were water levels ever measured from the bottom of a river ?
If there is such a thing.....

^ You focus blindly on CO2 while ignoring the many other factors that make up the complex system that drives our environment.

Factor in the variables below and even a simpleton like you should recognize that Global Warming and Climate Change are not good for agriculture-
Mean temperature

Average temperatures are expected to increase across the globe in the coming decades. In mid to high latitudes increasing average temperatures can have a positive impact on crop production, but in seasonally arid and tropical regions the impact is likely to be detrimental.
Mean precipitation

On average an increase in global precipitation is expected, but the regional patterns of rainfall will vary: some areas will have more rainfall, while others have less. There are high levels of uncertainty about how the pattern of precipitation will change, with little confidence in model projections on a regional scale. Areas that are highly dependant on seasonal rainfall, and those that are highly dependant on rain-fed agriculture for food security, are particularly vulnerable.
Extreme events

Recurrent extreme weather events such as droughts, floods and tropical cyclones worsen livelihoods and undermine the capacity of communities to adapt to even moderate shock. This results in a vicious circle that leads to greater poverty and hunger. The impacts on food production of extreme events, such as drought, may cancel out the benefits of the increased temperature and growing season observed in mid to high latitudes.

Carbon dioxide fertilisation

Carbon dioxide (CO2) concentrations are known to be increasing. However, the effect of CO2 fertilisation on crop growth is highly uncertain. In particular, there is
a severe lack of experimental work in the Tropics exploring this issue. There is some evidence that although CO2 fertilisation has a positive effect on the yield of certain crops, there may also be a detrimental impact on yield quality.
Drought

Meteorological drought (the result of a period of low rainfall) is projected to increase in intensity, frequency and duration. Drought results in agricultural losses, reductions in water quality and availability, and is a major driver of global food insecurity. Droughts are especially devastating in arid and semi-arid areas, reducing the quality and productivity of crop yields and livestock. Seven hundred million people suffering from hunger already live in semi-arid and arid zones.
Heatwaves

In all regions, one in 20-year extreme temperature events are projected to be hotter. Events that are considered extreme today will be more common in the future. Changes in temperature extremes even for short periods can be critical, especially if they coincide with key stages of crop development.
Heavy rainfall and flooding

While uncertain, it appears that there will be more heavy rainfall events as the climate warms. Heavy rainfall leading to flooding can destroy entire crops over wide areas and devastate food stores, assets (such as farming equipment) and agricultural land (due to sedimentation).
Melting glaciers

Melting glaciers initially increase the amount of water flowing in river systems and enhance the seasonal pattern of flow. Ultimately, however, the loss of glaciers would cause water availability to become more variable year on year as it will depend on seasonal snow and rainfall, instead of the steady release of stored water from the glacier irrespective of that year's precipitation.
Tropical storms

For many regions in the Tropics, a large portion of the annual rain comes from tropical cyclones. However, tropical cyclones also have the potential to devastate a region, causing loss of life and widespread destruction to agricultural crops and lands, infrastructure and livelihoods. Some studies suggest tropical cyclones may become more intense in the future with stronger winds and heavier precipitation. But there is limited consensus among climate models on the regional variation in tropical cyclone frequency.
Sea-level rise

Increases in mean sea-level threaten to inundate agricultural lands and salinise groundwater in the coming decades and centuries. Sea-level rise will also increase the impact of storm surges which can cause great devastation.
Changes in health and nutrition

Climate change has the potential to affect different diseases, including respiratory illness and diarrhoea. Disease results in a reduced ability to absorb nutrients from food and increases the nutritional requirements of people who are ill. Poor health in a community also leads to a loss of labour productivity.

Originally Posted by TonyBKK

You focus blindly on CO2 while ignoring the many other factors that make up the complex system that drives our environment.

oh the irony ...
you are finally coming around to our way of thinking

Originally Posted by TonyBKK

^ You focus blindly on CO2 while ignoring the many other factors that make up the complex system that drives our environment.

Oh, like you mean that burning sphere in the sky?

Get a clue...

Originally Posted by blue

Originally Posted by TonyBKK

You focus blindly on CO2 while ignoring the many other factors that make up the complex system that drives our environment.

oh the irony ...
you are finally coming around to our way of thinking

Originally Posted by Boon Mee

Originally Posted by TonyBKK

^ You focus blindly on CO2 while ignoring the many other factors that make up the complex system that drives our environment.

Oh, like you mean that burning sphere in the sky?

Get a clue...

Just complete balls isn't it chaps. They start one line of argument, get proven wrong, try the old "Oh but you know nothing" routine with a few insults chucked into the mix and get sent packing with facts as opposed to rhetoric and Goreicle posters. Then they get desperate and stick up a load of guff completely ignoring the point that they were previously making.


What they also do not see is that, if one could be arsed, each and every point that trollbkk makes can and has been individually shown to be a load of guff. He would then come back with "Look at the whole picture"

Well here is a picture Trollbkk



When you can be bothered to debate, come back. If all you will do is post gore crap, then on your (16 times greater polluting than a car) Bike.

Originally Posted by pseudolus

Hell, you might as well raise the white flag now and just admit that you are clutching at straws.

I see you addressed one portion of my post but skipped the main point/question. Why’s that?

Originally Posted by S Landreth

But I see you’ve come along far enough now to believe (some) peer reviewed studies. Good for you. But why celebrate only one and not the big picture and the overwhelming evidence that climate change is man made?

I will not hold my breath for your answer. I know the answer already. Hypocrisy

and remember

^ which part?

I see you refused to read the CSIRO report and instead decided to chuck up some of your hear say "evidence" instead.

Well done.

I have yet to read one argument on this thread or linked from this thread that refutes global warming and the anthropegenic cause of its acceleration.

Lots of noise but little substance.

Wading through the repeated unfounded and unteneable denial claims is getting boring.