A disgusting vat of filth that no self-respecting intelligent person would wade into.

[Cletus Miller]

Originally posted by Spanky
We just had couple of cold nights here in California that were below freezing and it has wiped out a lot of the citrus crop and artichoke crop. They were the coldest nights in twenty years. So if the chart just goes by the lowest temperature California should be moving to the colder section this year.

They don't re-do the map every year.

If the planet is getting warmer and the polar caps and Greenland are melting how come the oceans are not rising? As far as I know they haven't even risen a millimeter. Has anyone heard different? That the oceans have actually risen? And if not then how could the polar caps be melting?

Perhaps: Cold water is denser (down to, what, one degree celsius?) than warm. Ice melt is cold and will chill surrounding water, ergo, no greater volume with somewhat more water. Also, more water equals more weight which could compress the (relatively thin) crust under the oceans. Even a slight subsidence of the ocean floor would create a great deal extra volume for the oceans.

There is clear, photographic evidence of shrinking ice caps and glaciers around the world, so the ice must be going someplace. Unless someone is making money by hiding it off balance sheet, there must be greater water volume on the oceans. Probably less than .01%, but more nonetheless.

[notcasesensitive]

Originally posted by Cletus Miller
Obviously, a 16 year period doesn't tell us anything about climate change. But, I think that anything generated to show the average temperature (even in 100+ year periods) for the past 100,000 years is going to be conjecture and, ultimately, crap as far as showing trends and that the earth is 2 degrees warmer than long term average. Sure, if all the polar ice melts, science can demonstrate that that hasn't happened since whenever, but trend lines and ranges of normal cliamte fluctuation? I think that's going to take thousands of years to clearly establish.

And I actually think that human activity has had an impact on the environment and that the results are not going to be something that is postive for our way of life.

The giant meteor that is going to hit one day and wipe out life on earth as we know it* won't care whether the earth has warmed a few degrees. More palm trees to wipe out.

Have we learned nothing about disasters from the dinosaurs? Where are we in the development of our meteor-preparedness plan?



*But probably not kill off the cock-a-roaches. Pesky buggers!

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Spanky
We just had couple of cold nights here in California that were below freezing and it has wiped out a lot of the citrus crop and artichoke crop. They were the coldest nights in twenty years. So if the chart just goes by the lowest temperature California should be moving to the colder section this year.

Scientists suggest that global warming will make weather patterns more volatile. So more cold snaps of that sort could be expected.

If the planet is getting warmer and the polar caps and Greenland are melting how come the oceans are not rising? As far as I know they haven't even risen a millimeter. Has anyone heard different? That the oceans have actually risen? And if not then how could the polar caps be melting?

The oceans are rising, and the polar caps are melting. See, e.g., the story of the starving polar bears.

[Cletus Miller]

Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
Some freak could model it using data pulld from the ice caps, which I understand are good records of climate during varying periods going back thousands of years. If his math makes sense, hey, I'm in. Otherwise, going ballistic over global warming sounds a lot like the argument some philosopher gave for buying organized religion - "You've got everything to gain and nothing to lose." I think that's an intellectually vacant argument, even if has an admitted logical hook to it.

But (a) global climate isn't just the ice caps and (b) with less than 200 years of reliable weather data and less than 1000 years of decent widespread records to extrapolate from, it isn't possible to be certain how weather near the poles and at high altitude is related to weather on the other 75%+ of the planet.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Cletus Miller
So, if the folks who put the map together did some analysis beyond just looking at temperature records, the map should represent the expectation for "average minimum temperature" (whatever that is precisely) for the next 20-30 years. If not, then it would seem that the Dept of Agriculture (or whoever) has failed the American arborist.

I suspect they have discovered over time that the best guide to the next several years is the last several years.

[Cletus Miller]

Originally posted by notcasesensitive
Have we learned nothing about disasters from the dinosaurs? Where are we in the development of our meteor-preparedness plan?

Oh, come on, haven't you seen Armageddon. We've got that all figured out. Next you'll be worrying about a volcano at the Beverly Center.

Besides, we have one big advantage over the dinosaurs--we're (mostly) not cold blooded.

[Spanky]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop

The oceans are rising,

Where did you get that from?

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
I'm sure you can select time periods to make whatever case you want. I'll point out again, though, that this data was meant to be used in planting trees.

you posted some charts apparently w/o any knowledge of what they mean. do you not realize that you have no credibility to talk about it, or do you not care?

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
you posted some charts apparently w/o any knowledge of what they mean. do you not realize that you have no credibility to talk about it, or do you not care?

I knew what they meant. You are too stupid to read plain English, or you just enjoy being difficult. Or both.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally posted by sgtclub
This is not happening over night. The predictions I have seen are a couple of degress over the next 100 years. I don't see the costs of change as being dramatic.

That depends on whether you rely on tapping maple trees to pay the bills. You see, that little move from Zone 5 to Zone 6 in Western Massachusetts is the move that takes you out of prime Maple Syrup country.

On the other hand, the farmers up in Quebec say the syruping range is moving north.

Of course, if we wait a few years, they can all plant Pecans. But, you know, the crop doesn't come in for a bit.

There are some significant dislocations that come with even modest climate change. Whether it's the Colorado River drying up from heavier use or a bit of warming causing a few more hurricanes.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Spanky
Where did you get that from?

All over the place. Here, for example:

• 
  Glaciers and ice sheets on opposite ends of the Earth are melting faster than previously thought and could cause sea levels around the world to rise as much as three feet by the end of this century and 13 to 20 feet in coming centuries, scientists are reporting today.
  
  If the researchers' estimates are correct, a rise in ocean waters projected by the new studies not only would drown many of the low-lying inhabited atolls and islands that are already endangered by rising ocean waters, it also would threaten coastal cities and harbors on every continent.
  
  Scientists have been warning for decades that greenhouse gases from autos and industry are warming the planet and raising the seas, but the studies appearing today in the journal Science are the first to suggest that sea levels could climb as high as 20 feet as a result of global warming.

If you were to spend three seconds on Google, you could find lots of stories of this sort.

[Replaced_Texan]

Originally posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy
That depends on whether you rely on tapping maple trees to pay the bills. You see, that little move from Zone 5 to Zone 6 in Western Massachusetts is the move that takes you out of prime Maple Syrup country.

On the other hand, the farmers up in Quebec say the syruping range is moving north.

Of course, if we wait a few years, they can all plant Pecans. But, you know, the crop doesn't come in for a bit.

There are some significant dislocations that come with even modest climate change. Whether it's the Colorado River drying up from heavier use or a bit of warming causing a few more hurricanes.

FWIW, my parents have property that used to be able to grow most zone 8 plants and trees. In the last five years or so, they've resigned themselves to the fact that they're zone 9 now. Houston has always been zone 9, so this isn't likely to have much of an impact on me.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
I knew what they meant.

yes. for people who took Freshman science summary classes, you understand. I bet you got like a 3.5?

do something useful- go find a study that speculates temperature have risen 10 degrees in the last 15 years. or is your whole point just that you found a pretty chart that simplistically makes some dogma point?

[Penske_Account]

Hillary is hosting a live webchat right this minute via her interwebsite

I was thinking of asking her how she reconciles her campaign for president with her previous promise to the voters of New York to serve a full term,,,,

[Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)]

Originally posted by Replaced_Texan
Houston has always been zone 9, so this isn't likely to have much of an impact on me.

Give it a few years, and you'll be growing pineapple and macadamia nuts.

ETA: Or farming shrimp.