Don't tell trees that Global Climate Change is a Myth!

Recent studies show that trees have a relatively small buffer to protect them from water stress. According to the research they've done, the increase in temperatures worldwide have put as much as 70 percent of our planet's trees in danger. There are other factors as well including urban creep, pollution, drought (of course), but I was told that temp is the big one because it is not localized and is effecting botanical life everywhere.

There's a ton we still do not know yet and many, many factors involved. We haven't had one of these threads in a little while and I thought his analysis was pretty interesting without being alarmist. So, I thought I would parse it out. Give it a listen.

http://voicerussia.com/radio_broadcast/72430379/96497544.html

Here's a print version of the story though with less info.

http://www.sciencenews.org/view/generic/id/346630/description/Trees_worldwide_a_sip_away_from_dehydration

Bah....first a liberal, then a mouth piece for communist propaganda, now an environmental fear monger.

The trees hate our freedom!

The trees hate our freedom!

They're just ticked because we switched from burning wood to oil.

My area was switched to the next planting zone to the south several years ago in response to how plants have fared in recent years. But that is obviously due to the well-known liberal bias of the landscaping and nursery industries.

Recent studies are also showing a strong correlation between temp change and wildfires. The drier trees have less ability to fight off or are more susceptible.

The four studies he sites in my report really paint a powerful picture and even if it is cyclical which doesn't seem to be the case, we are apparently getting close to a dangerous tipping point.

people usually look at me funny when I talk to trees

is this a don't ask-don't tell thing?

Eventually the trees will fight back.

So we make a forest full of these:

http://phys.org/news/2011-03-faux-trees-co2-o2.html

Science can solve everything

Think of it this way. The trees are rightly protesting unfair, unsafe working conditions. They're gonna form a union and shut this whole thing down!

As always, blame the union.

So we make a forest full of these:

http://phys.org/news/2011-03-faux-trees-co2-o2.html

Science can solve everything

Classic! Instead of restraining our tree consumption, we'll spend billions to replace that which would have the job for FREE!

Classic! Instead of restraining our tree consumption, we'll spend billions to replace that which would have the job for FREE!

Free? Are you kidding me? Think of how much we spend on "green energy" and fighting fires to save the trees. Leaf raking, allergy medicine, lighting magnets, etc. At least those scientific trees don't kill people like our current "friendly environmental" trees.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/crime-scene/post/man-dies-after-tree-branch-falls-on-him-in-mount-pleasant/2011/10/20/gIQACgzG0L_blog.html

Free? Are you kidding me? Think of how much we spend on "green energy" and fighting fires to save the trees. Leaf raking, allergy medicine, lighting magnets, etc. At least those scientific trees don't kill people like our current "friendly environmental" trees.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/crime-scene/post/man-dies-after-tree-branch-falls-on-him-in-mount-pleasant/2011/10/20/gIQACgzG0L_blog.html

LoL! Because we couldn't possibly use LESS trees! And God knows people cannot possibly exist without allergy pills and leaf raking! The thing you're blind to is that there would need to be a whole industry built just to produce the trees to replace that which is natural.

LoL! Because we couldn't possibly use LESS trees! And God knows people cannot possibly exist without allergy pills and leaf raking! The thing you're blind to is that there would need to be a whole industry built just to produce the trees to replace that which is natural.

Sounds like a cure for the global employment crisis. You are spot on in your agreement that this is a great idea! I agree that less trees would be a good thing. I imagine that with a bit or research we could refine the process to work better then nature.

Sounds like a cure for the global employment crisis. You are spot on in your agreement that this is a great idea! I agree that less trees would be a good thing. I imagine that with a bit or research we could refine the process to work better then nature.

Seriously, you're just trolling now right?

Seriously, you're just trolling now right?

What do you mean? I thought you were agreeing with me.

a completely inappropriate and silly pun war based on this report between me and a well-known ESer can be found on this Facebook thread.

http://www.facebook.com/?ref=tn_tnmn#!/andrew.hiller.90/posts/400330570036419?comment_id=3416006&notif_t=share_comment

I always imagine that the reason that we (including me) joke about issues like this is that we don't have a ready solution. If trees are really feeling the pinch whether that's from natural or man made sources what can we really do about it? In a part of the country that's plagued by severe droughts here or in India can we afford to irrigate our Forests? If we do nothing and see some of the dying off periods that we already are... how long until replacement trees can replenish or worse, what happens to the food chain if we lose vast areas of forest?

We have some answers, but not many... so easier to joke.

Sounds like a cure for the global employment crisis. You are spot on in your agreement that this is a great idea! I agree that less trees would be a good thing. I imagine that with a bit or research we could refine the process to work better then nature.

This is a fantastic idea. The 'trees' could capture rainwater and provide drinking stations. And they could light up in different colors, unlike the monotonous green that natural trees are limited to.

a completely inappropriate and silly pun war based on this report between me and a well-known ESer can be found on this Facebook thread.

http://www.facebook.com/?ref=tn_tnmn#!/andrew.hiller.90/posts/400330570036419?comment_id=3416006&notif_t=share_comment

That's pretty funny.

What ever happened to Global Warming? Why is it called Global Climate change instead these days?

how long until replacement trees can replenish or worse, what happens to the food chain if we lose vast areas of forest?

We have some answers, but not many... so easier to joke.

We can generate more food than natures natural food chain, food is not the real issue

oddly enough fossil fuel use enabled reforestation here

humans are a pestilence,but some are cute

What ever happened to Global Warming? Why is it called Global Climate change instead these days?

My first instinct is to say that the term "global warming" has become loaded with negative meanings like "liberal" and you are seeing a switch in terms similar to the shift to "progressive". But I think a better explanation is that what we are seeing is more complex than just the planet warming, we are seeing changes in the frequency and severity of storms, precipitation distribution, etc (assuming that you believe these changes are actually occurring). So "climate change" more accurately captures the full scope of what is happening.

http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/basics/

I thought it was to quell the laughter at GW meetings getting snowed in :pfft: