Because not all plants are alike. This really isn't difficult. So you think greenhouses are like the real world? Really? Most deniers are just kind of lacking in common sesne, which is why they fail so consistently at understanding the real world.
If you thought poison ivy is much worse now than it was when you were young, you're right. And that's because of the CO2. https://grist.org/climate/climate-change-is-making-poison-ivy-stronger-and-itchier/ Vines love the CO2 as well, allowing them to strangle forests more effectively https://www.spokesman.com/stories/2006/jul/16/vines-grow-strong-on-carbon-dioxide-diet/ And yes, the greeni9ng stopped in the 1990s. I understand that deniers are upset about losing another dumb talking point, but that doesn't change the facts. https://www.planetizen.com/news/2019/08/105908-earths-vegetation-stopped-expanding-20-years-ago
<yawn> And they are not divided, taxonomically, into pest plants that thrive on CO2 and beneficial plants that don't. No. They are far more favorable to plant growth. Which is kinda the point. Duh. If there are two things anti-fossil-fuel hysteria mongers cannot accuse anyone else of, they are lack of common sense and consistently failing at understanding the real world.
Increased CO2 helps all plants via the process of photosynthesis. That’s why it’s ised in greenhouses. Common sense and the consensus of economic analyses show that global warming is beneficial. Increased CO2 is one of the reasons.
Ah yes, the ones that agreed with me. I suppose I should apologize for not thanking you for that. Here's a clue. A 2016 study that says earth has greened over the past 35 years does not contradict the fact that the greening stopped in the 1990s. I get it, deniers. You were really attached to that dumb cult talking point. Its loss devastates you. That means you're not going to pay any attention to evidence. You're all too emotionally invested in being wrong to stop being wrong. In other words, the usual.
You're not keeping up. Net Benefit: Rising CO2 Improves Essential Crop Yields 3% Per Year – Critical to Feeding The World By Kenneth Richard on 12. September 2022 The elevated CO2 fertilization effect is driving global greening trends, pushing back deserts, enhancing photosynthesis by 30 to 50%, improving water use efficiency, and boosting crop yields by about 3% every year since 1961. Recently atmospheric CO2 has been rising at a rate of about 3 ppm per year. While activists claim this is an […] Posted in CO2 Greens the Earth, Warming/CO2 Benefiting Earth | 15 Responses Higher CO2 Concentrations Mean Better Plant Water Use, Enhanced Photosynthesis, Expanding Sahel By P Gosselin on 19. March 2022 William Astley’s comment on CO2 and photosynthesis has been upgraded to a post (subheadings added). Rich green North German park. Photo by P. Gosselin Higher CO2 concentrations offer even more advantages By William Astley Better water use by plants In addition to increasing crop yields, increased CO2 enables plants to live in regions were there […] Posted in CO2 Greens the Earth | 6 Responses Fantastic Findings: German Study Shows Added CO2 Has Led To 14% More Vegetation Over Past 100 Years! By P Gosselin on 7. May 2021 Almost everyone with even just a fraction of a science education knows Co2 is fertilizer to vegetation and that the added 100 or so ppm in our atmosphere over the past decades have been beneficial to plant growth and thus led to more greening of the continents. Yet, some alarmists still sniff at this fact, […]
Once again you expect people to overlook this YOU wrote back in post 236 of the previous thread page: then you destroy you own claim so effortlessly that I have to give you kudos for that: Bwahahahahahahahaha!!! You posted NO facts to support that assertion and that a rising promotes greening from increased yields to more efficient use of water to better plant health after all CO2 is part of the PHOTOSYNTHESIS process when you have more of it there is an increase in plant growth behind it which is well known. Actually, the NASA report doesn't agree with you at all: "From a quarter to half of Earth’s vegetated lands has shown significant greening over the last 35 years largely due to rising levels of atmospheric carbon dioxide, according to a new study published in the journal Nature Climate Change on April 25." Largely due to CO2 rising levels which means it has been greening since the 1880's when CO2 started going up slowly at first now accelerating in the last 40 years because it is now around the 430 ppm up 150 ppm increase from 280 ppm. They make no distinction of plants just this phrase "...Vegetated lands has shown significant greening...." Now for the "coup de grace" The article was published in 2016 subtract 35 years goes back to 1981 this your embarrassing statement that utterly destroyed you: Mamooth wrote this, "CO2-induced greening ended in the 1990s. More CO2 now just mainly helps weeds, choking vines and poison ivy grow better, which is a net negative for humanity." NASA article says in year 2016: This includes the entire 1990's as 1981+35 years is 2016. You should stop digging now as you made a fool of yourself here.
That is not a fact. It is a false and unsupported claim that contradicts the known facts of plant biology. <yawn> That sort of puerile rant is not a substitute for the missing factual and logical evidence for your false claims, sorry.
More evidence in support of the Winter Gatekeeper. Winter Gatekeeper Hypothesis: New support for the effect of solar activity on lower atmospheric circulation Posted on October 20, 2022 by curryja | 7 comments by Javier Vinós A recent paper by Svetlana Veretenenko provides important support for the effect of solar activity on the lower atmospheric circulation through its effect on the polar vortex. Veretenenko’s paper is an important step in demonstrating the solar effect on global atmospheric circulation, an important part of the Winter Gatekeeper Hypothesis. Continue reading →
Of note: Meridional Transport, the most fundamental climate variable Andy May By Andy May “The atmospheric heat transport on Earth from the Equator to the poles is largely carried out by the mid-latitude storms. However, there is no satisfactory theory to…
Book Review: Climate of the Past, Present and Future — A Scientific Debate Kip Hansen “What wasn’t clear at all was the evidence that the carbon dioxide was causing the warming. Clearly the warming had started long before the fast increase in carbon dioxide.”. . . .
New Study: Shortwave Climate Forcing Increased From 2001-2018, Explaining The Warming By Kenneth Richard on 15. December 2022 Share this... Yet another observational study determines changes in Earth’s reflectiveness, or planetary albedo, may be primarily responsible for 21st century climate forcing. Earth’s radiation budget at the top of atmosphere (TOA) is predominantly controlled by internal changes in cloud cover. A declining albedo – linked to declining cloud cover – corresponds to an increase in the shortwave radiation absorbed by the Earth and thus a positive climate forcing. More specifically, a change in Earth’s albedo of just -0.01 corresponds to an increase of +3.4 W/m² in absorbed solar radiation (Wielicki et al., 2005). Thus, even tiny variations in the planetary albedo are sufficient to trigger glaciations and deglaciations (Budyko, 1969). A new study indicates the planetary albedo declined at a rate of -0.002 per decade from 2001-2018, equivalent to approximately +0.7 W/m² per decade of shortwave climate forcing. When we consider it allegedly takes 10 years and 22 ppm of CO2 increases to produce a total surface forcing of +0.2 W/m² per decade, it is obvious that the increase in absorbed solar radiation, modulated by changes in cloud albedo, has been the dominant forcing factor driving warming in recent decades. Image Source: Lv et al., 2022
The Sun-Climate Effect is starting to affect the public debate. The Climate Alarmist’s Greatest Fear Andy May Is it just me, or are the climate alarmists more unhinged than usual lately? Al Gore screaming about boiling oceans and rain bombs is just part of…
They are getting more desperate as the hypothesis of human CO2 emissions driving global warming continues to be disproven by global data time series.
There were financial timelines promised that these folks aren't meeting. Given who they made these promises to, likely they have good reason to be fearful. Hence the sudden thrashing that they are engaging in publicly.
Tom Nelson Interviews Javier Vinós Andy May Tom Nelson interviewed Dr. Javier Vinós on January 31, 2023, the interview can be seen here. Or click on the image below. Part of the interview was…
His full presentation is in the link I did a read over to see that this is one of the most important posts so far this year thus worth the time to read through it.
There have been some recently published papers on "potential explanations" for why the sudden dissipation of the last ice age occurred. One of those explanations is that periodically, the sun has a coronal episode that essentially burns off the outermost layer of the corona, and sends the outflow. This outflow is said to then overcome the magnetic bubble of the earth, and fries the atmosphere. The theory is that the ice caps didn't just melt off slowly, but almost instantaneously, and is an explanation for the catastrophic flood stories. There are others, sudden rapid heating caused by meteor hits around the ice sheets, etc. But what it suggests is that our climate is being effected externally by externalities far more greatly than anything terrestrial. As the citation that you provided explains, the theories behind the forcing processes simply doesn't explain enough of the historic evidence to lend it credible causation of the kinds of historic climate events our world has recorded happening to it. So, the next step, I suppose, is to spend the time to investigate what the other options could be. Every time I see the climate hustlers gather flying in on private aviation, I am galled at just how stupid they must believe the rest of the population is....
But is that happening now? I mean I am sure SOMEONE would have noticed if I mean this one is better than the idiot suggestion it is “magnetic pole reversal”
When forest is lost other plants take over the space, and a cycle is initiated by which another forest eventually grows.