I Am Getting So Sick of This, Part 2

As Our Planet Gets Greener, Plants Are Slowing Global Warming

Duh!

Boston University via phys.org / Jan 21, 2020

Chi Chen, a Boston University graduate researcher, and Ranga Myneni, a BU College of Arts & Sciences professor of earth and environment, released a new paper that reveals how humans are helping to increase the Earth’s plant and tree cover, which absorbs carbon from the atmosphere and cools our planet. The boom of vegetation, fueled by greenhouse gas emissions, could be skewing our perception of how fast we’re warming the planet.

The science . . . was settled . . . ?

Taking a closer look at 250 scientific studies, land-monitoring satellite data, climate and environmental models, and field observations, a team of Boston University researchers and international collaborators have

. . . has . . .

illuminated several causes and consequences of a global increase in vegetation growth, an effect called greening.

In a new study, published in Nature Reviews Earth & Environment, the researchers report that climate-altering carbon emissions and intensive land use have inadvertently

“inadvertently” is an awful, un-scientific word, implying intent. “Unexpectedly” would be a large impovement . . . but that would reveal their agenda, and their excuse for their misleading predictions.

greened half of the Earth’s vegetated lands. And while that sounds like it may be a good thing, this phenomenal rate of greening, together with global warming, sea-level rise, and sea-ice decline, represents highly credible evidence that human industry and activity is dramatically impacting

. . . . “impacting” in a good way, or a bad way?

An “impact” can be good or bad, can it not?

Why do we only hear of adverse impacts — unless their opposites are buried (and dismissed)?

the Earth’s climate, say the study’s first authors, Shilong Piao and Xuhui Wang of Peking University.

Green leaves convert sunlight to sugars while replacing carbon dioxide in the air with water vapor, which cools the Earth’s surface. The reasons for greening vary around the world, but often involve intensive use of land for farming, large-scale planting of trees, a warmer and wetter climate in northern regions, natural reforestation of abandoned lands, and recovery from past disturbances.

. . . Excellent outcomes for humans, all!

And the chief cause of global greening we’re experiencing? It seems to be that rising carbon dioxide emissions are providing more and more fertilizer for plants, the researchers say.

. . . Hooray!

As a result, the boom of global greening since the early 1980s may have slowed the rate of global warming, the researchers say, possibly by as much as 0.2 to 0.25 degrees Celsius.

[Greta frowns]

Wasn’t that amount supposed to trigger doomsday scenarios?

“It is ironic that the very same carbon emissions responsible for harmful changes to climate are also fertilizing plant growth, which in turn is somewhat moderating global warming,” says study coauthor Dr. Jarle Bjerke of the Norwegian Institute for Nature Research.

… What do you mean “ironic”? Wasn’t that predicted? By everyone? Literally, everyone?

Boston University researchers previously discovered that, based on near-daily NASA and NOAA satellite imaging observations since the early 1980s, vast expanses of the Earth’s vegetated lands from the Arctic to the temperate latitudes have gotten markedly more green.

Hooray!

“Notably, the NASA [satellite data] observed pronounced greening during the 21st century in the world’s most populous and still-developing countries, China and India,” says Ranga Myneni, the new study’s senior author.

Hooray!

Even regions far, far removed from human reach have not escaped the global warming and greening trends. “Svalbard in the high-arctic, for example, has seen a 30 percent increase in greenness [in addition to] an increase in [summer temperatures] from 2.9 to 4.7 degrees Celcius between 1986 and 2015,” says study coauthor Rama Nemani of NASA’s Ames Research Center.

Hooray!

“Plants are actively defending against the dangers of carbon pollution by not only sequestering carbon on land but also by wetting the atmosphere”

Hold on, there, pardner. I thought that we’ve been told that water vapor is a far, far — far — more effective greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide!

“through transpiration of ground water and evaporation of precipitation intercepted by their bodies,” says study coauthor Philippe Ciais, of the Laboratory of Climate and Environmental Sciences, Gif-sur-Yvette, France.

Oh, France. That explains it.

“Stopping deforestation and sustainable, ecologically sensible afforestation could be one of the simplest and cost-effective, though not sufficient, defenses against climate change,” he adds.

What about planting more crops?

It is not easy to accurately estimate the cooling benefit from global greening

— and you can take this to the bank from the “the science is settled” crowd” —

because of the complex interconnected nature of the climate system, the researchers say.

. . . Which has been settled . . .

“This unintended benefit

Again, it is not unintended, it is — (to be charitable) — “unforeseen.”

Now, the benefit having been seen, here comes the non sequitur:

of global greening, and its potential transitory nature, suggests how much more daunting, and urgent, is the stated goal of keeping global warming to below 1.5 to 2 degrees Celsius

Why? If this “unintended benefit” is a benefit . . . why stop it?


Occhh, I Am Getting So Sick of This

Global Science Team on Red Alert as Arctic Lands Grow Greener
University of Edinburgh via phys.org / Jan. 31, 2020

I’ll certainly keep my eyes out for this

    “Red Alert”

to make its appearance in the following article!

(Which I quote in full, by the way.)

Keep your eyes peeled for that red alert.

New research techniques are being adopted by scientists tackling the most visible impact of climate change — the so-called greening of Arctic regions.

And here is the photo they supply:

If you’re still not convinced about all the greening yet, just take a trip to the Arctic regions to look for that greening. Or continue to read their Arcticle:

The latest drone and satellite technology is helping an international team of researchers to better understand how the vast, treeless regions called the tundra is becoming greener.

As Arctic summer temperatures warm, plants are responding.

…summer warming? That is SHOCKER #1!

Snow is melting earlier and plants are coming into leaf sooner in spring. Tundra vegetation is spreading into new areas and where plants were already growing, they are now growing taller.

Understanding how data captured from the air compare with observations made on the ground will help to build the clearest picture yet of how the northern regions of Europe, Asia and North America are changing as the temperature rises.

By saying “as the temperature rises” they are conflating spring and summer with “Global Warming.”

But this is, in their methodology, merely an accident, and the reader’s own fault for misunderstanding.

Now a team of 40 scientists from 36 institutions, led by two National Geographic Explorers

Who never toe the company line

have revealed that the causes of this greening process are more complex — and variable — than was previously thought.

Translation: “The science was not settled.”

Researchers from Europe and North America are finding that the Arctic greening observed from space is caused by more than just the responses of tundra plants to warming on the ground. Satellites are also capturing other changes including differences in the timing of snowmelt and the wetness of landscapes.

So: seasonality and moisture on the ground were never before factors in Global Warming data?

OK. Excellent model you used, there …

Lead author Dr. Isla Myers-Smith, of the University of Edinburgh’s School of GeoSciences, said: “New technologies including sensors on drones,

[so expensive]

“planes and satellites,”

[extremely expensive]

“are enabling scientists to track emerging patterns of greening found within satellite pixels that cover the size of football fields.”

Very precise and scientific.

Yet we were told that having one temperature readout per half-a-continent, like in Siberia, and in the Sahara, few in the Arctic and and none in the ocean, was sufficient to establish a Global Temperature(tm) for all the years under review.

Professor Scott Goetz of the School of Informatics,

Infomatics?

Computing and Cyber Systems at Northern Arizona University, says this research is vital for our understanding of global climate change.

Of course he would.

Tundra plants act as a barrier between the warming atmosphere and huge stocks of carbon stored in frozen ground.

Did the models never assume that?

Changes in vegetation alter the balance between the amount of carbon captured and its release into the atmosphere.

Duh! Duh! DUH!! DUH!!

Small variations could significantly impact efforts to keep warming below 1.5 degrees centigrade — a key target of the Paris Agreement. The study will help scientists to figure out which factors will speed up or slow down warming.

Co-lead author Dr. Jeffrey Kerby, who was a Neukom Fellow at Dartmouth College while conducting the research,

but presumably is no longer . . .

said: “Besides collecting new imagery, advances in how we process and analyse these data — even imagery that is decades old —

when the science was settled?

are revolutionising how we understand the past, present, and future of the Arctic.”

Alex Moen, Vice President of Explorer Programs at the National Geographic Society, said: “We look forward to the impact that this work will have on our collective understanding of the Arctic for generations to come.”

Does Alex Moen intend to travel through time, if he is looking forward to that?

Seems more realistic than the climate stuff he is working on.

Huh: No “Red Alert” in the article.

But maybe, metaphorically, there was one.


For You Poetry Fans

Complete the quatrain or whatever it’s called:

The saddest words
Of tongue or pen
Are these few: …


A Reminder: All Our Problems and Struggles Are Nothing

Howard Brodie was a hell of an artist:

Source: Library of Congress

In the air:


Source

On Guadalcanal:


Source

.

And into Germany:


Source

Anti-Monkey vs. Anti-Government?? It’s a Wash

“Visit Nepal”‘s Yeti: How Mythical Creature Divided Himalayan Nation
BBC | 28 January 2020 | Kamal Pariyar

A row over the yeti has pitted experts against officials — and, for once, it is not about whether or not the mythical creature actually exists.

Instead, it is how the creature looks.

This is not right. The government can’t just do as it wants,” passer-by Reshma Shrestha says, shaking her head in front of the 7ft (2.1m) tall statue at the centre of a row.

“If you did not tell me, I would not have known that it was a yeti.”

‘It’s a sumo wrestler’

The arrival of the first of more than 100 statues emblazoned with the words “Visit Nepal” was supposed to be the start of a year-long celebration of what the small Himalayan nation had to offer to the outside world.

They will soon be popping up across the country — at popular tourist attractions, trade centres, airports and some of the base camps in the Himalayas — as well as travelling further afield to act as mascots in cities around the world.

But the launch of the tourism drive, which aims to bring two million tourists to the region, has been somewhat overshadowed by the row over the statues’ appearance.

In folk tales, the yeti has been described as a big monkey-like creature,” Ram Kumar Pandey tells the BBC. “However, the recent logo depicts it as a sumo wrestler. This does not at all match with the mythical character that has been described in many folk tales.”

And Pandey should know: the author of several books on the subject, his objections are supported by other Nepalese cultural historians.

From the “I Can’t Believe It’s Not Buddha” department:

If they’re so keen to boost tourism, how about a new slogan: “Have Retired Lame Clerks From Jersey Step Over Your Frozen Corpse On Everest”?


Straight Line of the Day: As Windbag Noted, Democrats Are Promising “Free Pony Rides for Transgendered Puppies.” Other Promises…

Straight Line of the Day: As Windbag Noted, Democrats Are Promising “Free Pony Rides for Transgendered Puppies.” Other Promises…


QOTW: Least unfavorite Democrat.

Or perhaps most favorite? Who am I to judge? But let us judge away any way so… away!

For the 2020 election who do you see as the least objectionable Democrat candidate? I can honestly say it may be a hard choice but some times you got to make the hard choices, even if you wish you didn’t have to.

So here goes nothing.

I’m going with…

Shoot. Damn me. This is tougher than I thought it would be.

Ahhh…

Marianne Williamson. She’s still in, right? I may have lost track. What? She’s out? Damn.

Okay, okay, okay…

I guess it has to be Tulsi Gabbard. Still a wackadoodle lefty but not 100% gone. Plus you got to give props to someone willing to diss Hillary. I will mourn her suicide.

So, that’s me. How about all of you?