Pay no attention to the plant growth on your monitor.
Clearly, crops will soon overwhelm the capacity of John Deere to harvest them, and millions upon millions will be left with nothing to eat but beetles and lizar…. OH NO!
Related: World Health Organization: Controlling the global obesity epidemic.
Those plants are gonna take over the world if we aren’t careful. Could be Day of the Triffids for real! What we need is more cows to eat all these carbon dioxide pumped up plants. Then we eat the cows.
The press release of the UC Davis paper appears designed to resemble a monkey wrench thrown into the spokes of the comprehensive work done on documenting accelerated plant growth at various levels of increased CO2. Without more information such as CO2 concentrations applied, duration, replication, available soil nitrate concentrations, etc the press release is meaningless. It would seem intuitive that when you eliminate the growth-limiting factor of CO2 concentrations you would encounter the next most limiting nutrient which, depending on the plant’s requirements and soil nutrient availability could be nitrate nitrogen.
The press release also glossed over the other well documented benefit of increased CO2, that being the ability of plants to grow in drier climates through reduced transpiration, IOW potentially reversing desertification (Potential future Sahara Forest?).
The experiment does look like the runner-up at a
regional science fair.
As for WHO – I thought that the big problem
was global hunger not obesity – has anyone told Bono?
Although the growth is impressive, I would like further information about the nutrient proportions in the grown plant.
E.G. Does the higher concentration CO2 give a uniform and proportional increase in the plant’s polysaccharides? Does the plant take up N, P & K in the same ratio from the soil/nutrient supply?
Well I expect to soon see global warming fanatics hyping the old 1962 movie “Day of the Triffids” where the earth is imperiled by plants , in support of global warming !
http://www.scifimoviepage.com/day_triffids.html
The faster plants grow the less nutrients are in them. It’s like the difference between hard grass and soft grass. Also why dryer areas grow higher protein wheat.
Is this the same as the frogs with more than the correct number of legs? THE RESEARCHERS WERE SPREADING A WORM THAT CAUSED THE CONDITION ! It was said to be caused by global warming.We dont hear about the condition any more.
Globesity or stupidity?
Tough call.
Syncro
Honey, we’re gonna need a bigger tractor . . .
But CO2 must be eliminated and plant growth curtailed. How else will the world’s population be reduced to 1 billion as some, including one National Post columnist, suggest. Would they be thinking Pol Pots method?
Ed P asks some good questions and John Chittick makes some very good comments. Wheat protein levels are set before the 6th leaf stage and proportional to the amount of rain received during the first 60 days of plant growth.
CO2 has become a political item and the snake oil salesmen are not interested in these questions or comments.
Speaking of CO2 in relationship to CO2 credits this video is very apt Sesame Street – Lefty sells “air” to Ernie http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7_TsPrlj7Zs
The Davis “study” – Michael Mann must have been involved in this one too..
I hope they do another plant growth study – 200 ppm versus 380 ppm.
200ppm 380ppm
All dead Better all around
That lizard paper which Kate links to is a good example of bad science. First, it is science by
press release. Second, there are no references – in particular no references to the climate model.
Third, there is no quantitative comparison
between the model predictions and the observations. Fourth, there is no consideration of factors other
than anthropogenic CO2 – and yet the effects of effluents from e.g. a growing Chinese chemical
industry do need examination – if the authors had cared about the quality of their “result”.
WHO = World Order. If the gument pays your hospital bills the gument sets the rules on how much and what you can eat or drink -or not!
We smokers warned the rest of you when the WHO came for us…first they came for the smokers…I was not a smoker so I said nothing (or encouraged the move!)…divide and conquer is old as the hills, yet citizens still fall for the old ruse when self interest is the decision making marker. Some German people, in 1939 Germany, owed Jewish businessmen money..kill the banker and the debt is gone!
When I was in school we analyzed actions in history with the following criteria: Immediate cause, underlying cause, action, results. The underlying cause of WWI was to disenfranchise the growing middle class threatening the power of ‘Captains and Kings’, the Immediate cause was the assassination of Archduke Ferdinand II of Austria (triggering the members of The Holy Roman Alliance, the Triple Alliance and the Quadruple Alliance to fire up the mechanisms of war), the action was war for 4 years, the result was the Bolshevik revolution, the rise of Hitler, the pacifier movement in the western world. All led directly to WWII…back to underlying cause of WWI.
Freedom is not free and once lost is almost impossible to regain. It took thousands of years for freedom loving people to acquire a nation of their own: United States of America. It is being unraveled in less than a decade and the freedom enjoying citizens have done the unthinkable: they have elected a human hater/freedom killer after only 200 years. We are at the crossroad again.
WarenZ
I wonder why they called him Lefty? Too funny…which brought this to mind.
http://www.peace.ca/kindergarten.htm
Syncro
So the crop yield increases by 50%, but the nutrient level may be 10% less. Ummmmmmm….seems to me that overall you would have a 40% increase in nutrient levels. If CO2 is so bad,why do commercial greenhouses pump it in to raise it to levels from 800-1000 ppm?
And where did they do this test? In a lab? Hydroponically? Under real world conditions? Or on a computer model(because we all know how reliable they are!!)?
” …Study documents widespread extinction of lizard populations due to climate change
International team of biologists, including Villanova University’s Dr. Aaron Bauer, find alarming pattern of population extinctions attributable to rising temperatures …”
The lizard study that Kate linked to (above) is yet another AGW funded crap-science , but it didn’t stop CBC’s Bob MacDonald (Quirks & Quarks) from have a breathless panting nitwit on his show today stating that all lizards were in imminent danger !
Notice who funded this “International team of Biologists” … most of whom are AGW proponents.
” … Funding for this study came from grants from the National Geographic Society, National Science Foundation, and a diversity of international funding bodies. …”
God, another hand-wringer. If I ever get carpal-tunnel I’m suing the Left.
You can make an impending disaster out of anything. For example, if everyone turned vegetarian, that would mean a lot more fiber in everyone’s diet…wouldn’t it.
And that would mean a much bigger demand for toilet paper – which, to the best of my knowledge, doesn’t get recycled anywhere….not even in those hot-spots of GREENERY: Calif. and Rosedale.
And that would mean cutting down massive amounts of forest to make arse-wipe for all those dirty arses…and more fuel consumed to carry the logs…and more trucks…and more mills…and more people working…and…
HEY! You heard it first right here folks: Canada’s Forest Industry supports Universal Vegitarianism!!!! I can see the headlines noe:
Loggers grinnin’ – while Greenies s***t themselves to death”
It seems to me that the researchers use a loose definition of extinct. They restricted the study to a specific species in a specific area and then assume that any reduction of numbers or disappearance as proof of extinction. Perhaps the “extinct” lizard species moved on to a more hospitable (cooler) area and were replaced by another lizard species that is better adapted to the warmer temps. Net loss of lizards = 0.
If warming and cooling is cyclical then this species shift would have repeated itself at every warm/cool cycle. For this study to extrapolate results from 1975-2010 to predict 2080 would be incorrect – the time period is too short. You see this happen quite often in “climate science”. They often assume a linear relationship going straight up when it may, in fact, be the increasing half of a sine wave ready to reverse and go down.
WUWT had another example of this a month or so ago.
More lies. After the amount of BS spread worldwide with the accompanying damage to economies & Individuals the planet ought to be so fertile, plants should be at war. You would figure these cons would never show their faces again.
We would be wrong. The draw towards huge taxes against their own people, is an irresistible lure for governments looking for kickbacks to themselves.
Amy lie will do, any disaster they (Greensville) can
make up. The elitist Marxist bureaucratic class. Need pocket money for their vacations with bonuses.
JMO
“Although the lizards normally bask in the sun to warm up, higher temperatures exceeding their physiological limits keep them in the shade, restricting their activity and preventing them from foraging for food..”
A welfare bum or out-of-work union dude can sleep in everyday and still collect a cheque…
Syncro: Notice how Lefty is also green in colour?
After seeing the video, my wife wondered aloud if CO2 could make everything grow bigger…
Eureka! I could make millions spamming CO2 for male growth enhancement. Al and your carbon credits, eat your hearts out.
ol hoss: “The faster plants grow the less nutrients are in them.”
Really? Go figure … I always thought that 3.39 times as much root could absorb 3.39 as much nutrients. More is really less!!!
Texas Canuck- That wife of yours…. wishful thinking?…buyer’s remorse?
Or just a true blue capitalist looking to make a bundle on a new concept?
Or none of my business? (:~D>
Reminds me of one of PJ O’Rourke’s writings when he visited the former USSR where he was told in all seriousness by his Russian tour guide: “we have two major problems here, getting enough to eat and losing weight”.
I’m surprised that the UN hasn’t come up with a “green energy” plan to utilize all those calories locked up in the millions of tons of excess adipose tissue lying on the couches of the world. All it would take to utilize this energy would be pedal driven generators to power TV’s and computers. Of course, such a program might require incentives such as using smart power meters to cut off power to the house of anyone with a BMI over 35.
As a graduate agronomist…my opinion is that UC Davis study is sophistry….not science….like the rest of the AGW scam.
All greenhouse grown tomatos, cukes, peppers, etc. are raised in high co2 atmospheres. We seem to be unaffected by it.
Really? Go figure … I always thought that 3.39 times as much root could absorb 3.39 as much nutrients. More is really less!!!
Ever heard the expression “politician crop”? Somehow I doubt it, given your thought process.
Loved the comment in the link:
inhaling the plant makes the grower higher – exhaling the Co2 makes the plant grow higher
CO2 as an atmospheric pollutant is obviously totally bunk. However I am concerned about ocean acidification.