Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : The Environmentalist Thread -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Brumar89 who wrote (17917)	12/2/2007 5:14:03 PM
From: maceng2	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 36922

Re: FFD's The 200 + year data sets provided have been put together by a very small band of dedicated proffessional scientists. Your line of reasoning would dismiss science altogether, one can always imagine a reason why a data point is inaccurate, providing some sort of evidence to prove it is another matter entirely. It has only been since year 2000 that the phenology projects have been restarted with contributions invited by the wider public. The data set clearly showing the advance of leafing dates by 4.5 days or 8 days is for Oaks which is a species of TREE btw, NOT a flower. The month advance mentioned was for FLOWERS called daffodils. Even Wordworth had the daffodils flowering in Early April in the UK lake district in year 1807. The vast numbers of Japanese and other Asian tourists who visit the UK Lake District each year usually arrive in April to see the daffodils. A full month or more late because the flowers bloom at least a month earlier now. This is not really news to scientists. There is more then enough convincing data available imho. dailymail.co.uk You really are going to make yourself look ridiculous if you insist that plant life growth is not linked to temperature and that flowering dates have not changed. I have not mentioned any human component of global warming with reference to phenology in this discussion. Lets keep to the subject material you brought up here... Nice meaningless anecdotal based claim and Your claim about flower blooming times - you think thats evidence of anythin? What flowers? When do they bloom and did they bloom a century ago? Where is the documentation? Has there been breeding for earlier blooming? Is there a micro-climate effect? Message 24097076 Seen enough data yet?? Re: Based on this we should give the UN $86B Well, you tell me, the USA and some Europeans are currently going to spend several $TRILLIONS on the invasion of Iraq, and that was all based on nothing but blatant lies. Spending less then $100 bil on assessing the real risks associated with climate change seems to be a far more prudent use of the available funds.