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: maceng2 who wrote (17934)	12/2/2007 7:57:33 PM
From: Brumar89	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 36922

The 200 + year data sets provided have been put together by a very small band of dedicated proffessional scientists. The 200+ year data sets weren't put together by professional scientists. They were dedicated non-scientists. Doesn't necessarily mean anything one way or another. But lets not misrepresent or hype things. 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. Most of the stuff you posted was about FFD's - first flowering dates. I know all about oaks. Thanks. And btw 4.5 days and 8 days is a lot less than your initial claim of a month advance - presumably for everything. 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. Daffodils are a flower native to Iberia. Elsewhere they're a domesticated flower, bred for their blooms. The blooming dates from 1804 to today may have changed due to climate - 1804 was still w/i the little ice age or may have changed due to breeding for earlier blooming. Daffodils are one of the earliest flowers to bloom in the spring. My grandmother grew lots of them and when I was young, every spring we'd cut them, tie them into bunches and take them to the produce market in Anna, IL. I have no idea what their ultimate destination was. They're not native to IL anymore than they are to England. She had a bunch - their small orchard of about an acre was filled with them. And all the area around that. I've guess if they were all bunched together they'd have covered about two acres. 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. Given your love of strawmen, you'd love for me to claim plant growth is unrelated to temperature but that will happen only in your fantasies. Flowering dates may well have changed. Especially if one is going back to the little ice age period and tracking forward. 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... The claim that all climate changes are man-driven and we must radically change our way of life as a result and give the UN $86B is very relevant to whats being discussed.