More From the Heartland: Farmers (3)

By: Dr. Ricky Rood , 4:32 AM GMT on July 12, 2013

Share this Blog
20
+

More From the Heartland: Farmers (3)

In the entry before President Obama’s speech, I wrote about farmers and climate change. I referred to a survey of farmer’s opinions on climate change performed by Iowa State University professor, J. Gordon Arbuckle and colleagues. In a 2013 paper in Climatic Change, Arbuckle and colleagues reported that 68% of farmers he surveyed in Iowa believed that the climate was changing. 28% were uncertain and only 5% believed that the climate was not changing. With regard to attribution, 10% felt that climate change was caused by humans, 23% felt it was natural, and about 35% felt it was caused by both human and natural causes. (Summary Article and Press Coverage )

In this blog I want to explore the results of the poll of the farmer’s some more.

Arbuckle’s work is in the standard protocol of social science studies focused on the acceptance and use of science-based knowledge by society. It utilizes the basic framework of how the responses to climate change are organized, specifically, mitigation and adaptation. Mitigation is the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, perhaps, coupled with enhancement of processes that remove greenhouse gases from the atmosphere, such as storage of carbon dioxide in forests and soils. Adaptation is modification of how we do and build things in response to climate change.

First a little about social science research – In the past 5 years I have worked with several social scientists. The practice of social science has strict protocols. Interview-based research, such as discussed here, poses questions to be explored and answered by input from a set of interviewees. As in natural science, it is required that the research questions can be tested and evaluated. Not only does this require careful design of the research questions, but it also requires design, review and testing of the questions to be asked in the interview. The design of a robust experiment to disentangle questions where there is a strong element of human preference and decision is exceedingly difficult. This includes picking the group of people who are asked to respond to the interview.

The design of Arbuckle’s research had two research questions: “(1) do Iowa farmers support actions aimed at climate change adaptation and mitigation; and, (2) are beliefs and concerns about climate change associated with support for or opposition to those activities."

The interview questions that were designed to unravel the issues of the two research questions focused first on precipitation. As I wrote in the earlier blog, there is already a perceived change in precipitation, especially in the springtime during planting. There is too much water. It is worth noting that this part of the country is a part of the country that has seen less warming than the regions surrounding it – the Midwest warming hole (excellent paper by Kunkel et al. and Rood blog with unfilled promises). Therefore climate change is felt more in this region by changes in precipitation than by warming.

The interview questions were anchored around protecting the land, draining the land, and whether or not there should be mitigation to counter the climate change that is causing the increased precipitation. There was strong support for protecting the land through conservation practices. The support for draining the land was less strong, with more people uncertain about this option. An interesting aside, much of the Midwest corn land has extensive drainage infrastructure, which made what was historically a too wet environment into viable and excellent corn and soybean land. There was far less support for mitigation. However, looking at the mitigation numbers it was about equally split between opposing mitigation, uncertain about mitigation and supporting mitigation. Those opposing was about 3 percentage points higher than those supporting. This suggests that many recognize the changing climate and believe that more resiliency should be built into their land and practices – that is, they are interested in adaptation. They are less convinced of mitigation, which makes sense from many perspectives – but I assert because it is far less easy to see the benefit of mitigation whether or not there is acceptance that greenhouse gas emissions are the primary cause of the warming planet.

Arbuckle’s research then uses a set of questions to investigate farmer’s perception of vulnerability to farming due to climate change and extreme weather. As in the mitigation question those unsure, concerned and unconcerned were split, but in this case the largest group was always in the concerned group with numbers of about 40 percent to 20 percent. About a third of the farmers were uncertain in each category. The largest difference was in the group concerned about the impact of more extreme weather, with 45 percent expressing concern. The farmers were split on whether or not we would find technological or other methods to address climate change.

When all of these questions were put together and analyzed a set of conclusions, some surprising, emerge. Farmers interested in more protection of the land in anticipation of climate change had a high level of concern of increased risk and were older. Farmers interested in improved drainage had a high level of concern, large farms, higher education and felt that climate change was not a major issue because farmers would develop innovative solutions. Interestingly, support for taking adaptive measures did not correlate with whether or not the farmers perceived climate change was attributable to humans. Finally farmers interested in mitigation felt that the climate change was real and had an important contribution from humans, a high level of concern and did not feel that we would innovate our way to solutions.

One of the more robust conclusions from this research is that perceptions of vulnerability due to weather and increased vulnerability due to changes in precipitation and severe weather were a major motivation to take steps to prepare for climate change. This was true whether or not farmers “believed” in climate change. This recognition of vulnerability and increased risk is consistent with my (our) experience in the Great Lakes Integrated Sciences and Applications Center – people engage when they perceive vulnerability. Surprisingly, older farmers were more concerned than younger farmers about adaptation. With regard to mitigation, those who accepted a human contribution to the changing climate were more supportive of mitigation – makes sense. And worth a mention the combination of those who think that climate change has a human component or is primarily caused by humans is almost 45 percent, and that’s not as low as one might take away from the political and public record.

r

Some good references:

One Gardner’s Struggle

Gardeners Expect Warmer Nights

Climate and Farming

Farming Success in an Uncertain Future (Cornell)

USDA Warns Farmers about Climate Change (and announces plans to set up climate change centers)

Reinventing Farming for a Changing Climate (NPR)

Farm Level Adjustments to Climate Change (USDA)

Climate Change More Expensive to Farmers than Climate Bill

Reader Comments

Comments will take a few seconds to appear.

Post Your Comments

Please sign in to post comments.

or Join

Not only will you be able to leave comments on this blog, but you'll also have the ability to upload and share your photos in our Wunder Photos section.

Display: 0, 50, 100, 200 Sort: Newest First - Order Posted

Viewing: 343 - 293

Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12Blog Index

Quoting 335. Snowlover123:


You can see how terrible the Pacific side of the Arctic looked in 2012 compared to now.

This image was made by a meteorologist on another board.


Cherry picking just gets to be a way of life, doesn't it? I ask because here's the image from 19JUL2012, two days before the image you posted.




A couple of days can exhibit a large change in CT's graphics. Radical differences are usually not showing anything real.

{Edit to add: This is probably a good time to reiterate that daily images and numbers should be taken with a grain of salt. One should look over three or four days data/images to get a fair assessment of the situation.}
Member Since: October 30, 2005 Posts: 7 Comments: 5182
Back with Arctic happenings, here's a detail of the western ablation zone of the Greenland Ice Sheet, south of Ilulissat, from Terra, today.

Source image at 250m resolution

Melt ponds sit among cryoconite and 'dark snow'.

Member Since: June 5, 2012 Posts: 0 Comments: 438
Quoting 337. Snowlover123:


The tiny little "dive" that you focused so much on at around 2000 turned out to be nothing unusual.



The question still remains, why haven't we seen a large acceleration in the rate of Glacier Retreat since the end of the Little Ice Age, despite an exponential increase in anthropogenic forcing?


http://www.chasingice.com/

It's streaming free on Netflix right now. Maybe you can invest a little time and learn something.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
"It would be easy to say that we owe it all to the Bush family from Texas, but that would be too simplistic. They are only errand-boys for the vengeful, bloodthirsty cartel of raving Jesus-freaks and super-rich money mongers who have ruled this country for the past 20 years and arguably for the past 200. They take orders well, and they don't ask too many questions.

The real power in America is held by a fast-emerging new Oligarchy of pimps and preachers who see no need for Democracy or fairness or even trees, except maybe the ones in their own yards, and they don't mind admitting it.

[...] The only freedom we truly crave today is freedom from Dumbness. Nothing else matters."

Hunter S. Thompson, Kingdom of Fear: Loathsome Secrets of a Star-Crossed Child in the Final Days of the American Century (2003)

Quoting 328. zampaz:
I wonder if I sound like a nut when I say that big public media is owned by big corporations which cater to big money corporate advertisers which have a vested interest in "Business As Ususal."
The misinformation industry preys upon the objectivity of journalists whose advertisers and hence editors insist upon "objectivity."

Social Darwinism isn't going to work addressing climate change...it's like watching a train wreck in slow motion.
"Slow down, take a different track!" the people in coach class scream at the immortal and deaf automated engineer profit driver. Together we ride the money train basing our reality on something which does not exist in nature.
I cannot imagine how our species could have progressed so far without religion, money and science and technology spurred in investment in war.
I can't imagine how every resource available to our species isn't being used to address the potential threats our species, every species on our planet faces.

What a wonderful and unique opportunity for evolution beyond social Darwinism these challenges present.



Member Since: June 5, 2012 Posts: 0 Comments: 438
To take this further--please advise these firms, The Weather Channel owning wunderground, and NBC-Universal owning The Weather Channel.

The Weather Channel
300 Interstate North Parkway
Atlanta, GA 30339

(770) 226-0000

NBC-Universal Media
30 Rockefeller Plaza
New York, NY, 10009

(212) 664-4444

And these are some Jewish organizations that combat anti-Semitism.

The Anti-Defamation League page for reporting anti-Semitism. Please also include the inaction by wunderground so far concerning yoboi's anti-semitic activities on the featured climate blog.

This page gives the mailing addresses and phone numbers for the Anti-Defamation League offices around the country. I suggest contacting as many of them as you can.

B'nai B'rith is another noted organization which combats anti-Semitism. The various offices and emails are on this page. Please make sure they are aware that anti-Semitic activity is being condoned on wunderground, and make sure you include information about their ownership by The Weather Channel and NBC-Universal in your correspondence with them. This is the place to report anti-Semitic activity first:

Center for Community Action

Phone: 212-490-3290
Email: cca@bnaibrith.org

The Southern Poverty Law Center also combats anti-Semitism and other bigotry. They also educate corporations about the unacceptability of condoning anti-Semitism and other prejudices on their web sites--and widely publicize corporations which condone such activities on their web sites.

The Southern Poverty Law Center
400 Washington Ave.
Montgomery, AL 36104

(334) 956-8200

This is the Southern Poverty Law Center's email form

Please contact as many of these organizations as you can regarding the anti-Semitic activity by yoboi on Dr. Rood's blog and the curious inaction by the moderators and admin so far in this matter.
Member Since: August 9, 2011 Posts: 25 Comments: 8004
Quoting 313. Birthmark:

Still ignoring that dive at the far right of the graph that you yourself posted in post #236? (A graph which ended in 2000, btw)

You can't (without justification) just pick bits and pieces of a paper . You can't (without justification) ignore the parts of a paper that disagree with your hypothesis. And you will *never* knock down a well-established theory by nitpicking. (Read that again, it bears repeating.)

You want to displace AGW theory? Fine. You must replace AGW theory with another that better matches observation and comports with other well-established science. I shall read your new theory closely and try to pick up pointers so that I can destroy the Uncertainty Principle.

That one sticks in my craw...but I have no choice but to accept it since it is well-established. It's still irritating though. lol


The tiny little "dive" that you focused so much on at around 2000 turned out to be nothing unusual.



The question still remains, why haven't we seen a large acceleration in the rate of Glacier Retreat since the end of the Little Ice Age, despite an exponential increase in anthropogenic forcing?
Member Since: April 1, 2010 Posts: 9 Comments: 2699
yoboi linked to the Veterans Today site. Veterans Today is on the Southern Poverty Law Center's list of hate groups. Here is what the Southern Poverty Law Center has to say about them.
Member Since: August 9, 2011 Posts: 25 Comments: 8004
Quoting 331. Birthmark:
And just to keep people abreast of the Arctic happenings:



You can see how terrible the Pacific side of the Arctic looked in 2012 compared to now.

This image was made by a meteorologist on another board.

Member Since: April 1, 2010 Posts: 9 Comments: 2699
Quoting 333. BaltimoreBrian:
I see yoboi has returned to use this featured blog to spread anti-Semitic poison. A repeat performance. What are the moderators and admin doing about it?
Your guess is as good as mine. But so far ..........


Member Since: Posts: Comments:
I see yoboi has returned to use this featured blog to spread anti-Semitic poison. A repeat performance. What are the moderators and admin doing about it?
Member Since: August 9, 2011 Posts: 25 Comments: 8004
Quoting 331. Birthmark:
And just to keep people abreast of the Arctic:

img src="">


Edit:
Adding link:
http://www.arctic.noaa.gov/gallery_np.html
Member Since: February 2, 2011 Posts: 3 Comments: 870
And just to keep people abreast of the Arctic happenings:

Member Since: October 30, 2005 Posts: 7 Comments: 5182
Quoting 328. zampaz:
I wonder if I sound like a nut when I say that big public media is owned by big corporations which cater to big money corporate advertisers which have a vested interest in "Business As Ususal."
The misinformation industry preys upon the objectivity of journalists whose advertisers and hence editors insist upon "objectivity."

Social Darwinism isn't going to work addressing climate change...it's like watching a train wreck in slow motion.
"Slow down, take a different track!" the people in coach class scream at the immortal and deaf automated engineer profit driver. Together we ride the money train basing our reality on something which does not exist in nature.
I cannot imagine how our species could have progressed so far without religion, money and science and technology spurred in investment in war.
I can't imagine how every resource available to our species isn't being used to address the potential threats our species, every species on our planet faces.

What a wonderful and unique opportunity for evolution beyond social Darwinism these challenges present.



We're not riding the money train. The vast majority of us are being dragged behind the money train, in many (most?) cases against our will. What's worse is that the train has no achieved just enough self-awareness to want to avoid being disassembled or changed, but not enough to see the cliff it's about to go over. Hope it enjoys plummeting!

I won't.
Member Since: October 30, 2005 Posts: 7 Comments: 5182
Yoboi;
The climate is getting warmer.
The North pole is melting.
Sea Level is rising.
What would you do about it?
Member Since: February 2, 2011 Posts: 3 Comments: 870
I wonder if I sound like a nut when I say that big public media is owned by big corporations which cater to big money corporate advertisers which have a vested interest in "Business As Ususal."
The misinformation industry preys upon the objectivity of journalists whose advertisers and hence editors insist upon "objectivity."

Social Darwinism isn't going to work addressing climate change...it's like watching a train wreck in slow motion.
"Slow down, take a different track!" the people in coach class scream at the immortal and deaf automated engineer profit driver. Together we ride the money train basing our reality on something which does not exist in nature.
I cannot imagine how our species could have progressed so far without religion, money and science and technology spurred in investment in war.
I can't imagine how every resource available to our species isn't being used to address the potential threats our species, every species on our planet faces.

What a wonderful and unique opportunity for evolution beyond social Darwinism these challenges present.


Quoting 323. JohnLonergan:
False Balance Lives At Reuters: Climatologist Slams %u2018Absurd%u2019 Use Of %u2018Unrelated Climate Skeptics Nonsense%u2019

On Tuesday, we reported that a former Reuters climate change correspondent, David Fogarty, charged the publication was openly hostile to climate coverage.

Turns out Reuters proved Fogarty right in a major climate story this week, %u201CSeas may rise 2.3 metres per degree of global warming-report.%u201D

The Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research news release for the study from explains:


Greenhouse gases emitted today will cause sea level to rise for centuries to come. Each degree of global warming is likely to raise sea level by more than 2 meters in the future%u2026.

%u201CCO2, once emitted by burning fossil fuels, stays an awful long time in the atmosphere,%u201D says Anders Levermann, lead author of the study and research domain co-chair at the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research. %u201CConsequently, the warming it causes also persists.%u201D


So, the study is about the long term impact of warming on sea levels.

Here is what Reuters feels compelled to insert into their piece:


Scientists say global warming is responsible for the melting ice. A U.N. panel of scientists, the IPCC, says heat-trapping gases from burning fossil fuels are nudging up temperatures. A small number of scientists dismiss human-influenced global warming, arguing natural climate fluctuations are responsible.
...

...

Climate sceptics, however, say the evidence is unconvincing. Measurements of changing temperatures are unreliable, contradictory and unsupported by solid historic data, they say.

They question the accuracy of computer climate forecasts and point to historic, cyclical changes in the world%u2019s temperature as evidence that global temperature changes are natural. Others say the evidence shows temperatures have stopped rising and that the sun plays a bigger role than human activities.


These are nothing but climate science denier BS
talking points that have been thoroughly refuted....

...Dr. Stefan Rahmstorf, Co-Chair of Earth System Analysis at the Potsdam Institute, emailed me this critique:


This stuff has nothing to do with the paper about which the report is; the paper is about long-term sea-level commitment and has nothing to do with whether temperature measurements are unreliable. Simply, a lot of unrelated climate skeptics nonsense has been added to this Reuters piece. In the words of the late Steve Schneider, this is like adding some nonsense from the Flat Earth Society to a report about the latest generation of telecommunication satellites. It is absurd.
...


Emphasis in original
Member Since: February 2, 2011 Posts: 3 Comments: 870
I wouldn't have known the referring site's reputation of yoboi's post if FLwolverine hadn't pointed that out to me...nor would I have "plussed" yoboi's post which, aside from the conspiracy aspect, points out that increasing the cost of carbon based fuels...a political solution to slow down their use, will affect the poor and middle class as increased costs are passed on to consumers.
It is inevitable that wealth and power will be consolidated in the hands of the wealthy and powerful.
This is the social Darwinism paradigm we live with.
What has risen to the top of our paradigm is immortal corporations whose sole purpose is profit; very few of which are controlled by a few major stock holders.

The technocentric know a logical path forward is technology driven. Sustainable energy technologies and tecnologies such as Artificial Photosynthesis are the answer to prevent going past the tipping point...it may already be too late.

I'm not a social scientist and I don't know if it's even possible to evolve a new paradigm, but I suspect social media, which has made the world a much smaller place will play a crucial role in how we confront the social and environmental messes we've created as we face the challenges of reality: rising sea levels, drought, famine and flood.

Quoting 308. FLwolverine:
You're back. Why? And didn't you learn anything last time you linked to a hate site?

"Veterans Today is an American political website that describes itself as "an online journal representing the position of members of the military and veteran community in areas of national security, geopolitical stability and domestic policy."[2] Many of their contributors are veterans, and they state support for "the United States against all enemies foreign and domestic".[citation needed] The Anti-Defamation League ("ADL") and the Southern Poverty Law Center have criticized it for promoting bigoted and extremist viewpoints.[3][4] According to the ADL, VT's articles are reposted widely on the Internet, primarily on conspiracy-oriented and right-wing extremist websites.[3]"
Wikipedia Link. There are other more open criticisms of Veterans Today if you google that name.

But maybe you'll get away with this too because, after all, it's just another another argument in the climate change debate. NOT.
Member Since: February 2, 2011 Posts: 3 Comments: 870
Quoting 322. Some1Has2BtheRookie:


I ask of you to read my post and not just quote it in your response.
Rookie, yoboi will never understand your question because he starts from the premise that global warming is a scam and renewable energy is just another way to cheat a working man out of his money. He has said that himself, and he apparently refuses to acknowledge that there is anything wrong with the climate or the extreme weather. It's just too bad for this country that there are so many people who think like he does.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting 324. FLwolverine:
The WHOIS search showed both sites owned by Medbillz, inc, which turns out to be a Panama company. After following that name around for awhile I decided I didn't need to know anything else.

Sorry it's turning out that way. I was hoping there were good guys and bad guys.


"Mailing Address

Veterans Today Network
c/o Medbillz, Inc.
315 E. San Ysidro Blvd.,#300 C-304
San Ysidro, CA 92173"

Lol
Member Since: June 1, 2010 Posts: 4 Comments: 2682
Quoting 320. Naga5000:


Veteran's Today and Veteran's Today Network are one in the same. They share the same fax/voice mail number. He is not deceived, I find it seriously hard to believe that this "coincidence" would occur twice. Just looking at the hot articles on Veterans Today tells you all you need to know, although the SPLC summed it up quite nicely.

Edit: After doing some digging, it seems the network and site are owned by Trinity Transport, INC (Trinity Logistics), an international shipping corporation.
The WHOIS search showed both sites owned by Medbillz, inc, which turns out to be a Panama company. After following that name around for awhile I decided I didn't need to know anything else.

Sorry it's turning out that way. I was hoping there were good guys and bad guys.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
False Balance Lives At Reuters: Climatologist Slams %u2018Absurd%u2019 Use Of %u2018Unrelated Climate Skeptics Nonsense%u2019

On Tuesday, we reported that a former Reuters climate change correspondent, David Fogarty, charged the publication was openly hostile to climate coverage.

Turns out Reuters proved Fogarty right in a major climate story this week, %u201CSeas may rise 2.3 metres per degree of global warming-report.%u201D

The Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research news release for the study from explains:


Greenhouse gases emitted today will cause sea level to rise for centuries to come. Each degree of global warming is likely to raise sea level by more than 2 meters in the future%u2026.

%u201CCO2, once emitted by burning fossil fuels, stays an awful long time in the atmosphere,%u201D says Anders Levermann, lead author of the study and research domain co-chair at the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research. %u201CConsequently, the warming it causes also persists.%u201D


So, the study is about the long term impact of warming on sea levels.

Here is what Reuters feels compelled to insert into their piece:


Scientists say global warming is responsible for the melting ice. A U.N. panel of scientists, the IPCC, says heat-trapping gases from burning fossil fuels are nudging up temperatures. A small number of scientists dismiss human-influenced global warming, arguing natural climate fluctuations are responsible.
...

...

Climate sceptics, however, say the evidence is unconvincing. Measurements of changing temperatures are unreliable, contradictory and unsupported by solid historic data, they say.

They question the accuracy of computer climate forecasts and point to historic, cyclical changes in the world%u2019s temperature as evidence that global temperature changes are natural. Others say the evidence shows temperatures have stopped rising and that the sun plays a bigger role than human activities.


These are nothing but climate science denier BS
talking points that have been thoroughly refuted....

...Dr. Stefan Rahmstorf, Co-Chair of Earth System Analysis at the Potsdam Institute, emailed me this critique:


This stuff has nothing to do with the paper about which the report is; the paper is about long-term sea-level commitment and has nothing to do with whether temperature measurements are unreliable. Simply, a lot of unrelated climate skeptics nonsense has been added to this Reuters piece. In the words of the late Steve Schneider, this is like adding some nonsense from the Flat Earth Society to a report about the latest generation of telecommunication satellites. It is absurd.
...


Emphasis in original
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting 321. yoboi:



Green energy fossil fuels are both a scam....the working man will be taxed to death with both.....we are already 17 trillion in debt 7 occured the past 5 yrs and the projection is over 20 trillion in the next 4 yrs.... we are past the point of no return.....History does repeat itself we will be back to the horse and buggy days because nobody will be able to afford to keep the lights on....


Edit: I am sure our children and grandchildren will thank us......just imagine when a person is born today they would owe over 100,000 to get out of the red......


I ask of you to read my post and not just quote it in your response.
Member Since: August 24, 2010 Posts: 0 Comments: 4728
321. yoboi
Quoting 319. Some1Has2BtheRookie:


I will ask Yoboi a question beyond this. What happens to our economy if we have not removed ourselves from the finite resources that fossil fuels are, and we have not yet developed and deployed the technology to sees us into the future long before the fossil fuels become depleted? Fossil fuels will become too cost prohibitive to use long before they become depleted. Have you been by any gas stations lately? And this happening as we are supposedly in a glut of fossil fuels? Here is another question for you, Yoboi. What happens to our economy if we do not do anything to develop and deploy renewable energy sources and the rest of the world does? Your "do nothing now" principles will once again leave us at the mercy of other nations to supply our energy needs. The exercising of policy based on your fears are certain to keep us obligated to other countries for our energy needs and be our quickest path to economic demise... As you said, Yoboi. It is time to wake up!



Green energy fossil fuels are both a scam....the working man will be taxed to death with both.....we are already 17 trillion in debt 7 occured the past 5 yrs and the projection is over 20 trillion in the next 4 yrs.... we are past the point of no return.....History does repeat itself we will be back to the horse and buggy days because nobody will be able to afford to keep the lights on....


Edit: I am sure our children and grandchildren will thank us......just imagine when a person is born today they would owe over 100,000 to get out of the red......
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting 318. FLwolverine:
Sorry to keep posting the same thing here as in sensitivethug's blog (which is, for those of you who try to avoid this kind of wrangling, the designated site for wrangling), but .....

Yoboi, there appears to be a big difference between Veterans Today and Veterans Today Network. The Network is the one who says they've been serving vets for 40 years; they're the ones who seem to offer real services, not just links. VT, and its apparent affiliate Veterans News Now (which seems to specialize in hate filled articles), claim to be part of the Network and are linked to the Network website. I wonder if the Network even knows what those other two sites are doing.

I think you have been deceived.


Veteran's Today and Veteran's Today Network are one in the same. They share the same fax/voice mail number. He is not deceived, I find it seriously hard to believe that this "coincidence" would occur twice. Just looking at the hot articles on Veterans Today tells you all you need to know, although the SPLC summed it up quite nicely.

Edit: After doing some digging, it seems the network and site are owned by Trinity Transport, INC (Trinity Logistics), an international shipping corporation.
Member Since: June 1, 2010 Posts: 4 Comments: 2682
Quoting 315. Birthmark:

Well, this veteran thinks that those veterans have no clue what they are talking about.

Besides, what's it gonna cost when the world economy grinds to a halt due to the effects of climate change? Do you realize that just a 20 - 25% one year drop in world GDP due to CC equals the "extortion" the ignorant whine about? A five-year 5% drop will accomplish the same task (and then some).

And aren't they and you fear-mongering? Or perhaps you think that if a solution costs a lot of money, the problem can't exist? Or maybe the cost makes the science wrong? lol


I will ask Yoboi a question beyond this. What happens to our economy if we have not removed ourselves from the finite resources that fossil fuels are, and we have not yet developed and deployed the technology to sees us into the future long before the fossil fuels become depleted? Fossil fuels will become too cost prohibitive to use long before they become depleted. Have you been by any gas stations lately? And this happening as we are supposedly in a glut of fossil fuels? Here is another question for you, Yoboi. What happens to our economy if we do not do anything to develop and deploy renewable energy sources and the rest of the world does? Your "do nothing now" principles will once again leave us at the mercy of other nations to supply our energy needs. The exercising of policy based on your fears are certain to keep us obligated to other countries for our energy needs and be our quickest path to economic demise... As you said, Yoboi. It is time to wake up!
Member Since: August 24, 2010 Posts: 0 Comments: 4728
Sorry to keep posting the same thing here as in sensitivethug's blog (which is, for those of you who try to avoid this kind of wrangling, the designated site for wrangling), but .....

Yoboi, there appears to be a big difference between Veterans Today and Veterans Today Network. The Network is the one who says they've been serving vets for 40 years; they're the ones who seem to offer real services, not just links. VT, and its apparent affiliate Veterans News Now (which seems to specialize in hate filled articles), claim to be part of the Network and are linked to the Network website. I wonder if the Network even knows what those other two sites are doing.

I think you have been deceived.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Subarctic Wildfire Activity Is Heating Up

Subarctic wildfire frequency is higher now than it has been at any other point in the last 10,000 years, new records show.

The records, obtained from charcoal in the Yukon Flats of Alaska, have revealed the history of wildfire activity in the region known as the subarctic, the area just south of the Arctic Circle, from North America to Scandinavia and Siberia, where boreal forests dominate and winters are long and dark.

"The climate is predicted to get warmer, and this favors more fires," said Ryan Kelly, a plant biologist at the University of Illinois who examined the records. On the other hand, the spike in wildfires is transforming Alaska's coniferous forests into woodlands made up of relatively fire-resistant deciduous trees. In the past, this shift resulted in a kind of vegetative feedback that put the breaks on additional burnings.

"Will there be a feedback now?" Kelly said. "Maybe. That fits with what happened before."

The new study, detailed in the July 22 issue of the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, is part of decades-long research seeking to understand how ecosystems have changed in the past, Kelly told LiveScience, adding that this information will help scientists predict what may happen in the future. The current project focused on boreal forests, which make up about 10 percent of the Earth's land surface and more than 30 percent of its terrestrial carbon stock.

More At LiveScience.com
Member Since: September 18, 2005 Posts: 25 Comments: 948
Quoting 309. yoboi:



They have been serving the military and veterans for over 40 yrs.........

They haven't done a thing for me. Nor do they represent me.
Member Since: October 30, 2005 Posts: 7 Comments: 5182
Quoting 304. yoboi:Time to wake up!!!!!!!

Well, this veteran thinks that those veterans have no clue what they are talking about.

Besides, what's it gonna cost when the world economy grinds to a halt due to the effects of climate change? Do you realize that just a 20 - 25% one year drop in world GDP due to CC equals the "extortion" the ignorant whine about? A five-year 5% drop will accomplish the same task (and then some).

And aren't they and you fear-mongering? Or perhaps you think that if a solution costs a lot of money, the problem can't exist? Or maybe the cost makes the science wrong? lol
Member Since: October 30, 2005 Posts: 7 Comments: 5182
Quoting 312. yoboi:


they support wounded military....try to help with housing, people with ptsd, agent orange exposure etc....
Evidence?

And even if they do (which I doubt)' that justifies their anti-Semiticsm how?
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting 300. Snowlover123:


Actually, most of the temperature increase occurred in the early-20th Century in Oerlemans' temperature record, looking at Figure 3 of the Oerlemans paper. The paper notes that multiple times.

This is before any dramatic increase in Carbon Dioxide occurred, but matches, more or less, the dramatic increase in Solar Activity in the early-20th Century.

The point about the glaciers still stands though. There isn't a dramatic acceleration in the rate of glacier retreat in the late-20th Century despite a dramatic acceleration in CO2 levels. The question is why.

Still ignoring that dive at the far right of the graph that you yourself posted in post #236? (A graph which ended in 2000, btw)

You can't (without justification) just pick bits and pieces of a paper . You can't (without justification) ignore the parts of a paper that disagree with your hypothesis. And you will *never* knock down a well-established theory by nitpicking. (Read that again, it bears repeating.)

You want to displace AGW theory? Fine. You must replace AGW theory with another that better matches observation and comports with other well-established science. I shall read your new theory closely and try to pick up pointers so that I can destroy the Uncertainty Principle.

That one sticks in my craw...but I have no choice but to accept it since it is well-established. It's still irritating though. lol
Member Since: October 30, 2005 Posts: 7 Comments: 5182
312. yoboi
Quoting 310. FLwolverine:
Oh?

From their website: "Veterans Today (VT) is an online journal representing the position of members of the military and veteran community in areas of national security, geopolitical stability and domestic policy. "

Online for 40 years? Very enterprising of them. And how do they serve the military other than feeding them biased bigoted information?


they support wounded military....try to help with housing, people with ptsd, agent orange exposure etc....
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting 310. FLwolverine:
Oh?

From their website: "Veterans Today (VT) is an online journal representing the position of members of the military and veteran community in areas of national security, geopolitical stability and domestic policy. "

Online for 40 years? Very enterprising of them. And how do they serve the military other than feeding them biased bigoted information?


"Veterans Today (VT) is a website that bills itself as a “military veterans and foreign affairs journal.” And, indeed, many of its contributors are military veterans or veterans’ advocates from across the political spectrum. VT also offers some information about veterans’ benefits (lifted from the Veterans’ Administration) and links to home and other loans for vets.

But start reading the posts, and you’ll find something else entirely: myriad claims that there was a conspiracy behind 9/11 (Israel orchestrated it, in cahoots with the American government), that the American government is a puppet (of Israel), that the Holocaust never happened or was greatly exaggerated (Jews made it up to manipulate non-Jews), and, most recently, that Julian Assange, the man behind Wikileaks, is a pawn (of Israel).

Notice a theme?

Gordon Duff, the senior editor and chairman of the board at VT, is a prolific proponent of these anti-Israel conspiracy theories, including the Wikileaks claims. Though he does occasionally write on issues and policies that directly affect American veterans (he claims to be a Marine Vietnam veteran), most of his ammo is reserved for churning out articles that claim 9/11 was a U.S./Israel conspiracy and that Israel controls the U.S. government. According to Duff and VT contributors like author and attorney Jeff Gates, the Anti-Defamation League (ADL), a civil rights watchdog group, and the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), a lobbying group, are Zionist-controlled fronts for Israeli intelligence operations." Link
Member Since: June 1, 2010 Posts: 4 Comments: 2682
Quoting 309. yoboi:



They have been serving the military and veterans for over 40 yrs.........
Oh?

From their website: "Veterans Today (VT) is an online journal representing the position of members of the military and veteran community in areas of national security, geopolitical stability and domestic policy. "

Online for 40 years? Very enterprising of them. And how do they serve the military other than feeding them biased bigoted information?
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
309. yoboi
Quoting 308. FLwolverine:
You're back. Why? And didn't you learn anything last time you linked to a hate site?

"Veterans Today is an American political website that describes itself as "an online journal representing the position of members of the military and veteran community in areas of national security, geopolitical stability and domestic policy."[2] Many of their contributors are veterans, and they state support for "the United States against all enemies foreign and domestic".[citation needed] The Anti-Defamation League ("ADL") and the Southern Poverty Law Center have criticized it for promoting bigoted and extremist viewpoints.[3][4] According to the ADL, VT's articles are reposted widely on the Internet, primarily on conspiracy-oriented and right-wing extremist websites.[3]"
Wikipedia Link. There are other more open criticisms of Veterans Today if you google that name.

But maybe you'll get away with this too because, after all, it's just another another argument in the climate change debate. NOT.



They have been serving the military and veterans for over 40 yrs.........
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting 304. yoboi:
[Link removed] Time to wake up!!!!!!!
You're back. Why? And didn't you learn anything last time you linked to a hate site?

"Veterans Today is an American political website that describes itself as "an online journal representing the position of members of the military and veteran community in areas of national security, geopolitical stability and domestic policy."[2] Many of their contributors are veterans, and they state support for "the United States against all enemies foreign and domestic".[citation needed] The Anti-Defamation League ("ADL") and the Southern Poverty Law Center have criticized it for promoting bigoted and extremist viewpoints.[3][4] According to the ADL, VT's articles are reposted widely on the Internet, primarily on conspiracy-oriented and right-wing extremist websites.[3]"
Wikipedia Link. There are other more open criticisms of Veterans Today if you google that name.

But maybe you'll get away with this too because, after all, it's just another another argument in the climate change debate. NOT.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting 302. FLwolverine:
From Climate Denial Crock of the Week:

For The Wealthy, Climate-Gated Communities. For the Rest of Us, Whatever is Left
Link

"Exxon Chairman Rex Tillerson famously told us last year – no worries about climate change, “..we’ll adapt to that.” I’m sure that for the fabulously wealthy like Tillerson, there will be options for centuries to come. For the rest of us, the outlook is not so clear."

The second video (with Dr M) is worth watching, as is of course the excerpt from Dr Strangelove in the first comment.


I put a link to the second video on Dr. Master's blog.
Member Since: August 24, 2010 Posts: 0 Comments: 4728
Global Warming Five Million Years Ago in Antarctic Drastically Raised Sea Levels

As temperatures rise, scientists continue to worry about the effects of melting Antarctic ice, which threatens to raise sea levels and swamp coastal communities. This event, though, isn't unprecedented. Researchers have uncovered evidence that reveals global warming five million years ago may have caused parts of Antarctica's ice sheets to melt, causing sea levels to rise by about 20 meters.

Learning about our planet's past weather might help us better understand future conditions. That's why researchers set out to learn about ancient melting of the East Antarctic ice sheet by studying mud samples. After examining the samples, they found that melting took place repeatedly between five and three million years ago, during a geological period called the Pliocene Epoch. This period was known for its global cooling and aridity, which occurred after the warmer Miocene. Yet at the time, sea levels probably rose about 10 meters.

article at www.scienceworldreport.com (7/22/2013)


Carbon dioxide in atmosphere at highest level for 5 million years


Atmosphere rising at fastest rate since records began

Registering a huge landmark on the climate change map – albeit a predictable and inevitable one – the monitoring stations recorded a CO2 concentration of 400.03 ppm on Thursday.

The elevated carbon emission reading harks back to the Pliocene period, between 3m and 5m years ago, when global average temperatures were 3 or 4C hotter than today, the Arctic was ice-free, sea levels were about 40m higher and jungles covered northern Canada.

article at www.independent.co.uk (5/13/2013)
Member Since: September 18, 2005 Posts: 25 Comments: 948
Quoting 301. ScottLincoln:

Example 100-something now that Snowlover doesn't understand the papers he cites, nor even read them, in some cases.


Demonstrably false. You didn't understand what I was concluding from the Chylek et al. paper, nor are you understanding what I am concluding from the Oerlemans paper.
Member Since: April 1, 2010 Posts: 9 Comments: 2699
Quoting 302. FLwolverine:
From Climate Denial Crock of the Week:

For The Wealthy, Climate-Gated Communities. For the Rest of Us, Whatever is Left
Link

"Exxon Chairman Rex Tillerson famously told us last year – no worries about climate change, “..we’ll adapt to that.” I’m sure that for the fabulously wealthy like Tillerson, there will be options for centuries to come. For the rest of us, the outlook is not so clear."

The second video (with Dr M) is worth watching, as is of course the excerpt from Dr Strangelove in the first comment.


I wonder if Rex Tillerson kisses his grandchildren with that mouth.
Member Since: August 24, 2010 Posts: 0 Comments: 4728
From Climate Denial Crock of the Week:

For The Wealthy, Climate-Gated Communities. For the Rest of Us, Whatever is Left
Link

"Exxon Chairman Rex Tillerson famously told us last year – no worries about climate change, “..we’ll adapt to that.” I’m sure that for the fabulously wealthy like Tillerson, there will be options for centuries to come. For the rest of us, the outlook is not so clear."

The second video (with Dr M) is worth watching, as is of course the excerpt from Dr Strangelove in the first comment.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
301. ScottLincoln
4:44 PM GMT on July 22, 2013
Quoting 294. schistkicker:


The neat thing is that looking JUST at glacial ice Fig. 1 in the Oerlemans (2005) paper entirely misses the point of the paper itself.
If you look at Figure 3 of the PDF, you'll see that the temperature reconstruction the author created from mountain glacier records shows the pronounced acceleration in warming in the late 20th century that Snowlover implied wasn't there.


Example 100-something now that Snowlover doesn't understand the papers he cites, nor even read them, in some cases.
Member Since: September 28, 2002 Posts: 5 Comments: 2872
300. Snowlover123
4:36 PM GMT on July 22, 2013
Quoting 294. schistkicker:


The neat thing is that looking JUST at glacial ice Fig. 1 in the Oerlemans (2005) paper entirely misses the point of the paper itself.
If you look at Figure 3 of the PDF, you'll see that the temperature reconstruction the author created from mountain glacier records shows the pronounced acceleration in warming in the late 20th century that Snowlover implied wasn't there.



Actually, most of the temperature increase occurred in the early-20th Century in Oerlemans' temperature record, looking at Figure 3 of the Oerlemans paper. The paper notes that multiple times.

This is before any dramatic increase in Carbon Dioxide occurred, but matches, more or less, the dramatic increase in Solar Activity in the early-20th Century.

The point about the glaciers still stands though. There isn't a dramatic acceleration in the rate of glacier retreat in the late-20th Century despite a dramatic acceleration in CO2 levels. The question is why.
Member Since: April 1, 2010 Posts: 9 Comments: 2699
299. Snowlover123
4:19 PM GMT on July 22, 2013
In about 60 hours, the Vortex should be pretty large, and we will see whether Birthmark/Neapolitan or I are correct about it's impacts on the ice cap.

Member Since: April 1, 2010 Posts: 9 Comments: 2699
298. Snowlover123
4:17 PM GMT on July 22, 2013
We can already start to see the DMI 30% data starting to respond to this more favorable pattern. The favorable pattern will become even more favorable over the next few days or so. Does this mean that the Arctic will rebound to 1980s levels? No, but the more pessimistic forecasts calling for a melt below 2012 are looking very shaky. I'm hedging my bets around a 2010 type minimum extent. We'll see how I do.

Member Since: April 1, 2010 Posts: 9 Comments: 2699
297. Some1Has2BtheRookie
2:19 PM GMT on July 22, 2013
Quoting 293. no1der:
Methane release (yellow, above 1950ppb) over the southern Kara Sea - the same region where emissions were observed at ca. 60m depth across a large area of shallow shelf. [Post 181] Also major land-based release from permafrost and/or fires.

Data via Methanetracker.org


I have long thought that the continued ice loss in the Arctic region would be the first tipping point. Reversing this ice loss anytime soon would not happen through even strict CO2 mitigation efforts now. Now that more methane is entering the atmosphere, from the thawing of the ice and the permafrost, I believe we have reached another tipping point. I do not know what is next, but I bet it ain't pretty.
Member Since: August 24, 2010 Posts: 0 Comments: 4728
296. RevElvis
2:52 AM GMT on July 22, 2013
Could Photosynthesis Be Our Best Defense Against Climate Change?

Some scientists think that biochar is the key to extracting carbon dioxide from the atmosphere.

At the moment, climate policy focuses overwhelmingly on the 2 ppm part of the problem while ignoring the 400 ppm part. Thus in his landmark climate speech on June 25, President Obama touted his administration's doubling of fuel efficiency standards for vehicles as a major advance in the fight to preserve a livable planet for our children. In Europe, Germany and Denmark are leaving coal behind in favor of generating electricity with wind and solar. But such mitigation measures aim only to limit new emissions of greenhouse gases.

That is no longer sufficient. The 2 ppm of annual emissions being targeted by conventional mitigation efforts are not what are causing the "unprecedented" number of extreme climate events. The bigger culprit by far are the 400 ppm of carbon dioxide that are already in the atmosphere. As long as those 400 ppm remain in place, the planet will keep warming and unleashing more extreme climate events. Even if we slashed annual emissions to zero overnight, the physical inertia of the climate system would keep global temperatures rising for 30 more years.

We need a new paradigm: If humanity is to avoid a future in which the deadly heat waves, floods, and droughts of recent years become normal, we must lower the existing level of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. To be sure, reducing additional annual emissions and adapting to climate change must remain vital priorities, but the extraction of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere has now become an urgent necessity.

Under this new paradigm, one of the most promising means of extracting atmospheric carbon dioxide is also one of the most common processes on Earth: photosynthesis.

Compost is but one of the materials that can be used to produce biochar, a substance that a small but growing number of scientists and private companies believe could enable extraction of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere at a meaningful scale. Biochar, which is basically a fancy scientific name for charcoal, is produced when plant matter—tree leaves, branches and roots, cornstalks, rice husks, peanut shells—or other organic material is heated in a low-oxygen environment (so it doesn't catch fire). Like compost, all of these materials contain carbon: The plants inhaled it, as carbon dioxide, in the process of photosynthesis. Inserting biochar in soil therefore has the effect of removing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere and storing it underground, where it will not contribute to global warming for hundreds of years.



more at MotherJones.com
Member Since: September 18, 2005 Posts: 25 Comments: 948
295. BaltimoreBrian
2:11 AM GMT on July 22, 2013
A couple of articles about climate change and the environment from this week's issue of The Economist.

Welcome to the plastisphere


Art about climate change
Member Since: August 9, 2011 Posts: 25 Comments: 8004
294. schistkicker
2:11 AM GMT on July 22, 2013
Quoting 261. Snowlover123:


We can see this from individual glaciers, the image again from Oerlemans 2005, and you can once again see the deceleration since 1950.



The neat thing is that looking JUST at glacial ice Fig. 1 in the Oerlemans (2005) paper entirely misses the point of the paper itself.
If you look at Figure 3 of the PDF, you'll see that the temperature reconstruction the author created from mountain glacier records shows the pronounced acceleration in warming in the late 20th century that Snowlover implied wasn't there.

Member Since: June 13, 2011 Posts: 0 Comments: 287
293. no1der
1:53 AM GMT on July 22, 2013
Methane release (yellow, above 1950ppb) over the southern Kara Sea - the same region where emissions were observed at ca. 60m depth across a large area of shallow shelf. [Post 181] Also major land-based release from permafrost and/or fires.

Data via Methanetracker.org
Member Since: June 5, 2012 Posts: 0 Comments: 438

Viewing: 343 - 293

Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12Blog Index

Top of Page

About RickyRood

I'm a professor at U Michigan and lead a course on climate change problem solving. These articles often come from and contribute to the course.