Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Google Search
-
Recent Posts
- Mission Accomplished
- Both High And Low Sea Ice Extent Caused By Global Warming
- Record Sea Ice Caused By Global Warming
- “Rapid Antarctic sea ice loss is causing severe storms”
- “pushing nature past its limits”
- Compassion For Terrorists
- Fifteen Days To Slow The Spread
- Maldives Underwater By 2050
- Woke Grok
- Grok Explains Gender
- Humans Like Warmer Climates
- Homophobic Greenhouse Gases
- Grok Explains The Effects Of CO2
- Ice-Free Arctic By 2027
- Red Hot Australia
- EPA : 17.5 Degrees Warming By 2050
- “Winter temperatures colder than last ice age
- Big Oil Saved The Whales
- Guardian 100% Inheritance Tax
- Kerry, Blinken, Hillary And Jefferson
- “Climate Change Indicators: Heat Waves”
- Combating Bad Weather With Green Energy
- Flooding Mar-a-Lago
- Ice-Free Arctic By 2020
- Colorless, Odorless CO2
Recent Comments
- Disillusioned on Mission Accomplished
- Bob G on Mission Accomplished
- James Snook on Both High And Low Sea Ice Extent Caused By Global Warming
- czechlist on Mission Accomplished
- arn on Record Sea Ice Caused By Global Warming
- Disillusioned on Record Sea Ice Caused By Global Warming
- Gamecock on “Rapid Antarctic sea ice loss is causing severe storms”
- Disillusioned on “pushing nature past its limits”
- Disillusioned on “pushing nature past its limits”
- czechlist on “Rapid Antarctic sea ice loss is causing severe storms”
Looks in better shape than a lot of golf courses I have played.
The Guardian has gone full blown doomsday it’s unbelievable I’ve never thought I would see anything like that, they have convinced them selves and the people around them that they’re all doomed from Co2 like some creepy cult trying to provoke mass hysteria to get people to do what they want. Madness!
I doubt that Billions of trees died as a result of drought this sounds like another sensationalist piece( Duh!), “Billions of trees died” how does someone come up with a figure like this do they check every tree to make sure that it’s dead then count it? I doubt it, they guess an estimate then exaggerate it! luckily there’s enough co2 to help billions of trees to grow there!
“Lewis was careful to note that significant scientific uncertainties remain and that the 2010 and 2005 drought – thought then to be of once-a-century severity – might yet be explained by natural climate variation.”
So it turns out that they were wrong in thinking that the 2005 drought was once-a-century severity,
Lewis seems to be saying;
“It may be going too far to blame the drought on man made co2 or global warming, because of all the other exaggerations, and because we have now been told that agw causes cold weather by the almighty manbearpig or something we don’t know at all,
but look at all the dead trees, no we didn’t take photos of all the dead trees we thought that it would be disrespectful.” D’oh!
Lush green is the new drought.
Lushdrought, greendry.
You took the words out from my keyboard!
Anybody else getting the impression that dying trees/forests is going to be the next ‘big scare’, after ocean acidification didn’t work so well?
When the article is read carefully it is clear that they have test plots examined after the 2005 droubt. However, the billions of trees that died after the 2010 droubt is purely speculation. Note that hey state that they are trying to raise money to revisit the plots and actually collect data. what a thought, collect some data before you state what the conclusions are.
Even worse, they indicate that the billions of extra dead trees may not exist as the droubt intolerant trees may have already died in the 2005 droubt.
If I was a prof. teaching a first year university science course and got a paper like this I would give the student a 15%, i.e. minus 85% for stupidity and lack of scientific method, +15% for imagination and feeling sorry for the dumb a$*.
It is garbage.
As the loopy scientist in Jurassic Park said, “shouldn’t there be dinosaurs in a dinosaur park,” shouldn’t there be dead trees in a forest with a billion dead trees. I don’t see any, and when looking at satellite images green is what I see, not brown.
That’s the thing, green is the new drought. Record cold is the new heat.
Didn’t we already debunk this bogus Amazon sensitivity madness a couple of years ago?
Debunking means something to them? I didn’t get that memo.
Areas were flooded in 2009 & 2004. How does that factor into the drought scenario?http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/NaturalHazards/view.php?id=39359
Future-minded Manaus rioters had been protesting our current drought since 1958