Stupid plants
(Science mag) Not all species flee rising temperatures. As the mercury has inched upward across western North America over the last 40 years, many plant species have moved downhill, toward—not away from—warmer climates, according to the results of a new study. The finding adds to growing evidence that temperature isn’t the only factor influencing how Earth’s life will respond to climate change.
“This is a very cool study and demonstrates what many of us have been saying—that we will get surprises,†writes Camille Parmesan, a climate change biologist at Plymouth University in the United Kingdom, in an e-mail to Science. She was not involved with the study.
Like animals, plants require specific environmental conditions—such as the right temperature, moisture, and light levels—in order to thrive. Even small changes in environmental parameters can affect the reproduction and survival of a species. As global temperatures rise, both animal and plant populations are projected to gradually shift toward northern latitudes and upward to higher elevations where temperatures are cooler in order to stay within their ideal range of environmental conditions.
Yes, as the mercury has inched up a massive 1.5 degrees Fahrenheit since the mid-1800’s, doom. Well, except for the stupid plants which refuse to cooperate with said doom. Who knew that plants like warmth?
The results of the analysis were unexpected. More than 60% of plants shifted their distributions downward, toward warmer, lower elevations—despite significant climate warming across the regions under study, the team reported online on 24 July in Global Change Biology. Even more striking, all plants within a region—regardless of species—moved in the same direction.
It’s almost like nature is flipping the bird at Warmists for thinking that everything must stay static. Which, of course, it never does. There have been numerous cool and warm periods throughout the Holocene, much less the history of the earth, and things change. Life adapts. Except for flat earth Warmists.
Nice weblog right here! Also your web site lots up fast!
What host are you the usage of? Can I am getting your associate link
in your host? I desire my site loaded up as fast as yours lol
My page; Tucson Emergency Plumber (Roosevelt)
So you think that ecosystems are “flipping the bird” at climate scientists. Go on… How does the planet do such a thing? Is this the sort of thing you wish to be taught in schools?
So the way real science works is that dedicated, educated and ethical scientists conduct research and report their findings in prestigious scientific journals such as Science, even if the results do not support their original hypothesis. Can you imagine a conservative doing such a thing? lmfao.
Is climate science still a cult in your fevered imagination? Or only the results with which you disagree qualify as a cult?
Well, that lets out a lot of the warmists.
Yeah, because liberals such as yourself have such a track record of telling the truth and being honest.
By the way Jeffery, how are you laughing yourself off?
“So the way real science works is…dedicated, educated and ethical scientists conduct research and reprt their findings in prestigious scientific journals..” Exactly, which is why your little description has nothing to do with today’s climate astrologers. They may be dedicated, but dedicated to their government pay check to keep up the scam by adjusting the data that doesn’t fit the theory. “Educated”….a useless term, as there are many educated people on both sides. You seem desperate to have to use such a term in your post. And they surely aren’t ethical as Mann himself has been caught lying about his supposed Nobel prize and his hockey stick has been shown to be a fraud. Ethical scientists don’t adjust data-they don’t have to.
Mockery and ridicule, but never a discussion.
Do you really believe that climate scientists are unethical?
j,
Educated like Teach? Goddard? Morano? Limbaugh? lol
Why are there so few denier scientists? Most deniers are bloggers and their hangers on.
Every denier knows that Dr. Mann claimed to have won a Nobel Prize. So it should be easy to find the evidence, thanks.
Every denier knows that the “hockey stick” is false. So it should be ease to find the evidence, thanks.
The RSS dataset is “adjusted” data. Is it fraudulent?
And thanks for at least trying to make an argument (flawed as it was). Your buddy g2 has dropped all pretense and now just shrieks “hypocrite!”