Originally posted by Hamloc
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Congratulations Sask on achieving number 1
Collapse
Logging in...
Welcome to Agriville! You need to login to post messages in the Agriville chat forums. Please login below.
X
-
-
Originally posted by AlbertaFarmer5 View PostNot arguing with you at all, very good points, but the evidence does not point to any catastrophic effects of an increasingly benign climate, regardless of what the cause of improved climate might be. I challenge posters here to find me an example of long term food production declining due to increased CO2, or increased temperatures, at any time in history, recorded or otherwise? Farmers have proven to be very adept at adjusting to warming temperatures, and hopelessly helpless against cooling temperatures, on any time scale.
Comment
-
Originally posted by farmaholic View PostIf rising temperatures are accompanied with increased precipitation, or at the minimum, average precipitation.... affects of minor increased temps can/may be mitigated. But if higher temps come with lower precip....we are somewhat screwed where I farm. Soils zones are the way they are for a reason.... and a good part of that is a result of average yearly precipitation. .....Just move the boundaries of each further north and east.
Comment
-
Originally posted by AlbertaFarmer5 View PostMore importantly, and evidence based, what trend have your yields shown during these recent decades of unprecedented Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming? Cherry pick any time frame and show me how they have been declining due to climate change.
My yield trends have likely improved more because of farming practices than anything else..... and that proves one of your points. But common sense dictates that there is only so much I can do and Mother Nature plays the last card. Of the three years mentioned..... my same recipe..... different results.... because of Mother Nature's contribution or lack there of. Hot and dry doesn't work here. Semi arid.
Comment
-
Originally posted by farmaholic View PostAs I mentioned(somewhere) 2015 and 17 weren't very good here. 2016 was stellar. And before that when other areas were drowning we were actually doing quite well. I've been on this farm long enough to know hot dry conditions aren't good for crop production. May be somewhere else, but not right here.
My yield trends have likely improved more because of farming practices than anything else..... and that proves one of your points. But common sense dictates that there is only so much I can do and Mother Nature plays the last card. Of the three years mentioned..... my same recipe..... different results.... because of Mother Nature's contribution or lack there of. Hot and dry doesn't work here. Semi arid.
Comment
-
Originally posted by farmaholic View PostAs I mentioned(somewhere) 2015 and 17 weren't very good here. 2016 was stellar. And before that when other areas were drowning we were actually doing quite well. I've been on this farm long enough to know hot dry conditions aren't good for crop production. May be somewhere else, but not right here.
My yield trends have likely improved more because of farming practices than anything else..... and that proves one of your points. But common sense dictates that there is only so much I can do and Mother Nature plays the last card. Of the three years mentioned..... my same recipe..... different results.... because of Mother Nature's contribution or lack there of. Hot and dry doesn't work here. Semi arid.
No one in their right mind would consider the climate getting hotter and drier as a good thing.
Comment
-
Originally posted by grassfarmer View PostCome on, you're smarter than that. You know that C02 % in the atmosphere is the controller of temperature and that we can not warm the earth too much without having catastrophic effects. Grow extra plants is fine but how does that work for you when we get into a severe drought? Oops, not enough growth to sequester the increased C02 so the warming accelerates and creates more drought. If you can't acknowledge that basic fact you really don't have a part to play in the discussion.
'CO2 is the CONTROLLER of temperature'
Wow, where did you ever get THAT from??
We may soon see how much the data was bent spindled and mutilated by the AGW supporters to get the results they wanted.
[URL="https://wattsupwiththat.com/2017/12/08/winning-ua-ordered-to-surrender-emails-to-skeptics-of-human-caused-climate-change/"]https://wattsupwiththat.com/2017/12/08/winning-ua-ordered-to-surrender-emails-to-skeptics-of-human-caused-climate-change/[/URL]
And there were also the hidden emails and data in the UK that AGW supporters did not want to release also.
In fact public data was even destroyed to keep AGW sceptics from seeing it.
The reason that the AGW (like Prof Mann) hid their data and emails is because the data they were collecting DID NOT SUPPORT THEIR THEORY OF CO2 WARMING THE EARTH.
Why else would they hide their work if it showed they were right?
Don't forget that it even took world leading NASA 20 years to finally admit/realize that water vapour was the major part of weather and temperature on earth.
CO2 is statistically insignificant in the world's weather.
WATER VAPOUR IS THE BIG DOG.
Comment
-
My narrative of my experience of a "nano second of time of weather history" hardly supports or detracts from the argument of climate change in the AGW debate.
I just know the weather conditions that are conducive to successful crop production where I live....and hotter and drier aren't them.
Comment
-
Guest
Originally posted by farmaholic View PostIf rising temperatures are accompanied with increased precipitation, or at the minimum, average precipitation.... affects of minor increased temps can/may be mitigated. But if higher temps come with lower precip....we are somewhat screwed where I farm. Soils zones are the way they are for a reason.... and a good part of that is a result of average yearly precipitation. .....Just move the boundaries of each further north and east.
Comment
-
Guest
Originally posted by RWT101 View Post'CO2 is the CONTROLLER of temperature'
Wow, where did you ever get THAT from??
We may soon see how much the data was bent spindled and mutilated by the AGW supporters to get the results they wanted.
[URL="https://wattsupwiththat.com/2017/12/08/winning-ua-ordered-to-surrender-emails-to-skeptics-of-human-caused-climate-change/"]https://wattsupwiththat.com/2017/12/08/winning-ua-ordered-to-surrender-emails-to-skeptics-of-human-caused-climate-change/[/URL]
And there were also the hidden emails and data in the UK that AGW supporters did not want to release also.
In fact public data was even destroyed to keep AGW sceptics from seeing it.
The reason that the AGW (like Prof Mann) hid their data and emails is because the data they were collecting DID NOT SUPPORT THEIR THEORY OF CO2 WARMING THE EARTH.
Why else would they hide their work if it showed they were right?
Don't forget that it even took world leading NASA 20 years to finally admit/realize that water vapour was the major part of weather and temperature on earth.
CO2 is statistically insignificant in the world's weather.
WATER VAPOUR IS THE BIG DOG.
until it hits the climatards real hard in the pocketbook , we are all wasting our breath......
Comment
- Reply to this Thread
- Return to Topic List
Comment