Some carbon info for Chuck Chuck

[seldomseen]

https://www.grainews.ca/2018/08/09/carbon-the-mega-plant-nutrient/




I was just catching up on some reading that comes in the summer and found this article by Les Henry and just thought of you Chucky.


Les has two questions near the end of the article that you could answer to help out. I would imagine Les is just another old fella bought off by big oil!

[shtferbrains]

These are his previous comments on what thermometers:

Weather/climate information

Weather is the day-to-day conditions that we enjoy or hate. Climate is the 30-year average of that weather.

In days of yore, weather information was gathered by dedicated and mostly volunteer observers located right where the weather was happening. They read a thermometer twice a day and read and dumped a rain gauge and mailed the results to the federal government.

When we (H.K. Harder at the University of Saskatchewan and I) prepared a map in 1991 showing “Soil Climatic Zones of Southern Saskatchewan” it was based on data from “Environment Canada, Atmospheric Environment Service. Canadian Climate Normals, 1951-1980, Temperature and Precipitation.” I have many such books on shelves at the University of Saskatchewan.

The printed map was 22″ x 17″ and the back side was full of the criteria and data used to make the map. In 1991 there were 194 Saskatchewan weather stations and all but Uranium City and LaRonge were in the agricultural area.

Recently I found a federal government document online, from the Environment and Climate Change department. It was an Excel spreadsheet, titled “Historical Homogenized Temperature Stations for Canada — Updated to December 2016.”

Hmm. “Homogenized” sounds kind of suspicious to me.

That 2016 document was based on only 36 stations in the province of Saskatchewan and six of those were not in the agricultural area. When something as important as our weather/climate information was digitized it has, in my opinion, been “dumbed down” to a frightening degree.

A few years ago, when I was preparing the annual November 1 Soil Moisture Map I was having trouble with data from the Manitoba Interlake area. As always, if I want to know something in the country I call up a local. So, I picked on a seed grower and phoned him. He informed me that the automated local station had been out of service for a long time.

It seems that “homogenizing” involves using the nearest stations to “manufacture” data for a missing station. If a crow makes an unsolicited deposit in an automatic recording rain gauge, that data is gone forever. It cannot be generated from the nearest stations.

Rainfall in particular cannot be modeled or otherwise mathematically derived. It must be measured at a point, and it takes a lot of points to get any kind of useful map.

I think there is one way that modern technology could help a lot in making rainfall maps. The Doppler Radar is amazing technology and I think it could be used to make a better rainfall map. Terry Aberhart, Langenburg area farmer and Agri-Trend associate, showed an example of that at a recent precision ag meeting in Saskatoon.

But no one in research or bureaucracy seems to be advancing that idea. Instead, the Radisson radar that serves Saskatoon area has been AWOL for months and was recently joined by Bethune and Jimmy Lake (northwest). We now have no functional radar in the province. Even when they are all operating, the very important northeast ag area (Melfort/Nipawin) is without service.

Perhaps our federal Environment and Climate Change Canada department should spend less money jetting around to make Kyoto, Rio, Paris etc. accords and spend more time sticking to the business of measuring and reporting our day-to-day weather. Weather cannot be modeled — it can only be measured.

[Sheepwheat]

Our farm was one of those 194 reporting stations. It was an interesting and rewarding job. We phoned in every Monday morning. Collect call. We called the Wynyard office, and shared our records of the week with them verbally. Those were good days. Initially my dad did it on a volunteer basis, later it became a paid job. Those weather reporting Cheques helped me start farming after dad died. I kept the Stevenson screen as a permanent yard fixture. I still use the rain gauge and the snow ruler.

Now we rely on inaccurate observations, and so no wonder climate change is happening. It is due in large part to this dumbing down of accuracy of records. I know with my station removed from the records, it would automatically show global warming, because we are in a cool wet area. There were actually I believe 400 stations total. Many towns had a reporter, some volunteer, some paid, depending on how much info was reported. I remember getting a monthly printout of all the station records for the month,and it was interesting. There were several pages of reports.

Climate change is man made all right. By removing hundreds of stations, the implications are huge.

[fjlip]

Oh yes thank you for giving proof for my firm belief that measuring the WHOLE EARTH'S average temperature to the tenth of a degree is TOTAL absolute BULLSHIT. All guesses. lies, made up numbers, no where near the truth and how the F*CK can rational people believe this CRAP?

[seldomseen]

This is just some simple common sense information from a sensible old academic that spent his whole 80 or so years observing and documenting conditions in Sask and around the world.

I guess if Chucky can't refute it he will just cover his ears and say "I Can't Hear You"

[fjlip]

Chucky is it going to be F*CKING COLD this week???????????????
Guess climate is changing...again...and again....and again....

[chuckChuck]

I read Les Henry's article in the summer. I was kind of surprised that Henry, a well known soil scientist would be so uninformed about the negative affects of climate change, the research that shows the increasing temperatures and what causes ice ages and why ice ages end.

There is no dispute carbon is essential to life on earth and increased CO2 will benefit plant growth. But seeing an educated scientist who ignores overwhelming evidence of climate change and all the negative impacts, is mind boggling. Henry spent most of his life looking at soil, so maybe its no surprise he is not well informed on climate change.

Henry Quote:
"At meetings where I continually hear about how bad the future will be I ask two questions:

What thermometers do they average to come up with a global temperature?
Twenty thousand years ago, what is now Saskatoon was under about a mile of ice. It all melted and not a fossil fuel to be had. What force of nature resulted in that massive global warming event?

I have yet to receive an answer to those questions."

It seems like the only reason Henry doesn't have an answer to these basic questions is he doesn't believe in climate science? Or he hasn't bothered to review what causes ice ages? This information is widely available on the internet. Below is one simple description.

Glacials and interglacials occur in fairly regular repeated cycles. The timing is governed to a large degree by predictable cyclic changes in Earth’s orbit, which affect the amount of sunlight reaching different parts of Earth’s surface. The three orbital variations are: (1) changes in Earth’s orbit around the Sun (eccentricity), (2) shifts in the tilt of Earth’s axis (obliquity), and (3) the wobbling motion of Earth’s axis (precession).

https://geology.utah.gov/map-pub/survey-notes/glad-you-asked/ice-ages-what-are-they-and-what-causes-them/

There are some other influences on ice ages and interglacials explained above.

https://www.climate.gov/maps-data/primer/measuring-climate This link explains how NOAA in the US measures climate.

https://www.climate.gov/news-features/understanding-climate/climate-change-global-temperature This one explains global temperature measurement.

This link from NASA explains the evidence for climate change. https://climate.nasa.gov/evidence/

[chuckChuck]

Chucky is it going to be F*CKING COLD this week???????????????
Guess climate is changing...again...and again....and again....

This weeks weather is turning cold. Wow... that has never happened in the first week of November before! LOL

But if you don't understand the difference between short term weather variability and long term climate trends then it is pointless to discuss this issue with you.

[binthere]

There you have it chuckles is the only informed scientist. Regurgitating all that internet knowledge. But no common sense.

[Oliver88]

Hard to take any of this serious when you read about “homogenizing” weather records. 🙈



It seems that “homogenizing” involves using the nearest stations to “manufacture” data for a missing station. If a crow makes an unsolicited deposit in an automatic recording rain gauge, that data is gone forever. It cannot be generated from the nearest stations.

[chuckChuck]

I don't think Homogenization would have any impact on a climate record when the data shows 4.5 C degree warming in the past 70 years in the Mackenzie area of the Northwest Territories.

"People say, well gee, the world's warmed up by 1 C in the last 135 years, but there are parts of Canada that have warmed in some seasons by four, four-and-half degrees in a 70-year period," Environment Canada's senior climatologist, David Phillips says. "So twice as much in half the time."

take a look at the climate map from Environment Canada in this article:
https://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/climate-change-canada-1.4878263

"The greatest differences are seen in the north and the interior of continental coast in the west. The region with the greatest warming in 70 years is in the Mackenzie area of the Northwest Territories where temperatures have risen by between 4 C and 5 C in some parts."

I recently spoke with a farmer from La Crete in northern Alberta. On the ground in that area it has had dramatic climate change with higher temperatures and much drier than normal. It is near the area of greatest temperature change in the Mackenzie as mentioned by Philips and show on the map in the article.

You can deny climate change and make excuses all you want, but the data tells the truth.

[blackpowder]

So where are we at on the interglacial timeline?
And what should we do about it?

[chuckChuck]

So where are we at on the interglacial timeline?
And what should we do about it?

Read this "Are we heading into a new Ice Age?" https://www.skepticalscience.com/heading-into-new-little-ice-age.htm
Excerpt:
"So what are today’s conditions like? Changes in both the orbit and tilt of the Earth do indeed indicate that the Earth should be cooling. However, two reasons explain why an ice age is unlikely:

1. These two factors, orbit and tilt, are weak and are not acting within the same timescale – they are out of phase by about 10,000 years. This means that their combined effect would probably be too weak to trigger an ice age. You have to go back 430,000 years to find an interglacial with similar conditions, and this interglacial lasted about 30,000 years.
2. The warming effect from CO2 and other greenhouse gases is greater than the cooling effect expected from natural factors. Without human interference, the Earth’s orbit and tilt, a slight decline in solar output since the 1950s and volcanic activity would have led to global cooling. Yet global temperatures are definitely on the rise.

It can therefore be concluded that with CO2 concentrations set to continue to rise, a return to ice age conditions seems very unlikely. Instead, temperatures are increasing and this increase may come at a considerable cost with few or no benefits."

[seldomseen]

So wouldn't the farmer from La Crete just be talking about weather? How can you have an informed discussion with someone doesn't know the difference between weather and climate?

[chuckChuck]

So wouldn't the farmer from La Crete just be talking about weather? How can you have an informed discussion with someone doesn't know the difference between weather and climate?

His on the ground anecdotal weather observations over several farming seasons correlate with the data that shows up on the temperature map. The temperature data is proof, the farmer observations are supporting the data and conclusions.

That's very different that saying its going to be very cold this week and so there is no warming.