http://albertaclimaterecords.com/

[sumdumguy]

[QUOTE=jazz;430503]BS the growing season has not changed. First frost dates are same as they have been for as long as people have been farming here and those shoulder months are just as cold as they always have been.

How long you been farming for? Go find an old timer in the coffee shop and have a little chat instead of surfing the net. You might get your eyes opened.

JHC my dad has fought off every imaginable weather condition we have seen. He can quote a handful of yrs in the 50s and 60s and 80s to match anything we have seen.



EXACTAMONDO!

[Guest]

"the growing season is now three to five weeks longer than it was in 1950"

FFS, do you read this drivel before you post it at all ?????????????

[jazz]

And maybe the reason we are struggling with getting the crop off is we have about 90% less ****ing farmers trying to whip off 4 times the yeild just to stay afloat.

[farming101]

So it is wise to consult a climate scientist when deciding how to farm in Western Canada...
I eagerly await their latest advice on how to successfully farm around climate change

[chuckChuck]

Click on Growing Temperature on the Alberta climate map and you will see that the growing season is indeed longer now than it was in 1950. It varies from region to region. When I click on the map most places are in the 10-20 days longer range.

You will have to ask Stefan Kienzle from the University of Lethbridge how he came up with the 3-5 week longer growing season or whether Pilger misquoted him.

albertaclimaterecords.com/ http://albertaclimaterecords.com/

[jazz]

You will have to ask Stefan Kienzle from the University of Lethbridge how he came up with the 3-5 week longer growing season or whether Pilger misquoted him.

Nah I will ask a farmer or two first.

The growing season isn't magically longer because snow is off the ground. Its a combination of day and night time temp, moisture, soil temp etc. These egg head academics don't know shit and that's why they hide out in universities.

[chuckChuck]

Under the Growing Temperature indexes the first and last day of the growing season are there. Along with growing degree days above 0 C, 5 C and 10 C.

So please explain how a farmer in the period of 1950 -2010 would have records to establish the growing season length, growing degree days, soil temperature, frost free periods etc?

Do you have those records on your own farm? I doubt it. And I don't know any farmer who has those detailed records.

So any farmer who claims that they know their growing season length is unchanged since 1950 has basically no records to backup their claim.

Why did you send your children to school if you don't believe in science,learning or academics?

Do you file your own corporate taxes? Do you do your own law? Do you do your own surgery and dentistry? Why not just ask the farmer down the road to do it for you if they know more than all the specialists in their field? LOL

Jazz you are out to lunch if you think humanity progressed without listening to scientists, academics and scholars. Perhaps that is why you think the way you do? LMAO

[ajl]

I have studied local (Vegreville area) weather records a lot recently in order to find other years that have been as crappy is the past few. The high temp for the month of October this year was 17.3. Every year had a temp over 20 in October a least once except 1950. So the study began in 1950, a known cold year. Had they started in 1937 there would have been a different conclusion. If the period from 2011 to 2019 would be added on then there would not be as much if any warming and may even show cooling. The research was interesting but does not prove AGW. The question I have is it absolutely necessary to own a dryer to farm in the Vegreville region? Apparently the answer is yes because it is too cold here. Another thing that has stood out my study of the data is that the past few years have had way above average rainfall in this region. A cold decade like the 50's did not have near the fall rainfall as we have seen these past few years. Higher rainfall is making the summers colder as well since every day is cloudy. Need supplemental vitamin D here in summer. Rainfall data can be notoriously inaccurate as well especially with these automated weather recorders.

[AlbertaFarmer5]

sk_wheatking: Nice rant about global warmers need to live what they preach. But SK if you truly feel the climate is actually cooling, and the growing season is getting shorter what are you doing mitigate potential losses on your farm?

Should not those who believe the climate is cooling also have to grow shorter season crops, and crops that require less heat units before crying for government and insurance support when crops are left out in the field?

Instead of selecting varieties by yield, should you not be selecting by days to maturity?

Are you still applying fungicide which lengthens the growing period? Perhaps those claiming global cooling is occurring should not be allowed to use a fungicide?

Have you switched to growing shorter season Polish Canola instead of Argentine varieties?

Why would anyone who believes in the solar minimum or global cooling is happening be trying to grown soybeans or corn on the prairies anymore? Should they not be going back to the shorter season crops their parents and grandparents grew?

I can't speak for everyone, but as someone attempting to farm in the lowest heat units area of the prairies( combined with almost highest precipitation), I will offer what we are doing.

I am back (briefly) to growing the long season crops that my grandparents generation grew successfully. In the 30's, they were growing long season wheat, and flax amongst others, had to give up on those crops during the cooling of the 40's and 50's. By the peak in the cooling cycle, in the late 70's most had gone to hay and grass, what little crops were grown were barley and oats. Took till the end of this most recent warming cycle to be able to grow wheat out here once again, and for canola to really take off, and it is looking like the experience will be short lived as this cooling cycle ramps up.

I do not apply fungicide, for the very reason that it extends maturity, I choose varieties that are as resistant as possible instead. I choose varieties that are as short as possible without sacrificing other agronomic traits. I am torn about giving up wheat to replace it with barley, given the almost guaranteed threat of hail and excess June water, which wheat tolerates drastically better than barley. Same with lodging, and overwintering crops, feed wheat is a pleasure to overwinter compared to barley. For now, the threat of falls such as this, where it is a severe challenge to harvest tremendous wheat crops, still doesn't outweigh the almost guaranteed risk of hail and excess moisture on barley crops which would mature earlier, to much less yield.

I spent yesterday at Agritrade, spoke with most of the seed companies I have dealt with, especially canola. I attempted to impress upon them the need to develop shorter season varieties again. It isn't just us in the extreme fringes needing them, but after a few falls like this, even longer season areas must be rethinking their growing season. Any of the short season Argentinian canola's that used to work here, have been discontinued. While I certainly appreciate the features, and potential yield benefits of the new varieties, if they can't get mature in our climate, then I may have to remove canola from our rotation, have already cut back on canola. The yields I have seen from the early season polish variety(s) would not make any economic sense to even try, unless there was a large non GMO premium.
I have been communicating with barley breeders directly making sure they are aware of the potential market out here for varieties that could withstand the stresses better, especially as we need to replace the longer season crops with something shorter.

There is a local seed grower who follows the actual scientists who have been predicting the cooling cycle. he has been accumulating registrations for short season varieties in preparation. Of course, as with all things, being right is only half the battle, still have to get the timing right too.

After a few exceptional years with long warm falls(long enough that we were able to mature regrowth canola that was hailed out at end of July/beginning of August a couple of times), we are back to (or below) more long term average falls. This year, crops seeded in good time, with very fast even emergence, and no real set backs all season, yet still weren't close to ripe as of the 1st of October when the first big killing frost hit. From this perspective it is starting to look more like a trend than an anomaly, but unfortunately, our research dollars are still going into making catastrophic warming projections decades and centuries out, and ignoring shorter term fluctuations which we could actually prepare for.

[furrowtickler]

Under the Growing Temperature indexes the first and last day of the growing season are there. Along with growing degree days above 0 C, 5 C and 10 C.

So please explain how a farmer in the period of 1950 -2010 would have records to establish the growing season length, growing degree days, soil temperature, frost free periods etc?

Do you have those records on your own farm? I doubt it. And I don't know any farmer who has those detailed records.

So any farmer who claims that they know their growing season length is unchanged since 1950 has basically no records to backup their claim.

Why did you send your children to school if you don't believe in science,learning or academics?

Do you file your own corporate taxes? Do you do your own law? Do you do your own surgery and dentistry? Why not just ask the farmer down the road to do it for you if they know more than all the specialists in their field? LOL

Jazz you are out to lunch if you think humanity progressed without listening to scientists, academics and scholars. Perhaps that is why you think the way you do? LMAO

So cherry pick one year . 1950 , is science ? Lol
Anyone want to guess what happened from 1950 to 1955 ???
Yup a solar minimum....
2004 was a solar minimum, yup the year of widespread frosts . Then we had some nice wide open falls going into 2008-2014 ... peak of that solar cycle was 2011 ish
So when one picks the growing seasons from the early ‘50s to the later 2000’s yup big difference. Again selective data to push a narrative .
Hence the reason from the switch from global warming to climate change .... they know dam well what is about to and is happening so blame these natural fluctuations on carbon to further their agenda on wealth distribution...

[dmlfarmer]

I can't speak for everyone, but as someone attempting to farm in the lowest heat units area of the prairies( combined with almost highest precipitation), I will offer what we are doing.

I am back (briefly) to growing the long season crops that my grandparents generation grew successfully. In the 30's, they were growing long season wheat, and flax amongst others, had to give up on those crops during the cooling of the 40's and 50's. By the peak in the cooling cycle, in the late 70's most had gone to hay and grass, what little crops were grown were barley and oats. Took till the end of this most recent warming cycle to be able to grow wheat out here once again, and for canola to really take off, and it is looking like the experience will be short lived as this cooling cycle ramps up.

.

very interesting, thanks. I do have one question. My grandfather began growing more wheat in the 30s also, but it was because of the introduction of Garnet which matured 10 days earlier than Marquis and would mature in cooler weather. (due to the crossing of Canadian wheats with varieties grown in Russia and Himalayas) When garnet was no longer eligible for top grades due to grading changes and demand for Garnet dried up so he had to switch to Thatcher which was back to a much longer season, he grew less. So I am wondering if it was only temperatures or also variety selection that allowed your grandparents to grow wheat in the 30s.

[furrowtickler]

Very easy to pick date from the solar minimum/ maximum graphs .... established by scientific records and promote an agenda


How’s the growing season this year-compared to 1950 ? Probably much the same ... short and cool ...
it will be an interesting next few years to see how this “global warming” holds up . The flip to climate change was to simply cover this reality .
If the global temperatures do rise the next 5 years in the face of the solar minimum then there will be some validity to global warming . It’s going to be harder to fudge global warming temperatures, so time will tell .
But in the meantime this whole climate catastrophe hysteria b/s should be tempered as should be , this big push to massively push for higher carbon tax’s that will cripple many industries including Ag .

It is karma though, the very people / governments who pushed hard for global warming , then switched this whole agenda to climate change now have to deal with a whole young generation they convinced the world will end in 5 years lol .
They have over convinced this young generation that global warming will destroy the planet .... well we will see how this pans out in the next 5 years .

[jazz]

Jazz you are out to lunch if you think humanity progressed without listening to scientists, academics and scholars. Perhaps that is why you think the way you do? LMAO

Lets be clear. I support evidence based science, objective, verifiable, repeatable, observable, predictable. I hold an engineering degree and I have as much science based training as any scientist.

Climate change fits exactly none of those check marks. That's why I disavow it.

Now add in the political element - govts, UN, protests, funding scams and I reject it completely.

The earth is a dynamic chaotic system, it cannot be modelled. Models cannot properly account for the variables we do feed in them because they are flawed too. What is the CO2 release at the edge of tectonic plates 100 miles down? No answer, leave it out, like they do with dozens of similar variables and then feed flawed data to force the models to converge to a solution. When the solution fits the narrative then crow about it all day long on MSM. When it doesn't, hide it, obfuscate, whip up some weasel words to cover.

Science never ever speculates on an outcome. Climate science does that ALL the time.

Greenland 30 yrs ago and today. Remember the MSM getting in tizzy about the melting.

[Guest]

It is karma though, the very people / governments who pushed hard for global warming , then switched this whole agenda to climate change now have to deal with a whole young generation they convinced the world will end in 5 years lol .
They have over convinced this young generation that global warming will destroy the planet .... well we will see how this pans out in the next 5 years . Reply With Quote


they will just come out with another one
remember, not one, NOT ONE, NO NOT EVEN ONE OUT OF THE 100'S OF HAIRBRAINED PROPHECIES, has ever come true . and yet , they believe

[fjlip]

Not a single ONE...CC are you "over a barrel?" respond to these missed predictions. Why believe YOU/CULTISTS now?