climate change

[TOM4CWB]

Freewheat,

For doing the poll; Did you get paid....???? That is the question!

[freewheat]

I think that particular one was 1 dollar,
Tom. A whole dollar. But seeing as my
opinion is so deviant from the "norm", I
am not so certain I will actually receive
my dollar. If I get my dollar, it will ALL
go into the offering plate come Sunday, to
offset the turkeys who support Suzuki and
Gore, and all their earth worship friends.

[parsley]

The scheme to transfer the cost development of
new energy sources through taxation, has been
squashed.

And we know , dont we, that in agriculture, the
bottom line is: farmers will inevitably end up
paying for the taxation, like your oil filters, not the
developer, and farmers will end up paying for the
pollution, not the patent holders. pars

[freewheat]

Hey miss Parsley,

Climate change has NOT affected the lovely
flowers you sent. They have quite enjoyed
the climate, and the extra C02 from all
the "pollution".

Thanks again.

[parsley]

Glad to hear it. Was hoping you got a marathon
in the batch. And hope the lovage and sorrel
grew. If they didn't I can resend. Pars

[parsley]

Sb: martagon. Darn iPhone

[LWeber]

Commodity Weather Group

One of the questions that has come up recently has been whether 2012 is comparable to the weather patterns seen back in the 1930s. As we have discussed frequently, the current season does indeed only fall short of 1936 for June/July heat/dryness in the corn belt. But, were the driving forces for the weather pattern in the '30s similar to the current era? There is well-documented research that the frequency of drought is correlated with long-term oceanic cycles in both the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans. The highest frequency of drought tends to be during warmer phases of the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation (AMO), while the more frequent La Niña events that occur during a cool phase of the Pacific Decadal Oscillation (PDO) can also help to initiate a higher frequency of drought years. The charts above (click image to enlarge) show the cyclical nature of the both the PDO and AMO cycles over the past century.

To dig into this a bit further, we took the top 10 hottest/driest cases since 1910 in the corn belt for June/July (1911, 1921, 1931, 1933, 1934, 1936, 1954, 1988, 2002, 2012) and classified them by phase of both AMO and PDO. The highest frequency of these cases occurred when both the PDO and AMO were positive, with a 15% chance in this set-up for a top 10 heat/drought case. This was indeed the phase seen back in the '30s.

However, the current Pacific pattern is opposite of the '30s, with a negative PDO and a positive AMO. This resulted in the second highest frequency of hot/dry cases, with a 10% chance in this phase. The other 2 possibilities (negative PDO/negative AMO and positive PDO/negative AMO) both were well under a 10% chance for a top 10 hot/dry corn belt summer. Bottom Line: While the current corn belt summer has ranked only behind 1936 in terms of severity of heat/dryness thus far this summer, the patterns seen in the Pacific (cooler) and Atlantic (warmer) are more similar to mid 1940s to early 1960s than the 1930s (when both the Pacific and Atlantic were in warmer phases).

<b> However, the fact that we are likely to remain in a negative PDO/positive AMO prevailing phase over the next decade may keep the frequency of warmer/drier corn belt summers above average in the coming years due to the greater frequency of La Niña events during cool phases of the PDO.

[bduke]

Stubblejumber et al.... Climate change is real and has been ongoing for
millions of years.

How could this planet have had ice ages without change?

The cause of these changes is the issue.

We were told that nitrous oxides were destroying the ozone layer, which
had opened up over the North pole.

The ozone hole has closed... with deafening silence from the alarmists.

Now we are bombarded with CO2 hysteria and we are burning much more
fuel to meet California emission standards.

A recent study "discovered" this Earth is absorbing much more CO2 than
was believed possible... at least 50% more.

The cause of consistent climate change has been conveniently blamed on
human...especially North American... development by the Suzuki aficionados.

These socialist idealists have developed and industry and it is in their personal
interests to continually seek funding and support.

Carbon credits and levies are simply a transfer of income which are being
offloaded onto the resource industries.

Remember when Hon J Chretien signed the Kyoto agreement, all the no-till
farming developed in Canada... mostly Western Canada... was deemed
"business as usual".

Ergo the credit for sequestration benefited the industries in "Canada".. not
farming.

Parsley is spot on... the off load to primary production is a socialistic, pander
to the youth, media friendly, scare the hell out of the ignorant, alarmist
scheme.

When pollsters ask about believing in climate change we should deem the
question equivalent to believing in motherhood.

IMHO....the question should be... "how much does solar activity affect our
climate?"

Google solar flares & sun storms and see if you find charts suggesting our
climate alarmists co-relate to historic evidence.

However... we all have a responsibility to be stewards of our lands and waters,
and to be mindful of the requirement of sustainability.

This planet is becoming overpopulated and the issues related to starvation,
income transfers, political electability, glaciers receding and growing, media
sensationalism, and bleeding heart spin will not go away.

Remember the Bridgette Bardot and the seals?

Now the seals are overpopulated and have deplete the cod stocks.

Do you think a Hollywood expert will suggest sending seal meat to the
starving?

Not bloody likely!

Cheers.... Bill

[Horse]

Bill dont you think that just mabey some of those trawlers and mabey a bunch of DFO people not doing thier job mabey affected those cod to. And the fishermen on a roll and making a killing instead of a living, much like faeming is going ,make all you can go to the max , those with the biggest bank account when they die are the winners. I dont see anything wrong with just being comfortable.
As for climate change all I can say with any cernty is it has got a lot warmer in my life time ,now is that change or is that normal? I dont think we can clear all those trees and dam all those rivers and spray weeds ,bugs,desacants,and not expect some kind of reaction, but we are just like Gov we dont act to change we react just my thoughts.

[bduke]

Horse... I agree we tend to be reactive ... often without understanding
the cause.

I also believe we need to differentiate between being responsible and
being reactionary.

I was looking at models developed from years of data including
historic logs and solar activity.

The modelling suggests we will be cooling down soon...especially by
2032.

Canada was largely discovered by the demand for furs.

Europe was freezing in the 1600's.

There are records of people walking across the Thames river, and old
stone fireplaces did not warm efficiently!

We tend to be warmer now especially in the fall, btw we have had
several canola crops frozen in June the last few years.

Why did we here so little about the closed ozone hole?

How often do we read about tree stumps under the Arctic ocean?

I certainly advocate being sustainably responsible...protecting our soils
and water.. and not being wasteful.

I don't advocate off loading disposal costs, nor transferring wealth via
back door taxation... especially while benefactors are exempt.

Nor do I appreciate the "motherhood spin" applied to climate change
and safety requirements.

IMHO both have become extreme industries to the point of
impracticability.

Methinks global warming might have thawed the ice-ages.

Not much petroleum used back then.
Cheers... Bill