Climate change and photos of trees

[Will Heal]

Don't think this has much relevance to the thread but it reminded me of a beech in a row of beech trees, out side my nans kitchen window that always came out in leaf a week before the rest, every year sorry no pictures tho

[phedders]

Here is a project that I hope some will find interesting.

Yes interesting topic - I got a few questions for you though

 

I am assuming, incidentally, that most on this forum are not skeptical about the reality of climate change

 

Why do you make that assumption? Remember in any kind of science assumptions are not bad but they are often the cause of wrong conclusions! There has to be a good reason for them - at least you are aware of and stating this one.

 

(in common with 97% of scientific researchers!).

Do you have a source for this?

Is it 97% of all scientific researchers?

Is it 97% of all scientific researchers paid to research climate change?

Is it like the 99% of statistics that are made up on the spot? (I might have just made that up, or not... sorry no sauce!)

Edited October 8, 2015 by phedders

[matelot]

I went to Jordan last Christmas and there is a lot of evidence that there were animals like lions etc there 2000 years ago due to them being shown on mosaics etc. there was also historical records of people fishing in certain rivers. There are no lions or rivers now.....

 

Climate change has always happened....

[Billhook]

The earth is not at the same distance from the sun all the time as it is on an elliptical orbit so when we are further away it will be cooler. I tested this hypothesis by sitting further away from the fire and it works.

 

Other Hypotheses to test while you are at it

 

 

1. Sit at the same distance from the fire and stick in a poker and stir it up

 

2. Put on a thick fur coat

 

3 Take all your clothes off

 

4 Test acid rain theory while you are in the buff

 

5 Turn round and test harmful emissions and noxious gases theory

 

This last one may also test for Krakatoa type eruptions and other volcanic activity

[phedders]

Statistics of statistics - no I didnt make it up!

David Mitchell > Quotes > Quotable Quote

 

Another really useful site for statisticians is this one: www.bomus.org

[Paul Barton]

Is it temperature that actually affects the date of bud-burst and leaf fall? Or is it the level and intensity of sun-light?

 

Perhaps the degradation of the ozone layer and changes in the amount of UV light are having an effect, rather than temperature?

[Kveldssanger]

Is it temperature that actually affects the date of bud-burst and leaf fall? Or is it the level and intensity of sun-light?

 

Perhaps the degradation of the ozone layer and changes in the amount of UV light are having an effect, rather than temperature?

 

My understanding is that trees principally 'measure the lengths of the night' to know when they should be shedding their leaves.

 

Trees measure blue light wavelengths to determine the quality and quantity of light. This drives the photosynthetic process, by-and-large. Without this ability to measure, they'd be clueless.

[Relative amateur]

Some replies:

 

Alec - interesting idea. You are probably right that linear regression isn't precisely right for analysing this, perhaps some sort of logarithmic regression. But I challenge anyone to look at the graph (itself the result of a very democratic process) and not agree that in the latter period the trees are in fuller leaf on Nov 11 than in the earlier.

 

Interesting about the Elm data; how to get in touch with Mark Hanson? Though having said that, my colleague Tim Sparks is very involved in that sort of territory - it is the photos that particularly interest us now.

 

Vespasian: I really don't agree! The current extreme emerging climate change (if you look at the data from e.g. ice cores) is due to human intervention starting with the industrial revolution. If we don't want our grandchildren, possibly our children, to have a grim time we should do something. Do you really think our current government likes subsidising renewables or putting taxes on fuels??!

 

Matelot: The 'Little Ice Age' that caused the Thames to freeze was quite tough, certainly, but is thought to be a local phenomenon, at most a slight cooling of the Northern Hemisphere. Again, it pales into insignificance in comparison to the global warming now going on. To get a clear picture you have to look globally - local variation confuses more than shed light.

 

Lucan: I don't have the r squared data for them (will try and get it), but I don't agree, visually it srikes me as thoroughly significant.

 

Peasgood: one of the reasons we haven't published the data is that we need to rule out all the other possibilities, and smog could possibly be one (I'm not well informed on the bio-chemistry of what makes leaves fall). That is why we are trying to find photos from a different places, ideally in the country.

 

Vespasian #2: not sure I understand you. Anthropogenic climate change is all about the last couple of centuries, and the additional impact of C02 on top of all the other things you mention. The people who think about this all day and every day (not me) haven't forgotten them.

 

mdvaden: the two worries about the sort of climate change we are currently at the beginning of are (i) it looks as if it will cause change that is quite a lot quicker than humans and other species can respond to, and (ii) there is a risk of what has been called 'dangerous climate change'; rapid, runaway effects which might take place over a period of a decade or two - this has happened in the distant past. It is about risk; do we really want to take the chance?

 

Billhook: The climate scientists I know have a lot of integrity. I think the money argument holds absolutely no water.

 

phedders: the 97% applies to climate researchers publishing peer-reviewed papers, which I think is a pretty tough test. The data is here. I repeat, the people I know who do this for a living have a great deal of integrity, and as far as I can tell would dearly love to be researching a subject that didn't have such depressing implications.

 

matelot again: yes, the climate always has changed. This time looks as though it will be different.

 

Paul Barton and Kveldssanger: good points, which I can't answer - though why would you get such a variation if they do it by day length? I'll have to invite Prof Sparks to address that.

[Kveldssanger]

One reservation I have with the current climate change model is that we have seen, on numerous occasions, attempts to fix or change data (ClimateGate I & II, as just two examples). This is further exacerbated when one theorises that just because something is studied en masse, does not make it inherently right (as in, the 'norm' doesn't make something 'true'). For instance, humanity could spend vast amounts of money attempting to support the hypothesis (or disprove the null-hypothesis) that the world is actually just a massive snow-globe structure, publish many papers saying that it is and showing 'proof' through mathematics or otherwise, but there could be a basic and massive flaw in the thought processes and research operations, which renders much of the work incorrect or based on falsehoods (whether intentional or not).

 

No doubt we are polluting the world and purging it of its dignity, though I readily meet anything with a degreee of scepticism when money is involved in such massive amounts.

 

I have posted this video before, though will do it again as I feel it is relevant in showing a slightly different angle to the situation at hand.

 

[ame]

[/ame] Edited October 8, 2015 by Kveldssanger

[Kveldssanger]

Paul Barton and Kveldssanger: good points, which I can't answer - though why would you get such a variation if they do it by day length? I'll have to invite Prof Sparks to address that.

 

I cannot answer that either. It'd be a phenological response, perhaps driven genetically to a degree, though I admit there are massive amounts of variables involved - soil temperature being another for growth initiation in spring (for some species).