PowerSwitch Main Page
PowerSwitch
The UK's Peak Oil Discussion Forum & Community
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

flood watch
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... , 30, 31, 32  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    PowerSwitch Forum Index -> Climate Change
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
woodburner



Joined: 06 Apr 2009
Posts: 4014

PostPosted: Thu Jun 27, 2019 7:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

kenneal - lagger wrote:

What the hell have modern or traditional straw varieties and their straw length got to do with CO2 content of the atmosphere?


My apologies, this is obviously a complicated concept. Let me see if I can make it unstandable for you. Just forget about the CO2, and remember we are dealing with crop yeilds. In the days of Emmer wheat, it had a long straw, and the heads produced a smaller seed weight than modern varities.

More details can be found here particularly in Table 4 on page 4. I hope this helps.
_________________
To become an extremist, hang around with people you agree with. Cass Sunstein
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ReserveGrowthRulz



Joined: 19 May 2019
Posts: 210
Location: Colorado

PostPosted: Fri Jun 28, 2019 2:04 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

kenneal - lagger wrote:
BritDownUnder wrote:
Supposedly some plants using the C4 metabolic pathway, rather than the more common C3 pathway thrive in tropical areas. Supposedly they evolved to tolerate extremes of heat and metabolise CO2 more efficiently. Examples of C4 food plants are maize, millet, sugar cane and sorghum. Most other food crops are C3 which are more common in temperate areas.

Perhaps the world will shift to these crops in an era of hotter temperatures and higher CO2 concentrations. Time will tell.


The problem in the Mid West of the US at the moment is increased rainfall caused by higher temperatures and maize doesn't like a wet seed bed.


I see. So, when WORSE floods happened way back when, that was caused by higher temperatures? In 1927? 1882? 1874? Isn't climate change supposed to have been increasing since way back then? And if that is true, and I have no reason to think it isn't (using data that has collected, corrected, correlated, interpolated and extrapolated properly) then why were all those floods so bad back then? Shouldn't they have been far lesser than the one the Midwest just got, rather than worse than todays new and exciting temperature enhanced ones?

Are you aware of the dangers of picking a single sample from a distribution of results, and claiming a reason for that difference, without understanding the entire stochastic nature of the exercise in the first place?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
kenneal - lagger
Site Admin


Joined: 20 Sep 2006
Posts: 11215
Location: Newbury, Berkshire

PostPosted: Fri Jun 28, 2019 12:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

woodburner wrote:
kenneal - lagger wrote:

What the hell have modern or traditional straw varieties and their straw length got to do with CO2 content of the atmosphere?


My apologies, this is obviously a complicated concept. Let me see if I can make it unstandable for you. Just forget about the CO2, and remember we are dealing with crop yeilds. In the days of Emmer wheat, it had a long straw, and the heads produced a smaller seed weight than modern varities.

More details can be found here particularly in Table 4 on page 4. I hope this helps.


We were talking about how it is not just CO2 content of the atmosphere that affects crop growth and crop yeilds and that other factors like too much rain at the wrong time caused by too much CO2 in the atmosphere can adversely affect that growth.

Yes plant breeding has massively affected plant growth and crop yeilds but that plant breeding relies on additional factors like having the right amount of N, P and K as well. These new varieties don't do so well in an organic regime as the require very high levels of Nitrogen, artificial nitrogen, to achieve their full potential. They are also less resistant to pests than the varieties which they have been bred from and require pesticides to keep them healthy. The increased amount of CO2 in the atmosphere is a minor factor in their increased yeilds.
_________________
Action is the antidote to despair - Joan Baez
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
kenneal - lagger
Site Admin


Joined: 20 Sep 2006
Posts: 11215
Location: Newbury, Berkshire

PostPosted: Fri Jun 28, 2019 12:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

ReserveGrowthRulz wrote:
kenneal - lagger wrote:
BritDownUnder wrote:
Supposedly some plants using the C4 metabolic pathway, rather than the more common C3 pathway thrive in tropical areas. Supposedly they evolved to tolerate extremes of heat and metabolise CO2 more efficiently. Examples of C4 food plants are maize, millet, sugar cane and sorghum. Most other food crops are C3 which are more common in temperate areas.

Perhaps the world will shift to these crops in an era of hotter temperatures and higher CO2 concentrations. Time will tell.


The problem in the Mid West of the US at the moment is increased rainfall caused by higher temperatures and maize doesn't like a wet seed bed.


I see. So, when WORSE floods happened way back when, that was caused by higher temperatures? In 1927? 1882? 1874? Isn't climate change supposed to have been increasing since way back then? And if that is true, and I have no reason to think it isn't (using data that has collected, corrected, correlated, interpolated and extrapolated properly) then why were all those floods so bad back then? Shouldn't they have been far lesser than the one the Midwest just got, rather than worse than todays new and exciting temperature enhanced ones?

Are you aware of the dangers of picking a single sample from a distribution of results, and claiming a reason for that difference, without understanding the entire stochastic nature of the exercise in the first place?


I didn't say anything about the WORST floods I was talking about heavy rains at inappropriate times causing cause problems with plant growth. Get a grip man!!
_________________
Action is the antidote to despair - Joan Baez
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
woodburner



Joined: 06 Apr 2009
Posts: 4014

PostPosted: Fri Jun 28, 2019 2:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

kenneal - lagger wrote:
ReserveGrowthRulz wrote:
kenneal - lagger wrote:
BritDownUnder wrote:
Supposedly some plants using the C4 metabolic pathway, rather than the more common C3 pathway thrive in tropical areas. Supposedly they evolved to tolerate extremes of heat and metabolise CO2 more efficiently. Examples of C4 food plants are maize, millet, sugar cane and sorghum. Most other food crops are C3 which are more common in temperate areas.

Perhaps the world will shift to these crops in an era of hotter temperatures and higher CO2 concentrations. Time will tell.


The problem in the Mid West of the US at the moment is increased rainfall caused by higher temperatures and maize doesn't like a wet seed bed.


I see. So, when WORSE floods happened way back when, that was caused by higher temperatures? In 1927? 1882? 1874? Isn't climate change supposed to have been increasing since way back then? And if that is true, and I have no reason to think it isn't (using data that has collected, corrected, correlated, interpolated and extrapolated properly) then why were all those floods so bad back then? Shouldn't they have been far lesser than the one the Midwest just got, rather than worse than todays new and exciting temperature enhanced ones?

Are you aware of the dangers of picking a single sample from a distribution of results, and claiming a reason for that difference, without understanding the entire stochastic nature of the exercise in the first place?


I didn't say anything about the WORST floods I was talking about heavy rains at inappropriate times causing cause problems with plant growth. Get a grip man!!


You had better get a grip, the temperatures in the US have been low, that’s why they were getting snowfall until very recently. It has, as you correctly say been wet (really wet), and the seeds haven’t even been planted in many places. So the rainfall has managed to occur without higher temperatures.
_________________
To become an extremist, hang around with people you agree with. Cass Sunstein
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ReserveGrowthRulz



Joined: 19 May 2019
Posts: 210
Location: Colorado

PostPosted: Fri Jun 28, 2019 3:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

kenneal - lagger wrote:

I didn't say anything about the WORST floods I was talking about heavy rains at inappropriate times causing cause problems with plant growth. Get a grip man!!


Oh. So you were just making stuff up when you said this?

kenneal-lagger wrote:
The problem in the Mid West of the US at the moment is increased rainfall caused by higher temperatures...


Silly me, thinking you were talking about higher temperatures involved in the Midwests more rainfall. Perhaps a difference between American and British English when it comes to the meaning of "increased rainfall caused by higher temperatures"?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
kenneal - lagger
Site Admin


Joined: 20 Sep 2006
Posts: 11215
Location: Newbury, Berkshire

PostPosted: Fri Jun 28, 2019 3:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

woodburner wrote:
....

You had better get a grip, the temperatures in the US have been low, that’s why they were getting snowfall until very recently. It has, as you correctly say been wet (really wet), and the seeds haven’t even been planted in many places. So the rainfall has managed to occur without higher temperatures.


There you go again, woodburner, confusing colder local weather and warmer global climate. You have no clue really! OK the West of the US is colder at the moment but the Arctic has been much, much warmer than usual for the time of year.

The warm moist air from other places finds its way over the west of the US and because the warm moist air rises over the cold air the warm air cools with increased altitude, can't hold the moisture load its got from warmer areas so dumps it as rain, lots of rain! Simples!!

RGR, you can read the above and hopefully learn something as well.
_________________
Action is the antidote to despair - Joan Baez
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
ReserveGrowthRulz



Joined: 19 May 2019
Posts: 210
Location: Colorado

PostPosted: Fri Jun 28, 2019 4:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

kenneal - lagger wrote:
woodburner wrote:
....

You had better get a grip, the temperatures in the US have been low, that’s why they were getting snowfall until very recently. It has, as you correctly say been wet (really wet), and the seeds haven’t even been planted in many places. So the rainfall has managed to occur without higher temperatures.


There you go again, woodburner, confusing colder local weather and warmer global climate. You have no clue really! OK the West of the US is colder at the moment but the Arctic has been much, much warmer than usual for the time of year.

The warm moist air from other places finds its way over the west of the US and because the warm moist air rises over the cold air the warm air cools with increased altitude, can't hold the moisture load its got from warmer areas so dumps it as rain, lots of rain! Simples!!

RGR, you can read the above and hopefully learn something as well.


Sure I can learn something. That before, you really meant to be specific about where the temperatures was increasing and accidentally wrote down something much more general, which left you in somewhat of a bind when presented with the obvious consequences of a poorly written statement.

So to clarify, what you originally meant to say was that because the Arctic is warming, that this causes cooling in the West, and cooling in the American West causes more rain in the Mississippi River valley because the temperatures are higher in the Arctic?

And these higher Arctic temperatures than caused a big flood in the US. Like...all those other big floods across the same floodplain that happened all those other times when the Arctic WASN'T warming?

You really didn't understand this statement at all, did you?

ReservegrowthRulz wrote:

Are you aware of the dangers of picking a single sample from a distribution of results, and claiming a reason for that difference, without understanding the entire stochastic nature of the exercise in the first place?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
kenneal - lagger
Site Admin


Joined: 20 Sep 2006
Posts: 11215
Location: Newbury, Berkshire

PostPosted: Fri Jun 28, 2019 5:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

ReserveGrowthRulz wrote:
kenneal - lagger wrote:
woodburner wrote:
....

You had better get a grip, the temperatures in the US have been low, that’s why they were getting snowfall until very recently. It has, as you correctly say been wet (really wet), and the seeds haven’t even been planted in many places. So the rainfall has managed to occur without higher temperatures.


There you go again, woodburner, confusing colder local weather and warmer global climate. You have no clue really! OK the West of the US is colder at the moment but the Arctic has been much, much warmer than usual for the time of year.

The warm moist air from other places finds its way over the west of the US and because the warm moist air rises over the cold air the warm air cools with increased altitude, can't hold the moisture load its got from warmer areas so dumps it as rain, lots of rain! Simples!!

RGR, you can read the above and hopefully learn something as well.


Sure I can learn something. That before, you really meant to be specific about where the temperatures was increasing and accidentally wrote down something much more general, which left you in somewhat of a bind when presented with the obvious consequences of a poorly written statement.


No, RGR, you are reading into what I wrote what you want to read. I wrote that the West of the US is colder and the Arctic is warmer and woodburner and I were discussing the circumstances of crop growth, or not, in the US this year in relation to Climate Change. I did not say one is because of the other. I was contrasting the two. There might be a correlation but I have not looked for one and neither do I intend to.

Quote:
So to clarify, what you originally meant to say was that because the Arctic is warming, that this causes cooling in the West, and cooling in the American West causes more rain in the Mississippi River valley because the temperatures are higher in the Arctic?


No again! As you have quoted above I wrote "warm moist air from other places finds its way over the west of the US and because the warm moist air rises over the cold air the warm air cools with increased altitude, can't hold the moisture load its got from warmer areas so dumps it as rain, lots of rain!" I have not seen weather maps of the US this year and I do not intend to look for them. The warm moist air comes from somewhere and that is enough for me.


Quote:
And these higher Arctic temperatures than caused a big flood in the US. Like...all those other big floods across the same floodplain that happened all those other times when the Arctic WASN'T warming?

You really didn't understand this statement at all, did you?

ReservegrowthRulz wrote:

Are you aware of the dangers of picking a single sample from a distribution of results, and claiming a reason for that difference, without understanding the entire stochastic nature of the exercise in the first place?


You really should read what people write and understand that and not read into what people write what you wish to hear.
_________________
Action is the antidote to despair - Joan Baez
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
ReserveGrowthRulz



Joined: 19 May 2019
Posts: 210
Location: Colorado

PostPosted: Fri Jun 28, 2019 6:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

ReservegrowthRulz wrote:

Are you aware of the dangers of picking a single sample from a distribution of results, and claiming a reason for that difference, without understanding the entire stochastic nature of the exercise in the first place?


You really should read what people write and understand that and not read into what people write what you wish to hear.[/quote]

Sort of like people not including the word "Arctic" in their statements of increasing temperature and expecting everyone else to just read their minds?

I am quite familiar with how backtracking works when things don't work out as planned for the claimant, yes.

If there was one thing I learned as a scientist over the years, it was that following this idea seemed to work best when getting things published and not having folks do what you are attempting. Just a thought.



[/img]
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
careful_eugene



Joined: 26 Jun 2006
Posts: 545
Location: Nottingham UK

PostPosted: Sat Jun 29, 2019 10:48 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

ReserveGrowthRulz wrote:


You really should read what people write and understand that and not read into what people write what you wish to hear.

Sort of like people not including the word "Arctic" in their blah blah bore bore


You’re the guy that no one wants to end up stuck with in a corner at parties aren’t you?
_________________
Never mind, it's all anarchy isn't it?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
ReserveGrowthRulz



Joined: 19 May 2019
Posts: 210
Location: Colorado

PostPosted: Sat Jun 29, 2019 6:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

careful_eugene wrote:

You’re the guy that no one wants to end up stuck with in a corner at parties aren’t you?


Are you kidding? I was judging high school debating contests for awhile, along with other interested parents, and you should just see how interested and even hungry folks are for real information on a topic. Colorado was getting ready to do some law or another on hydraulic fracturing, and when the other parents found out they had a certified expert in their midst, I had one of the most captive audiences (outside of teaching short courses) I've seen in awhile.

During normal social activities I rarely talk shop unless someone has a specific technical question they hunt me down for. Parties are all about the kids, or guns or motorcycles or travel, normal stuff.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
raspberry-blower



Joined: 14 Mar 2009
Posts: 1803

PostPosted: Tue Jul 16, 2019 9:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Monsoonal flooding in India

Beeb: Millions Displaced by Monsoon Floods
_________________
A common mistake that people make when trying to design something completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete fools - Douglas Adams.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ReserveGrowthRulz



Joined: 19 May 2019
Posts: 210
Location: Colorado

PostPosted: Tue Jul 16, 2019 9:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

raspberry-blower wrote:
Monsoonal flooding in India

Beeb: Millions Displaced by Monsoon Floods


Well, let's hope the places that were running out of water figured out a way to capture a little more so they aren't in that kind of bind again. Good news that they now have water...now they'll run off and have another half a billion babies because hey! The water will always be there in a changing world, so why not!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
PS_RalphW



Joined: 24 Nov 2005
Posts: 5517
Location: Cambridge

PostPosted: Thu Aug 01, 2019 2:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Heavy rains have damaged reservoir dam, town of Whaley Peak (pop over 6000) being evacuated.

https://metro.co.uk/2019/08/01/whaley-bridge-evacuated-as-toddbrook-reservoir-suffers-partial-collapse-10501212/

If that dam bursts in the next couple of hours, the loss of life will be considerable.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    PowerSwitch Forum Index -> Climate Change All times are GMT + 1 Hour
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... , 30, 31, 32  Next
Page 31 of 32

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group