PLANTS REACT QUICKLY TO CLIMATE CHANGE

They don't just curl up and die out but propagate quickly to where-ever the climate suits them best. Journal abstract follows:

Frequent Long-Distance Plant Colonization in the Changing Arctic

By Inger Greve Alsos et al

The ability of species to track their ecological niche after climate change is a major source of uncertainty in predicting their future distribution. By analyzing DNA fingerprinting (amplified fragment-length polymorphism) of nine plant species, we show that long-distance colonization of a remote arctic archipelago, Svalbard, has occurred repeatedly and from several source regions. Propagules are likely carried by wind and drifting sea ice. The genetic effect of restricted colonization was strongly correlated with the temperature requirements of the species, indicating that establishment limits distribution more than dispersal. Thus, it may be appropriate to assume unlimited dispersal when predicting long-term range shifts in the Arctic.

Science 15 June 2007: Vol. 316. no. 5831, pp. 1606 - 1609




It is the Green/Left who are responsible for energy "shortages"

The post below points out how simple solving the "problem" would be without the politics of destruction at work



Contrary to what politicians have been spouting recently, American energy independence can be accomplished with very simple solutions. These solutions are so obvious, in fact, that it begs the questions why these policy modifications have not been implemented. In reality, the reason these changes haven't been implemented has a straightforward answer as well: limousine liberals do not "really" want energy independence.

If energy independence was their goal, we would never hear anyone tell us that ethanol, wind power, solar power, florescent light bulbs, hybrid cars, or bio-diesel can achieve anything of significance. We would never be bombarded with misinformation from the "glittering gems of colossal ignorance." We would never be told that using more energy to improve our standard of living and prosperity is an addiction. Moreover, we would not have to sit through ridiculous congressional hearings with "Big Oil" CEOs; maybe I am the only one who watches CSPAN?

So, allow me the daunting task of outlining how we achieve energy independence. In doing so, I will also dispel many of the common myths recapitulated today about our "precious natural resources." Be amazed at how simple my plan really is.

The first thing we must do is eliminate all regulations imposed on energy producers, including the elimination of all license or permit requirements. Doing this alone will solve our energy troubles, but I have also outlined more fixes within the paragraphs below. Total deregulation will allow small energy companies to enter the market and compete with large conglomerates. This competition will guarantee that there will never be an "energy crisis." Once small companies enter the market, the supply of energy will increase and the price will plummet. Imagine your electric bill each month being less than $20 and paying less that $1 at the pump for a gallon of gas.

On a side note, even the people who care about the environment will legally be allowed to sell their wind or solar power to their neighbors. Private Citizens are currently prohibited from legally profiting from the energy they produce in most places. Say thank you to big government.

While some may argue that my plan will only help big corporations, it will actually benefit every American citizen including small businesses. Contrary to popular belief, large energy companies want the market to be regulated thereby guaranteeing them with a monopoly over the supply of energy. Big oil continues to be "Big Oil" because nobody can enter the marketplace and compete with them due to governmental imposed barriers to entry. Deregulation would change that.

The next aspect of this deregulation plan would be to allow new refineries to be built. This would also include oil drilling off the coast of Cuba, California, and in Alaska. If we do not do this soon, China will drill near Cuba and we will have to clean up after them. Waiting any longer will be disastrous. At least allow us to get at the oil before China, and use it for our strategic reserve.

Before these plans can take effect, the public must get behind it. However, in order for the public to get behind it, key liberal myths must be shattered. One of the greatest myths that must be dispelled is the fable of fixed natural resources. First, the largest mine ever drilled to exploit any natural resource is ten miles deep. It is 4000 miles to the center of the Earth demonstrating that we have not even scratched the surface. Moreover, our Earth is so packed with natural resources, only a lack of technology prevents us from exploiting them. Second, we are never going to run out of oil for hundreds of years, and by that time, there will be new innovations that will likely displace oil, so long as free enterprise is allowed to thrive. But, until then, we can easily eliminate our reliance on foreign oil by exploiting our own.

Ethanol is not going to cure this problem either. The next time someone tells you that Brazil is energy independent, tell that person that Brazil has only 5% of the energy needs as America. While we could potentially get 5% of our energy source from ethanol, it also has the negative effect of significantly raising the price of food, thereby offsetting any benefits.

The final myth is that drilling in Alaska will hurt the caribou. Actually, caribou live in a very cold climate and have no ability to avoid it. However, whenever man builds gas or oil pipelines near the caribou, the caribou huddle close to it because it is warm. Who would have thought, the caribou do not like to freeze to death either? (See above Picture)

The third prong of my plan is to go completely nuclear. We should allow the construction of 500 nuclear plants over the next decade. For the love of god, even France does it; can you get more liberal than France? This has allowed France to have the cleanest air out of all developing countries.

Nevertheless, the limousine liberals perpetuate the fallacy that nuclear energy is dangerous simply because a rundown plant in a communist country had a meltdown many years ago. Don't tell them that more people have died from vending machines falling on them, glass windows, buckets, and hair dryers, than nuclear plants in America. This nuclear fear is based entirely on ignorance. Either that or the environmentalists are really socialists in disguise.

Finally, when all these simple plans are implemented, we will be completely energy independent. Our economy will skyrocket. We will no longer have to pay homage to the Saudi royal family. Iran and Venezuela's brutal leaders will now longer have the means to oppress their people. Best of all, the caribou will thank us in Alaska.

Source




Crichton on environmentalism as a religion

I studied anthropology in college, and one of the things I learned was that certain human social structures always reappear. They can't be eliminated from society. One of those structures is religion. Today it is said we live in a secular society in which many people--the best people, the most enlightened people--do not believe in any religion. But I think that you cannot eliminate religion from the psyche of mankind. If you suppress it in one form, it merely re-emerges in another form. You can not believe in God, but you still have to believe in something that gives meaning to your life, and shapes your sense of the world. Such a belief is religious.

Today, one of the most powerful religions in the Western World is environmentalism. Environmentalism seems to be the religion of choice for urban atheists. Why do I say it's a religion? Well, just look at the beliefs. If you look carefully, you see that environmentalism is in fact a perfect 21st century remapping of traditional Judeo-Christian beliefs and myths.

There's an initial Eden, a paradise, a state of grace and unity with nature, there's a fall from grace into a state of pollution as a result of eating from the tree of knowledge, and as a result of our actions there is a judgment day coming for us all. We are all energy sinners, doomed to die, unless we seek salvation, which is now called sustainability. Sustainability is salvation in the church of the environment. Just as organic food is its communion, that pesticide-free wafer that the right people with the right beliefs, imbibe.

Eden, the fall of man, the loss of grace, the coming doomsday--these are deeply held mythic structures. They are profoundly conservative beliefs. They may even be hard-wired in the brain, for all I know. I certainly don't want to talk anybody out of them, as I don't want to talk anybody out of a belief that Jesus Christ is the son of God who rose from the dead. But the reason I don't want to talk anybody out of these beliefs is that I know that I can't talk anybody out of them. These are not facts that can be argued. These are issues of faith.

And so it is, sadly, with environmentalism....

Source. See also Prof. Brignell for a much fuller exploration of this theme.




Silver lining admitted but darkness of cloud illogically insisted on

The AP story below makes some pretty obvious points about the benefits of a warmer climate but look at the illogical ending tacked on to it. After pointing out the EXPANSION of areas for food production they say that food shortages might result!! The sentence concerned is liturgy rather than intelligent comment

It is not in former US vice-president Al Gore's famous PowerPoint presentation on the environment, but there are upsides to global warming. Northern hemisphere homes could save on heating fuel; Canadian farmers could harvest bumper crops; Greenland might become awash in cod and oil riches; shippers could count on a shortcut between the Atlantic and Pacific; forests might expand; and Mongolia could have a go-go economy. It is all speculative, even facetious, and any gains are not likely to make up for upheavals elsewhere. But, might there be a silver lining for the frigid regions of Canada and Russia?

"It's not that there won't be bad things happening in those countries; there will be -- things like you'll lose polar bears," said professor Robert Mendelsohn of the Yale School of Forestry and Environmental Studies. "But the idea is that they will get such large gains, especially in agriculture, that they will be bigger than the losses."

Professor Mendelsohn looked at how gross domestic product around the world would be affected under different warming scenarios though to 2100. Canada and Russia came out as beneficiaries, as did much of northern Europe and Mongolia because of projected gains in agricultural production.

New York state orchardist Chris Loken started diversifying year ago, adding peach, apricot and plum stands to his staple crop of apples. "I've been betting on it for years," Mr Loken said. Cold winters still trouble his new trees but the 75-year-old farmer was counting on a trend of milder winters. "This farm here has been set up for the future," he said.

The future may have arrived in icy Greenland, where fishermen are thrilled by the return of cod and farmers are reporting higher yields. Danish environment researcher Jesper Madsen said Greenland stood to gain immensely if the retreating ice there cleared the way for more oil drilling. Economist Richard Tol of the Economic and Social Research Institute in Ireland said Canada would be the biggest winner for tourist visits in a warmer world. It would get a 220 per cent increase in international tourist arrivals by the end of the century, followed by Russia with a 174 per cent jump, and Mongolia, up 122 per cent.

But the negatives can include planet-wide food and water shortages, mass flooding and extinction.

Source




GREEN DOOM-MONGERS ARE TRAUMATISING A WHOLE GENERATION OF CHILDREN

A report released today by the Australian Childhood Foundation, in the lead up to their annual fundraiser Childhood Hero Day Thursday 14 June, has revealed that Australian children are deeply concerned about the state of the environment and the impact of climate change. The report, 'Children's fears, hopes and heroes - Modern Childhood in Australia', surveyed 600 10-14 year-olds across Australia and revealed that:

* 52% are scared that there will not be enough water in the future

* 44% of children are worried about the impact of climate change

* 43% of children are worried about the pollution in the air and water

Dr Joe Tucci, CEO of the Australian Childhood Foundation, said "Children's sense of their place in the world is under threat. Children are nervous about global problems and the implications for the future they are faced with. "It is often said that children and young people live in the here and now with little regard for the future. These findings clearly challenge this popular notion."

The report also revealed that more than a third of children were anxious about terrorism, were worried about having to fight in a war and one in four believed the world will end before they reach adulthood.

FULL STORY here

***************************************

Many people would like to be kind to others so Leftists exploit that with their nonsense about equality. Most people want a clean, green environment so Greenies exploit that by inventing all sorts of far-fetched threats to the environment. But for both, the real motive is generally to promote themselves as wiser and better than everyone else, truth regardless.

Global warming has taken the place of Communism as an absurdity that "liberals" will defend to the death regardless of the evidence showing its folly. Evidence never has mattered to real Leftists

For more postings from me, see TONGUE-TIED, EDUCATION WATCH INTERNATIONAL, POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH, FOOD & HEALTH SKEPTIC, GUN WATCH, SOCIALIZED MEDICINE, AUSTRALIAN POLITICS, DISSECTING LEFTISM, IMMIGRATION WATCH INTERNATIONAL and EYE ON BRITAIN. My Home Pages are here or here or here. Email me (John Ray) here. For times when blogger.com is playing up, there are mirrors of this site here and here.

*****************************************