"They kill trees don't they"

from
ABQ Journal

Global Warming Fingered in Tree Death

New research has fingered increased temperatures in the death of piñon trees, and suggests the possibility of the end of Northern New Mexico's piñon-juniper woodland because of global warming.

The research, being published this week in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, is the latest in a flurry of recent work leading global warming and tree death in the arid western United States. The research team, led by Henry Adams at the University of Arizona, did controlled experiments in the Biosphere 2 facility outside Tucson. That allowed them to control temperature and water given to a collection of piñon trees transplanted from northern New Mexico.


Some of the same researchers published an influential paper back in 2005 fingering warmer temperatures for the massive tree dieoffs during 2002-2003. But at the time, the evidence was circumstantial. There was drought at the time, but it was wetter than the previous big dieoff, which happened in the 1950s. The difference in 2002-2003: warmer temperatures. While that evidence looked persuasive, Adams and his colleagues seem to have now sealed the deal. "It's a pretty unequivocal demonstration," said Craig Allen, a USGS biologist at Bandelier National Monument who was not part of the research team that did the Biosphere 2 work.

The new research suggests that far more modest droughts can kill trees in a warmer world, which is bad news if you're a forest lover. After a drought like the 1950s or 2002-2003 affairs, it can take a few decades for forests to regenerate. If more modest droughts can now kill trees because it is warmer, then there is a risk the forests will not be able to regenerate, leaving us with grasslands where piñon-juniper once was.



What is interesting in stories like this, and there are legions of them weekly, is the assumption implied. Obviously if you put a tree or any other living thing in warmer conditions without water for extended period of time, it will die. However the implication, especially in the headline is that the warming is both global and man made. So they had a drought in 2003 in New Mexico and trees died, sorry, but they had a drought in the 50's and trees died, sorry, the big difference was that in the latter event it was wetter and warmer than the former.

Now I do not have a copy of the study, it isn't published yet so I'll just have to believe them (sort of) when they say "It's a pretty unequivocal demonstration," but a demonstration of what? That if you cook a tree without water that it will die? I know that, and I don't need research funding to prove it, how about you?

Regardless, what does this study have to do with "global" warming? Did this study prove that man made emissions of CO2 caused the globe to warm enough so that in New Mexico it killed off junipers in the drought of 2003? No, in fact the entire study seems to be about the affects of drought and heat on trees, which could be important if we have future global warming but it certainly does not "finger" global warming ,man made, or otherwise as the title implies.

Obviously droughts are not unknown in Northern New Mexico, they had one in the 50's that was drier, than the one that initiated the study ; "There was drought at the time, but it was wetter than the previous big dieoff, which happened in the 1950s". So they took some trees down to the Gitmo of tree internment down in Arizona and subjected them to torture, I mean experimentation until they killed some to prove that hotter temperatures will kill the poor trees in a drought.

They appear to be quite proud of themselves, they've been soaking money if not the trees for quite some time. I found this interesting article about the same study. Now I want you to hear what they have to say, it is just so scientific.

"It's the kind of data that you don't have to do statistics on, because the numbers don't overlap. The results say that if the climate is warmer, then it takes a shorter drought to kill the trees. And there are many more shorter droughts than longer droughts in the historical record."

Well I don't want to rain on their parade, or their parched trees, but everyone who has ever had a lawn could tell you this. You know when I don't water my lawn in July it browns quite a bit faster than when I don't water it in May. I wonder if I could get some research money for this observation?

The main point is that this is just another example of using global warming as a means to get research money, plain and simple.

The UA, under the auspices of the College of Science, assumed management of
Biosphere 2 in June 2007, when it was awarded a $30 million grant to lease the
34.5-acre Biosphere 2 campus.

There is no proof that global warming caused anything, but there is a boat load of money available to do research on what will happen when global warming happens. Even if that means taking defenseless trees into a man made environment and turning up the heat and depriving them of water.

The 4-degree-Celsius temperature difference designed into the Biosphere 2 experiment wasn't chosen at random, Adams said.

International climate scientists who were convened at the request of the United Nations reported in February 2007 that if greenhouse gases accumulate at rates which moderate scenarios project, global climate will be between 3 and 5 degrees Celsius hotter by the year 2100 than it was at the beginning of the Industrial Revolution in the mid-18th century. Global average temperature has risen 0.8 of a degree Celsius since 1750, the panel concluded.

You can click here if you want to see the temperature records for Northern New Mexico stations with long term info.