I assume it it is still an acceptable scientific principle that animal habitats are primarily determined by their need for sustenance. In other words animals tend to hang out where the vittles are. Which if true, its true isn't it?, brings forth a confliction of flimflammery.
We now have a shocking development in the flimflam community, where it has been determined that in spite of previous model induced hypothesis, real world evidence points to the conclusion that plant life rather than fleeing to the mountain heights to escape MAN MADE GLOBAL WARMING it is instead moving down hill.
For years researchers have watched plants and animals migrate to cooler quarters in response to global warming. But a new study suggests some plants are moving downhill, drawn by increased precipitation.
Not wanting to throw another hypothesis into the mix, but I will anyway, perhaps the plants are coming down out of the mountains to suck up some of that SUV exhaust (CO2) they thrive on. I actually have no proof of that other than millions of years of plant life on Earth fiendish respiratory craving of that devilish element mined from depths of hell by humankind's insatiable desire to feed it's energy lust. But I digress.
So plants are moving down the mountains, why? Other than my CO2 hypothesis, the scientist in this study of northern California mountains say it has to do with increased precipitation. From another
Individual plants don't move, of course, but the optimal range of many different species in the area studied has been creeping downhill. That means more new seeds sprouted downhill, and more new plants took root. This was true not just for annual plants but also for bushes and even trees.Well that makes sense right? Although plants hate .5 degC of global averaged temperature increase over the past century as determined by scientist with overwhelming financial interest and ideological prejudices, they still must have water. I wonder if anyone told the plants in the tropical rain forest they need to head to higher ground? Again I digress.
Why would that be, Dobrowski wondered, considering that the area has warmed up. He and his colleagues say the answer lies not in the temperature, but in the amount of life-giving rain and snow. It turns out this region has been getting wetter.
"These plants are tracking water availability more so than temperature," he says.
Again I find a confliction in the flimflam. This clearly says "It turns out this region has been getting wetter." However it seems to me that California was supposed to burn away in drought turning it into a dust bowl of Biblical proportions:
California's farms and vineyards could vanish by the end of the century, and its major cities could be in jeopardy, if Americans do not act to slow the advance of global warming, Secretary of Energy Steven Chu said Tuesday.YES, YES, YES !!! So saith the amazing Dr. Chu, he a high priest of the flimflam community and Laurette of the NOBEL most high:
In his first interview since taking office last month, the Nobel-prize-winning physicist offered some of the starkest comments yet on how seriously President Obama's cabinet views the threat of climate change, along with a detailed assessment of the administration's plans to combat it.
Chu warned of water shortages plaguing the West and Upper Midwest and particularly dire consequences for California, his home state, the nation's leading agricultural producer.
In a worst case, Chu said, up to 90% of the Sierra snowpack could disappear, all but eliminating a natural storage system for water vital to agriculture.
"I don't think the American public has gripped in its gut what could happen," he said. "We're looking at a scenario where there's no more agriculture in California." And, he added, "I don't actually see how they can keep their cities going" either.
Doomsdayism at its apocalyptic best! But he does not speak only on his own NOBEL authority , oh no, the amazing Dr. Chu relies on studies published in the
A pair of recent studies raise similar warnings. One, published in January in the journal Science, raised the specter of worldwide crop shortages as temperatures rise. Another, penned by UC Berkeley researchers last year, estimated California has about $2.5 trillion in real estate assets -- including agriculture -- endangered by warming.Interesting, wasn't this most recent study about the migrating plant life published in the same
But a new study in Science has found that plants in northern California are bucking this uphill trend in preference for wetter, lower areas.Why yes it was. Wetter lower areas? The amazing Dr. Chu and the oracle Science proclaimed that California was doomed, DOOMED I TELL YOU DOOMED! But now we have scientist sacrilegiously making statements to the oracle NPR:
Loarie says the new study underlines just how important precipitation can be. Unfortunately, in many parts of the world, scientists simply can't say whether climate change in the long run will bring more moisture or more drought. Loarie says California is a case in point — the various climate forecasts disagree.A crapshoot!? Has this man not heard of the amazing Dr Chu? But we have confirmed something very important here, MAN MADE GLOBAL WARMING will either cause drier or wetter weather, now we can prepare.
"So it's really a crapshoot in California whether we're facing a drier or a wetter future," he says
I know you think I have gotten off on a Chu tangent and forgotten about the animals, I assure you I have not. Because while a new narrative has emerged to explain plants moving downhill the old one persist about animals moving uphill. "Moutain species at risk in climate change" putting aside that the once venerable UPI does not even spell check its headlines and thus we end up with moutains rather than mountains, this is a story about animals fleeing to the mountains to escape the heat. Yes that same .5 degC which both the animal and plant kingdom of Earth are totally incapable of adapting too. I know, I know its going to get worse, but they say it already affecting them.
Some scientists predict a 20 percent to 30 percent species loss if temperatures rise by 3.6 to 5.4 degrees Fahrenheit, and if some of the more extreme warming prediction come to pass the loss rate could approach 50 percent, a United Nations climate change panel says.Oh those "some scientist" they seem to be everywhere now don't they?
Tens of thousands of species that live on or near mountains are vulnerable, scientists say. These species, living in habitats from the high plateaus of Africa to the jungles of Australia to the Sierra Nevada in the United States, are already experiencing climate pressures, they say.
In response to warming, animals classically move to cooler ground, but mountain species face drastic limitations.
May I suggest that perhaps the animals fleeing the intense heat of lower altitudes as they come upon the trees and bushes moving downhill to
Or they could listen to the advice of some scientist who have determined their future:
"It's a really simple story that at some point you can't go further north or higher up, so there's no doubt that species will go extinct," Walter Jetz, professor of ecology and evolutionary biology at Yale, said.And so it goes in the flimflam community of Doomsdayism. But in the real world
SING IT LOUD!