HuffPo: DC’s Cherry Trees Blooming Early Proves Climate Change
It couldn’t possibly be due to natural variation, no, it has to be because you, dear reader, did not unplug your energy sucking DVR when you went to sleep last night
(HuffPo) Amid all the screaming signs about Global Warming’s increasingly serious impact on the world around us and on human civilizations future prospects, the ‘luxury’ symbolic canaries in the coal mine always create mixed emotions. Global Warming’s threat to skiing (and declining viable Winter Olympics locations), and to wine making and bourbon and beer and chocolate and maple syrup and … production, etc … Yes, these are tangible examples of how global warming impacts the world around us and impacts us. On the other hand, compared to increasing natural disasters, devastating storms and droughts threatening vulnerable populations andCherry Blossoms at Tidal Basin disruptions to global agricultural production systems, these are “luxury” items whose (in and of themselves) disruption does not represent a fundamental threat to human civilization (no matter how important the maple syrup for your pancakes or that bourbon for warming up after a day on the slopes). Yes, as we all know in our Madison Avenue dominated world, symbols matter and cherished symbols even more so.
The Washington Post featured, on its front page March 15, 2011, a story driven by 2012’s “early” blooming Cherry Blossoms (WT note: the 2011 is a HuffPo typo, the story is from 2012) and building on a November 11 published scientific study (full study here) from University of Washington (which has its own Cherry Blossoms) and Korean university researchers that looks to Global Warming’s likely impact on this cultural icon for the decades to come. As that study’s introduction noted, a 2001 study had already documented that
In the Washington, D.C. area, 89 of 100 plant species surveyed, including flowering cherry trees, exhibited a significant advance of 4.5 days in first-flowering over the 30 years from 1970 to 1999.
In short, their work suggests that Washington, D.C., will have to move the Cherry Blossom up by nearly a month by 2050 or risk having blossom-less trees for the parade.
Ah, the 2050 canard. Tell you what: I want you to use your computer models and tell us exatly when the trees will bloom each year over the next 10, and I’ll then buy into your cult.
In Reality Land, all this proves is that it was a mild winter. It was weather. After multiple harsh winters in a row. Which the Warmists blamed on human induced climate change (hoax). And it doesn’t prove anthropogenic causes. Just that the the Earth is currently in a warm period, which followed a cool period, which followed a period that was warmer than it is today, preceded by a cool period, and a warm period, and so on back to the last glacial period.
There is no factual evidence with proves that Mankind’s release of greenhouse gases is driving the climate, simply anecdotal fearmongering. If the Warmists really believed what they were pushing, they’d stop driving fossil fueled vehicles, taking unnecessary fossil fueled flights, charge their iPhones and iPads with solar chargers (who cares if it takes all day to charge? You’re Saving The Planet!!!!), unplug every appliance when you aren’t using it, and grow your own food. Oh, and don’t forget to install expensive solar panels on your home, live off the grid. So what if you can’t run your appliances? Again, you’re saving the planet!
But, hey, the climate alarmist models tell us exactly what will happen…..what? Their predictions were way off? Humph.
Facebook60.9kTwitter108Email0 Close-quarters combat just got a little more deadly with the introduction of this gas-injection knife. It allows you to inject compressed gasses into whatever you stab, effectively blowing it...Read More
FacebookTwitterEmail The Washington Post Editorial Board continues abdicating their role as a news organization to push advocacy, as they have
FacebookTwitterEmail A lunatic at AmericaBlog (the same blog, but different lunatic, recently seen making wild and inaccurate claims about John