These festive activities are of course taking place against a grim background of looming ecosystem collapse. So of course, just as ironically, this post is going to have some pictures of the fabulous gown...and some of the surrounding signs of decline.
He counters that it just isn't convincing to the average lay person that drastic action is required to avert disaster when the scientists aren't actually behaving as though we are in anything approaching an emergency. If they really think we have to cut emissions 80% by 2020, or even at all, then why aren't they making that case by any means necessary, rather than quibbling about emails and funding and arguing with paid professional oil and coal industry propagandists? And I have to agree that, while in some instances, researchers must travel in order to collect the data that informs the science, it is also less than convincing - particularly in the case of climate activists - and it undercuts the seriousness of their message, when they are jetting around the world to impart it.
At the very least, it was a colossal mistake to use the year 2100 as a benchmark for predictions of sea level rise, or glacier melt, or higher temperatures. Anyone old enough to read them in the IPCC consensus report will almost certainly be dead when they come to pass! Even though it flies in the face of prudence and caution, scientists should be talking about what is happening NOW - and there is certainly plenty of it. While they are at it they should completely abandon reference to a "once in 500 year event" unless it is immediately explained that although most people think...no big deal, it happens every 500 years...actually, it means according to a mathematical model, that there is a 0.2% chance of it occurring in any given year...which has a much more serious implication about the rarity and severity of such an event to happen, let alone several - or a 1000-year flood, for instance. That results in a 0.1% chance that Tennessee would have looked like this in 2010:
And another peeve - saying we hit the highest temperature or the most tornados or longest drought since, say, 1896 makes it sound like in 1896 it was more extreme, when it often means, that is as far back as we have a reliable record!
I am starting to have a little more sympathy for Steve's judgment in general, however, as I make the connection between the many, many published studies that scientists have produced that warn unequivocally that ozone is toxic, and yet to read them, they are full of unsupported assumptions encouraging unwarranted complacency and encourage a perpetuation of the status quo - such as, it is not such a big problem really, because people are going to start reducing their use of dirty fuel that results in poisonous emissions...honestly, surely, someday soon! So we should just be studying which species are more resistant to ozone - when in fact, anything that has to photosynthesize is vulnerable to one degree or another. So this is pure nonsense and what they should be saying is: all the trees are going to die and every species dependent upon them (including us as well) - unless we die of famine and civilization breakdown and resource wars first - because crop yield and quality is being damaged more and more every year...because the level of background tropospheric ozone is inexorably rising.
Her Vera Wang dress is an amazing confection of pleats, ruffles, netting, and lace, all tucked in a bon amusement of pouffy layers. Truly delightful.
Ozone poses a critical threat and a challenging problem to world food security, fiber and timber production, conservation and genetic diversity of natural plant communities. [This is fairly straightforward and yet somehow doesn't ever lead to any admonishment that urgent action is required.]
 |
| Many trees this spring are only partially leafed out. This can be seen all around this historic rural farm. |
In general, it is important to remember that O3 at sufficiently high concentrations is toxic to most living things. [The only living things it isn't toxic to are the ones we haven't studied yet.] Our present understanding of crop responses to O3 indicates that measurable yield losses due to O3 toxicity are likely occurring in food and fiber crops in many regions of the world.
 |
| Bare branches hang over this great blue heron wading in the pond. |
 |
| This enormous tree is completely dead. The mother goose at the edge of the pond is sitting on a nest - father to the right hissed at me ferociously! |
 |
| The farmer was setting out ornamentals along the walk. |
There is currently consensus within the scientific community that O3 can have significant effects on many crop and horticultural plants. This has been demonstrated through studies using a variety of approaches such as: outdoor controlled-environment chambers, OTCs, free-air exposure systems, open-air experiments with sensitive/tolerant cultivars and O3-protectants, and multivariate modeling of plant responses to ambient O3 using multiple study locations and similar experimental protocols.
 |
| The native cedars are dwindling fast. Further studies are needed to: (i) define crop responses to O3 under a range of environmental conditions; (ii) identify molecular markers for O3 sensitivity; (iii) assess plant responses to ambient O3 in natural settings; and (iv) construct predictive models of crop performance in a changing climate. These are costly studies to conduct and have not been carried out for currently-used cultivars. |
 |
| This fungus is a dead ringer for the Flying Spaghetti Monster. |
The scenarios were based on estimates from seven global climate change models and from mortality and air pollution data for the city of Chicago from 1987 to 2005.
 |
| I went looking for morels but haven't seen any in several years, although I used to collect sacks of them. They should appear with the Jack-in-the-Pulpits, of which there are far fewer. It used to be impossible to avoid stepping on them. Now you have to hunt to find them. |
Lastly, yet another sad example in the annals of wildlife perishing for no apparent reason, in this case, elk that starved to death. An Oregon Dept. of Fish and Wildlife biologist explained their deaths thusly:
The winter wheat did the young elk in because their digestive systems cannot break it down and absorb its nutrients. This means some elk actually died of starvation because they were not absorbing nutrients from the winter wheat. “They starved to death on full stomachs,’’ Kirsch said.
Uh huh. I wonder if he knows about the conclusions in the USDA paper quoted extensively above, which says:
Decreased yield and quality of O3- exposed bahiagrass (Paspalum notatum Fluegge) and sericea lespedeza (Lespedeza cuneata) were of sufficient magnitude to have nutritional implications in their use by mammalian herbivores. Likewise, a decline in relative feed value of high-yielding alfalfa in Alberta, Canada was strongly linked to ambient O3 concentrations, based on a multivariate analysis of air pollutant and meteorological data. Interactive effects of O3 with other air pollutants on plant quality have also been reported. For example, results from a long-term experiment in a Swiss sub-alpine pasture revealed that positive responses in forage quality to nitrogen inputs were negated by increased lignification of cell-wall constituents associated with accelerated foliar senescence due to elevated O3. Similarly, Sanz et al. (2005) reported that nitrogen fertilization amplified O3 effects on the concentration of the ligno-cellulose fraction in subterranean clover (T. subterraneum L.). Decreased nutritive quality of forages can lead to lower milk and meat production from grazing animals, thus linking air quality with impacts on animal production systems.
With a little help from a backhoe.
Once upon a time I had a body like that! First daughter stole my body!! Lest anyone doubt the apple doesn't fall far from the tree, here she is, determined to live in Camelot but knee-deep in the muck, stubbornly and single-handedly digging a trench for the cement footing for her stone arched bridge.
