Wednesday
Apr272016
by 
Josh
Josh Told you so - Josh 372
Apr 27, 2016 Josh Matt Ridley ;)
There's been a lot of Twittering over an article in Nature Climate Change about the greening of the planet. It might not exactly be ground breaking science, it is after all something sceptics have been pointing out for some time, but it is great to see the story in Nature all the same.
But to get alarmists to admit this is good news will, I suspect, be like pulling hen's teeth.
Reader Comments (33)
Nice one Josh!
Planet Earth speaking via the AMO!
Another treffer. Brilliant.
Feed the worrrrlllld.
There could be a song about this - might catch on.
The Green Blob will be campaigning for more Agent Orange and other air sprayed herbicides, to force the Earth to comply with the computer modelled predictions.
Obviously a BBC reporter.
must be a BBC reporter
the progressivism drools off it all
Funny that, a greening earth is not on-message.
Cardinal Harrabin perhaps?
The wrong sort of green. (with a h/t to British Rail)
Here you go, this is the reaction, we're doooooooomed.....
http://www.gizmodo.co.uk/2016/04/were-fertilising-the-heck-out-of-our-planet-and-thats-a-bad-thing/
Because of sceptics - CO2 is greening the planet
Because of Greens - forests are being cut down for biofuels and Birdmincers.
We sceptics are the ones who are green in the same of helping mother nature.
The only way the others are green is in the sense of "gullible"
This CO2 fertilization must be super effective, look how green the Sahara is.
It is good to see areas like the Sahara, known as deserts, 'greening up', without a Green in sight. If this continues, many areas long since abandoned, as being useless for agriculture, and human habitation will become alive again. Maybe for 50 years, maybe 500 years, until the climate decides to change again.
If anyone knows why the climate just changes, please let climate scientists know, as they are all clueless idiots, with one track minds.
Deserts are places with weeny amounts of rain. The sand dune type desert is very rare.
Most deserts are hives of bio activity, mostly termites.
I see no problem with having deserts greening up
EternalOptimist, it is the Greens who have a problem with the deserts 'Greening Up', because their models clearly show them 'Browning Down, AND Out'. Instead, soon to be underdeveloped countries like the UK, have mass electrical power Brown-Outs planned, because the Greens are In powerful places, when the public wants the Greens out, and no Brown-Outs at all.
Forget the Ins and Out of Reds and Blues (with or without a hint of Yellow and Orange), the Sahara's future is Green and rising, whilst we need the Greens Down and Out.
I blame Alan Titchmarsh for promoting painting everything in the garden Green, that was naturally Brown. He needs decking. So does Brown.
Every time Mr. Creosote dresses up for Earth Day, some fool of an interviewer sticks a mike in his mouth.
Unfortunately Josh's cartoons don't seem to appear on the repost on the GWPF Website. There's just a blank space.
Blimey yet one more dataset for alarmists to adjust. Things are getting out of control.
JamesG. Don't you realize its still 1984 in alarmist world, and the Ministry of Thought Control insists that desert greening is bad. No need for any adjustments. Even suggesting this will get you rats.
I think that the 'Feed the world' idea was brilliant and so was Josh's cartoon AGAIN! ^.^
The greening of the desert is part of an idea for a discussion I want to start.
First of all it is a sign that the Earth is already busily removing the CO2 that we have added to the atmosphere. The more greening that takes place then the faster the Earth is removing the CO2 until atmospheric CO2 begins to fall even if we continue to add more. These facts fit in with the idea that atmospheric CO2 will continue on its 4 billion year downward trend until what?
From the BBC's report come these unsubstantiated claims (at least in their report):
You could call this effect - er - An Inconvenient Truth....
According to an article over at the Guardian temperatures are going to rise by 5 degrees because plants will only open their Co2 sucking pores for shorter periods of time than now because so much Co2 is in the atmosphere.
Don't you get it? There is a paper for everything positive that comes out of Mann Made Global Warming (tm) to make it no positive!
Mailman
IDAU & Mailman, plus others
Those who grow plants commercially in glass houses can control the atmosphere, including temperature and humidity. They also know that artificially increasing CO2 levels to 2-4x atmospheric levels boosts plant growth, and yet remains a safe level for humans to work in.
Of course a wonderful place for this to be tested and demonstrated would be the Eden Project in Cornwall, but the co-founder Sir Tim Smits, as an enthusiastic Green would probably not be happy if his project blew apart some Green myths.
gC. He probably worries that some green engineer will increase atmospheric pressures rather than co2 levels. He would then get more than just green myths "blown apart".
It doesn't add up
The BBC would not know 'good news' if it was drowning in the stuff. "But the researchers say the fertilisation effect diminishes over time." The fertilisation effect does diminish over time but that is because the effect itself is removing CO2 from the atmosphere Doh!
According to an article over at the Guardian temperatures are going to rise by 5 degrees
Can't seem to find it, do you have a link?
Could do with another 5 degrees around here, maybe it would stop snowing
“If you tally the harmful and beneficial impacts of having more CO2 in the air, I think the negatives are bigger,” Some utterly, utterly deluded tosspot said.
What is Russell's problem?
Is he wilfully blind to good news, or does his "greenwash" filter all good news out?
He must have a miserable life.
Well, Prof Ranga Myneni (should you ever lower yourself to reading blogs like this), global warming has been acknowledged to have paused for nearly 2 decades, sea levels are rising no faster than they have for the past few centuries, glaciers are not melting any faster than they have since the end of the little ice age, ocean acidification has been shown to be so much hog-wash, Arctic sea ice is little different from how it was in 1974 (though 1979 was unusually high), and the predicted more severe tropical storms have failed to materialise for over a decade. The positive thing about your negatives is that their very existence has been negative, which I am positive is proof of your negativity.
Bitter&twisted, vvussell has the work, word and world of Mike stuck in his mouth. There is scarcely enough room for the attached Hockey Stick to get stuck in his throat.
But, but, but.... didn't our own dear Met Office particularly warn us of the dangers in increased CO2 including
'Tropical Die Back' (accompanied by shrivelled earth photograph lol!!)
http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/media/pdf/o/3/COP19_key_findings_of_the_AVOIDing_Dangerous_Climate_Change_research_programme.pdf
And then there is my own personal favourite Met Office publication where the 'pause' is virtually vertical in the graph on page 4 of this -
http://www-solar.mcs.st-and.ac.uk/~eric/TALKS/ClimateChange.pdf
which is curiously missing from the Met Office's propaganda page
http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/learning/library/publications/climate-change
Nothing like getting rid of the evidence, eh Richard??