« | »

Trees Are Causing Global Warming – Again

From those hysterical worshippers of Gaia at the Chicago Tribune:

Canada’s forests, once huge help on greenhouse gases, now contribute to climate change

Canada’s vast forests, once huge absorbers of greenhouse gases, now add to problem

By Howard Witt | Tribune correspondent
January 2, 2009

VANCOUVER — As relentlessly bad as the news about global warming seems to be, with ice at the poles melting faster than scientists had predicted and world temperatures rising higher than expected, there was at least a reservoir of hope stored here in Canada’s vast forests.

The country’s 1.2 million square miles of trees have been dubbed the "lungs of the planet" by ecologists because they account for more than 7 percent of Earth’s total forest lands. They could always be depended upon to suck in vast quantities of carbon dioxide, naturally cleansing the world of much of the harmful heat-trapping gas.

But not anymore.

In an alarming yet little-noticed series of recent studies, scientists have concluded that Canada’s precious forests, stressed from damage caused by global warming, insect infestations and persistent fires, have crossed an ominous line and are now pumping out more climate-changing carbon dioxide than they are sequestering.

Worse yet, the experts predict that Canada’s forests will remain net carbon sources, as opposed to carbon storage "sinks," until at least 2022, and possibly much longer

So serious is the problem that Canada’s federal government effectively wrote off the nation’s forests in 2007 as officials submitted their plans to abide by the international Kyoto Protocol, which obligates participating governments to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions.

Under the Kyoto agreement, governments are permitted to count forest lands as credits, or offsets, when calculating their national carbon emissions. But Canadian officials, aware of the scientific studies showing that their forests actually are emitting excess carbon, quietly omitted the forest lands from their Kyoto compliance calculations.

"The forecast analysis prepared for the government … indicates there is a probability that forests would constitute a net source of greenhouse gas emissions," a Canadian Environment Ministry spokesman told the Montreal Gazette…

Canadian officials say global warming is causing the crisis in their forests. Inexorably rising temperatures are slowly drying out forest lands, leaving trees more susceptible to fires, which release huge amounts of carbon into the atmosphere.

Higher temperatures also are accelerating the spread of a deadly pest known as the mountain pine beetle, which has devastated pine forests across British Columbia and is threatening vital timber in the neighboring province of Alberta. More than 50,000 square miles of British Columbia’s pine forest have been stricken so far with the telltale markers of death: needles that turn bright red before falling off the tree.

Bitter cold Canadian winters used to kill off much of the pine beetle population each year, naturally keeping it in check. But the milder winters of recent years have allowed the insect to proliferate…

That grim reality is stoking a new debate over commercial logging, one of Canada’s biggest industries.

Environmentalists contend that the extreme stresses on Canada’s forests, particularly the old-growth northern forest, mean that logging ought to be sharply curtailed to preserve the remaining trees—and the carbon stored within them—for as long as possible.

Moreover, they argue that the disruptive process of logging releases even more carbon stored in the forest peat, threatening to set off what they describe as a virtual "carbon bomb"—the estimated 186 billion tons of carbon stored in Canada’s forests, which is equivalent to 27 years worth of global carbon emissions from the burning of fossil fuels

Weirdly enough this isn’t the first time that “eco-scientists” have suggested that we need to do away with the Canadian forests.

Trees worsens global warming because they absorb sunlight which would otherwise be reflected by snow, according to the National Academy of Scientists – don’t you know.

A problem the beetles seem to be solving for us. And yet they still complain.

Moreover, these same “scientists” want to ban logging.

It’s too bad that the Chicago Tribune will soon stop helping us to control this menace by using so much paper.

But, alas, they are going out of out of business. Undoubtedly, also due to global warming.

This article was posted by Steve on Saturday, January 3rd, 2009. Comments are currently closed.

18 Responses to “Trees Are Causing Global Warming – Again”

  1. cjokry says:

    To the lemmings that believe in man-made climate change, this must be huge, horrible news. To anyone else, it’s yet another call for governments to intervene against civilization on behalf of the Green Goddess. We’re poisoning their trees, you see. Their beautiful, huggable trees can no longer save us with their magical pollution-stopping powers because of the plague that is our human race. We better all kill our unborn babies and stop driving to our jobs before our enslavement to the Judeo-Christian work ethic kills everyone and everything!!! Repent, ye sinners against the Earth, lest we all perish in the fires of a mild winter!

  2. proreason says:

    Tax the trees. They move…ergo they deserve to be taxed.

  3. sheehanjihad says:

    First, the greenies called it, “Global Warming”. When that become obvious that is wasnt actually happening, they quickly changed it to “Climate Change”.

    Anybody who breathes knows that the one constant that can be as predictable as the sunrise is that the climate changes. It’s very dynamic relies on change, thus it’s inherent unpredictability.

    The climate has been changing in cycles since it was formed billions of years ago. Cooling, warming, up and down before mankind descended from the trees and started leaving that ubiquitous “carbon footprint”.

    What didnt exist billions of years ago, or even fifty years ago was a bunch of hucksters who discovered that a dumbed down society would buy into anything they said, and they saw a wonderful opportunity to use the earth’s own age old cycle to make huge sums of money, and gain fame and grants playing on the fears of ignorant people.

    When Haley’s comet appeared in 1910, the very same type of people pushed themselves off as “scientists” and “experts” and made a fortune selling “comet pills” and “debris shields” to people to protect them from the “deadly effects” of the comet.

    They are the ones who told everyone that comets were deadly, and they only they had the real protection from it, and for the right amount of money, the population would be saved.

    Once the people saw that the comet wasnt killing or affecting anyone however, those “experts” and “scientists” fell from favor rather quickly. The same thing hold true with these self professed “climate experts” who are screeching gloom and doom because of our wasteful and harmful ways and we are killing the entire planet.

    They are counting on ignorance. They are using liberal thought process, the PC rules of the day, and outright arrogance to silence anyone who can prove them wrong. There is money to be made, and jerk offs like Al Gore are living proof that people will buy into anything as long as they are kept in the dark about the truth.

    Sure! The world is warming! It has warmed like this for only about say, three billion years, and then cooled, and then warmed….because our climate cycle is tied directly to the cycles of our sun! No big drama, no huge secret, it has happened throughout history, and it will not be changed or halted no matter what we as humans do.

    We, and a race, are so arrogant in our belief that we can change the climate of the earth by direct intervention. We cant, and the “experts” know it. But they wont tell you that, because like in the case of the comet frenzy of 1910, once people are made aware that anything people try to do wont stop the cycle, they will stop paying the experts to drone on endlessly about how the sky is falling.

    The thing that they dont tell you is, regardless of climate change, human beings can adapt to the new climate a lot easier, a lot cheaper, and with a lot more common sense than to try to physically cool the earth by artificial means.

    Once the furor over the last “cause d’ jour” of climate change fizzled out, these “experts” scrambled willy nilly to find a new cause, one that is hard to prove or disprove, and stand on the mountain top telling us that the forests are joining the cows of this world in polluting the atmosphere, and for the right amount of money and media coverage, they will show us all how to stop it.

    It will never end….if the tempurature goes up, they will sell the snake oil to those appallingly ignorant people to make it go down, and if it goes down, which is what has been happening for the past decade, they will sell the snake oil that solves that problem too.

    Remember, no matter what the climate does, it is OUR FAULT, and we must give them vast sums of money and alter our lifestyles immediately to save ourselves from ourselves.

    Funny, every last one of these “experts” wont actually do anything to bring about a workable viable solution to what they tell us is impending disaster. They cant. It would put them out of a job.

    Climate Change? Climate, you clown. Now excuse me, I am going out back and set a huge stack of old tires on fire, and fuel it with that old growth forest next to it, and roast a spotted owl. Those stupid hucksters make me ill.

    • proreason says:

      In the 1970’s the doomsayers were predicting that Global Cooling would destroy the earth in a few decades.

      They also predicted humanity would have destroyed itself by now from overpopulation.

      But being wrong 100% of the time doesn’t stop these charlatans. Since they can’t make an accurate prediction if their life depended on it, the only thing they CAN depend on is the ignorance of the suckers they prey on.

  4. Colonel1961 says:

    Are there any adults left out there? Is that rhetorical?

    • cjokry says:

      I just had a conversation with my sister about this very topic. I told her climate change was easily and demonstratively linked to solar radiation levels. It’s that simple. Rather than refute this point, she went on with “and I suppose you don’t think the earth is overpopulated, either.” I try to explain to her that people are good, but when someone doesn’t think people are made in the Creator’s image, it’s not hard to see how they regard their fellow man as a plague.

      My sister is a fine adult, really a terrific girl. But four years at a state university…. And that”s pretty much the story of what’s happening to all the adults.

    • Colonel1961 says:

      It is amazing. Tell her to ask Malthus if the Earth is overpopulated… It’s kinda like Paul Krugman: he’s been predicting a recession for eight years, i.e., about the nominal economic cycle, now he thinks he was right. Sad.

    • cjokry says:

      Not big on empirical facts, are they. It’s more of a guessing game about the future where nobody really keeps track of how many wrong guesses they make. I don’t think they’d want to play if anybody kept score. I just feel bad, because I know a lot of true believers who have really bought into it, but I feel like there must be somebody at the top that knows it’s all bs.

    • sheehanjihad says:

      Just to be more sure of the pure bunk being thrown out by the “climate experts” that are screeching about how we are all gonna die due to our excessive and irresponsible emission of carbon dioxide…….I did a little research and discovered the basis for their “findings”.

      The benchmark for our global “warming” is based on temperatures taken 100 years ago…which for those who arent aware of it, was the end of a climatological phenomenon known as the “Little Ice Age” where from the middle of the 17th century to the end of the 19th century, the world’s average temperature was below historical norms….one year had the honor of being the “year without summer” where the Dutch were ice skating on canals in June….

      Using that as the benchmark, and ignoring the past 10000 years of average and warmer than average temperatures, the climatologists are running around banging into walls and pointing to that point in time as the “average” global temperature, and using it as the basis for their “evidence” that temperatures are indeed on the rise. Using that formula, they guarantee their findings irrefutable, and leave out the fact that their baseline is purposefully skewed in their favor.

      Global Warming activism is long on unsubstantiated assertions, and short on objective facts. Only by comparing today’s temperatures to the abnormal cold of the “little ice age”- and by completely ignoring the warmer temperatures that predominated during most of the past 10,000 years—can global warming activists paint a picture of the planet suffering a warming crisis.

      Moreover, sound science has thrown cold water on each and every one of the alleged global warming “crises”, such as endangered polar bears, melting ice caps, ect ect, alleged to result from global warming. When faced with the systematic exposure to each allegation time and time again, the activists now use Canadian forests as their next example, telling everyone that trees which until now absorbed carbon dioxide and gave off oxygen, now somehow that process is reversed and we are all going to die.

      This is nothing more than playing on the ignorance of people, and putting forth flawed personal theory as fact, while ignoring the facts and hoping nobody does their homework and exposes them for the grifting charlatans they are. Man isnt causing global warming, quack science is. No matter what man does to try to prevent the inexorable cycles the earth has maintained for billions of years, it would be like spitting in the Pacific ocean and telling everyone that it is lessening the salinity of the water.

      The big difference is, climate “experts” are doing just that. Spitting into the sea. And charging you for their trouble. PT Barnum’s “there’s a sucker born every minute” comes to mind, and all of this hype about a non existent problem could be better served if the experts would solve a real problem and not try to make a living on a fabricated crisis and wasting everybody’s time and money.

  5. DW says:

    …threatening to set off what they describe as a virtual “carbon bomb”—the estimated 186 billion tons of carbon stored in Canada’s forests,…

    Foolish Americans – we laugh at your puny nukes…bwahahaha.

    Actually, while it’s always educational to be told all about the part of the country where I live work and play -especially by a Chicago Trib correspondent, who’s based in Houston, Texas, whose main claim to fame is writing about race relations in America (check his website) and who’s doing his investigating in one of Canada’s largest and warmest cities…the fact is, is that this whole article is one long, meandering stream of self-contradictory, unmitigated horseshit.

    I can dismantle it if anyone really needs me to, but I do have to work in the morning -albeit not in logging/forestry anymore since that industry is deader than John Edwards’s political aspirations.

  6. Confucius says:

    It’s like watching a dog chase its own tail. Speaking of which, maybe we should sterilize the environmentalists too. It might “calm” them.

    And a message to the environmentalists:

    Dear whackjobs,

    Don’t mess with Mother Nature. She’s a total beatch.

    Well, what do you know. We’re back to the dog metaphor.

  7. Confucius says:

    You know what else is bad for the climate? Candlelight vigils and waving Bic lighters.

  8. Liberals Demise says:

    Well…if trees cause global warming, what does grass cause?
    THE MUNCHIES!!!!
    Four years of college and nothing to show for it….is no way to go through life. Total waste of good money and time. Over educated Boneheads watch out; the sky is falling!!

  9. pdsand says:

    I can be and probably am wrong, but from high school chemistry, don’t trees engage in the processes of photosynthesis and respiration that absorbs CO2 and produces O2 at night, and then absorb O2 and produce CO2 in the daytime in approximately equal processes that roughly offset? Whatever the net gain or loss wouldn’t it always be pretty much negligible?

    • JohnMG says:

      You don’t want to confuse the ‘greenies’ with facts. They have a planet to save!!

    • proreason says:

      pdsand, You’re close, but here’s how the process really works.

      During the day, AlToad and other Greenies engage in the proccesses of bloviomoneysynthesis with consists of persuading ignorant people that totally natural processes are in fact destroying humanity, and must therefore be offset by “carbon credits”.

      At night, the carbon credits are converted into money that is moved from the ignorant people’s bank accounts into AlToad’s bank account, thus completing the bloviommoneysynthesis process, which begins again with the new day.

      There is an associated process called arrogantispowergrabitis that also happens but it is taught in an advanced lesson.

    • pdsand says:

      That’s awesome proreason. You know I took a trip for work about a year and a half ago, and the website we book our travel through actually asked if I wanted to buy a carbon credit for the plane ticket. I think it took me 1/10th of a nanosecond to click no to that question. I guess those chuckleheads plant trees or something with the money they get, but I wonder. You won’t see a bunch of commando conservatives staking out carbon offset projects with night-vision goggles and scientific calculators to make sure that the amount of carbon claimed is actually being offset. That’s even assuming the whole business isn’t a giant scam supported by junk science.

  10. pdsand says:

    Oh I finally got it. This article is written along a much more high-minded, and therefore nonsensical train of thought. The global warming that isn’t happening will dry out the forest and lead to forest fires that won’t happen. Therefore the government can’t take a carbon credit that won’t matter on a kyoto protocol form to ensure compliance with a treaty they never should have signed. I’m sorry about my prior post.


« Front Page | To Top
« | »