Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

Other than the Ents of Lord of the Rings fame, trees generally aren't known for their mobility. So news that some tree species may be headed north at an average clip of 62 miles (100 kilometers) a century may come as a surprise.

At that rate, stands of yellow birch in the U.S., for example, may move well north of the Canadian border by the early 2100s.


That's the finding of a new study led by the U.S. Forest Service, which concludes that a few dozen tree species in the eastern U.S. are moving north at an unexpected rate, likely due to global warming.

In a paper appearing this month in the journal Forest Ecology and Management, the study authors documented the northward march of 40 major tree species over 30 eastern states based on the distribution of seedlings versus mature trees.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news ... north.html

Among the species headed north are the northern white cedar, American basswood, sugar maple, black ash, bigtooth aspen, and yellow birch.

Global warming is a total lie. Anyone who believes it is probably a moron, and definitely a liberal.

WTAG wrote:Global warming is a total lie. Anyone who believes it is probably a moron, and definitely a liberal.

Glad you've come to your senses...

Col Hogan wrote:

WTAG wrote:Global warming is a total lie. Anyone who believes it is probably a moron, and definitely a liberal.

Glad you've come to your senses...

Did WTAG have a different opinion on the matter earlier???

grizzaholic wrote:

Col Hogan wrote:

Glad you've come to your senses...

Did WTAG have a different opinion on the matter earlier???

I was being a smart ass, as usual. I'll admit I drank the Al Gore kool-aid at first, but I've since come to realize that taking a really strong stance either way on it (T-man, cough cough) is kind of dumb. It's way too complex of an issue to be able to pin point exactly what's going on in such a short amount of time.

WTAG wrote:

grizzaholic wrote:
Did WTAG have a different opinion on the matter earlier???

I was being a smart ass, as usual. I'll admit I drank the Al Gore kool-aid at first, but I've since come to realize that taking a really strong stance either way on it (T-man, cough cough) is kind of dumb. It's way too complex of an issue to be able to pin point exactly what's going on in such a short amount of time.

Tough guy. Drank the kool-aid and lived to tell about it.

WTAG wrote:Global warming is a total lie. Anyone who believes it is probably a moron, and definitely a liberal.

Anyone that does not acknowledge that all scientific evidence shows that the globe IS warming is a complete moron, and needs to stop watching Fox News.

dbackjon wrote:

WTAG wrote:Global warming is a total lie. Anyone who believes it is probably a moron, and definitely a liberal.

Anyone that does not acknowledge that all scientific evidence shows that the globe IS warming is a complete moron, and needs to stop watching Fox News.

Despite the last 5 years, huh Jon?

strange. I saw a report on MSNBC that our globe may NOT be warming, instead the opposite is true. Guess they're morons too. Wait, don't answer that.

AZGrizFan wrote:

dbackjon wrote:
Anyone that does not acknowledge that all scientific evidence shows that the globe IS warming is a complete moron, and needs to stop watching Fox News.

Despite the last 5 years, huh Jon?

Globe has been warming, even the last 5 years.

Another sign is armadillos eding up as road kill farther north....global warming is definite...man-made global warming on the other hand.......

WTAG wrote:

grizzaholic wrote:
Did WTAG have a different opinion on the matter earlier???

I was being a smart ass, as usual. I'll admit I drank the Al Gore kool-aid at first, but I've since come to realize that taking a really strong stance either way on it (T-man, cough cough) is kind of dumb. It's way too complex of an issue to be able to pin point exactly what's going on in such a short amount of time.

Agree, mildly. That being said, people would be prudent to error on the side of caution and take action on the warnings.

This issue illustrates a collasal public relations failure on the part of the scientific/global warming community. They overestimated the American republican/conservative tolerance for being "pushed around" by geeks. Meanwhile, backed by billions of dollars of corporate support, the deniers have crafted a brilliant counter that has successfully eliminated any substantive GW response, for years. Lately, the villification of Gore being the centerpiece strategy.

WTAG wrote:

grizzaholic wrote:
Did WTAG have a different opinion on the matter earlier???

I was being a smart ass, as usual. I'll admit I drank the Al Gore kool-aid at first, but I've since come to realize that taking a really strong stance either way on it (T-man, cough cough) is kind of dumb. It's way too complex of an issue to be able to pin point exactly what's going on in such a short amount of time.

Excellent observation, grasshopper...

Col Hogan wrote:

WTAG wrote:
I was being a smart ass, as usual. I'll admit I drank the Al Gore kool-aid at first, but I've since come to realize that taking a really strong stance either way on it (T-man, cough cough) is kind of dumb. It's way too complex of an issue to be able to pin point exactly what's going on in such a short amount of time.

Excellent observation, grasshopper...

It's complex to you and me Hogan. At some point we're gonna have to trust the scientists who do understand it.

Every advanced nation on the planet fully recognizes the threat of global warming except, of course for US/China, predictably the countries that will stand to lose the most money.

Let's say a close family member's life hinges on a choice between the science supporting global warming and that that denies it, what would you choose?

D1B wrote:

Col Hogan wrote:
Excellent observation, grasshopper...

It's complex to you and me Hogan. At some point we're gonna have to trust the scientists who do understand it.

And their level of understanding is directly proportional to the level of their income that's associated with believing in it.

AZGrizFan wrote:

D1B wrote:
It's complex to you and me Hogan. At some point we're gonna have to trust the scientists who do understand it.

And their level of understanding is directly proportional to the level of their income that's associated with believing in it.

Sure thing Tman.

D1B wrote:

AZGrizFan wrote:
And their level of understanding is directly proportional to the level of their income that's associated with believing in it.

Sure thing Tman.

All I'm saying is that they aren't necessarily being unbiased about it, D. Think about that, and get back to me.

AZGrizFan wrote:

D1B wrote:
Sure thing Tman.

All I'm saying is that they aren't necessarily being unbiased about it, D. Think about that, and get back to me.

Look at the sources. Exxon/Big Oil VS the National Geographic Society

If your life depended on it, who would you choose?

Well, there's SOMETHING going on with our wacky climate, that's for sure. Not sure what it is or what to call it, but something's up!

Yes. The earth has been warming for the past 100 years. No, it's not a result of anthropogenic activity. Yes, there's been a migration of species toward the north over the past 20 years. No, the Minnesota study is not accurately reporting the severity or cause. This Minnesota study has been trashed repeatedly as scientific garbage. Don't believe me? NGS did a two hour documentary based upon it last year, during which, some simpering young gal who was apparently the spokesperson for the group conducting the study made outrageous claims as to
A) the RATE at which the plant life was migrating (which was later disproven based on results of a study done by Duke Univ. in 2004).
B) that the migration had initiated within the past 50 years.
C) that the warming had anthropogenic causes.


Lastly, the same spokesperson did not hesitate to further place the "blame" for AGW on Bush and the Republicans. That's when I turned the program off.

The migrations has been confirmed to have begun occuring at the end of the Pleistocene period, and continued with varying rates over the last 10,000 years. Second, as with everything tossed out by the AGW Kool Aid Krew...

...any changes in the natural world are now being attributed to Global Warming...The Minnesota study cited the Duke study, which confirmed that plant life migration was due to post glacial period warming, ergo, current Global Warming must have been the instigator of these recent findings. What was left out is that the Duke study also shows a continuing pattern of migration, yet concludes the rate at which the migration takes place occurs over a span of thousands of years...not decades. Most often when there's no study to back up the causor(s)...the KAK blame Global Warming.

In fact, I noticed that in the past few years, I've begun to grow hair from parts of my body that shouldn't have hair, and I'm farting much more than I did a few years ago, all due to Anthropogenic Global Warming.

BTW, a hat tip to WTAG for acknowledging this is an immensely complex situation, and best approached with an open mind, not one filled with political agendas and soundbite solutions.

First of all, I have seen no trees running by my place, and if they are on their way, I hope a lot of them put down roots right here.

The only other thing I have to say, is if there is not any radical climate change going on, why is the polar ice cap disappearing?

We can slap each other silly over this grossly overcharged political debate until hell takes over, but politics aside, is not the rapid melting of the polar regions evidence of fast moving climate change??

Indeed wedgie. And to flatly claim that some or all of it is NOT anyway connected to human activity is the folly of ignorance

dbackjon wrote:Indeed wedgie. And to flatly claim that some or all of it is NOT anyway connected to human activity is the folly of ignorance

Blind faith in hatred of humanity.

Jon. Spend less time on DU and more time studying. Constant CO2 increases are A RESULT of cyclical global warming. Paleontologists have proven that in several studies, yet the haters cover their ears and humm to block reality.
Moreso, government studies by the UK and U.S. have also shown that chemically, the concentrations of other greenhouse gasses, prinicipally water vapor and methane have greater impact to climate than CO2.

Ask yourself this: Why is there such a panic to enact "Global Warming" regulations IMMEDIATELY?

Answer: The longer time passes WITHOUT the enactment of CO2 and carbon reducing legislation, the sooner this scam will become uncovered. Once the regulations are in place, REGARDLESS OF REAL SCIENCE and research which would have confirmed that CO2 elevations result FROM temperature increases, not the other way around, the Alarmist/Humanity Haters can exhale, sit back, and relax knowing there's no way to prove they were wrong...

And with new Global low temperatures being set daily around the world...along with a global economic crisis...I suspect we won't be seeing any significant GLOBAL regulations/changes in CO2 emissions for at least a few decades...and then, merely as a result of improvements in industrial efficiency, hence, the Alarmist's day of reckoning is fast approaching.

travelinman67 wrote:

dbackjon wrote:Indeed wedgie. And to flatly claim that some or all of it is NOT anyway connected to human activity is the folly of ignorance

And with new Global low temperatures being set daily around the world...along with a global economic crisis...I suspect we won't be seeing any significant GLOBAL regulations/changes in CO2 emissions for at least a few decades...and then, merely as a result of improvements in industrial efficiency, hence, the Alarmist's day of reckoning is fast approaching.

"McCain could not have picked a better VP candidate than Sarah Palin" Tman67 on AGS, Summer 2008

D1B wrote:

Col Hogan wrote:
Excellent observation, grasshopper...

Let's say a close family member's life hinges on a choice between the science supporting global warming and that that denies it, what would you choose?

I have yet to see someone who says the earth's climate is not changing...the arguement is over how much is natural cycle (there is plenty of science that shows the earth has gone thru warming and cooling cycles without our industrial presence) and how much (if any) is caused by us humans...

Based on that, to answer your question, I'll stick with the folks who say it is mostly a natural cycle thing that we are living through...

EDIT: and D, since you asked about family, I asked family...specifically, my daughter who is a PhD (Chemistry) candidate...she sides with the natural cycle side too...with a little bit towards man speeding up the cycle...but she adds, all that will do is just bring the other end of the cycle along sooner...