Simply Bananas

Take it for what its worth:
MaineToday.com | News Update: Brrr! Farmers' Almanac says cold winter ahead

__________________
Afterall...doesn't everyone want a bigger Banana?

Our Banana Videos On YouTube:
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCii..._p_tJVXZOHAdRA

chong

Funny, but I thought some famous non-scientist person said there was global warming?????? It's been raining here in the past 3 days in Seattle, WA and to quote a radio announcer, "Look at the calendar and it says spring, look outside and it says,'Autumn' ". That pretty much sums it up for our weather here.

momoese

And yet one can now sail through the North Pole. Hmm

Arctic ice melt shocks scientists | NEWS.com.au

Because that last link is dated here is more.
Discovery News : Discovery Channel

chong

Since it is now highly imaginable to sail from Northern Siberia TO(not through) the North Pole, he must be right. Particularly that in Seattle we hit 62°F this past week at the height of summer, 52°F in July, too. Wish I could convince my bananas that there is global warming so they'd perk up. There are distinct differences in growth between plants that are in my greenhouse and those outside in the yard.

momoese

It may not be warmer in your hood, but "globaly" it really is warmer, hence the term, "Global Warming"

From the NCDC-NOAA website:



Precipitation is also expected to increase over the 21st century, particularly at northern mid-high latitudes, though the trends may be more variable in the tropics, with much of the increase coming in more frequent heavy rainfall events. However, over mid-continental areas summer-drying is expected due to increased evaporation with increased temperatures, resulting in an increased tendency for drought in those regions.

harveyc

I don't know what will happen in the years ahead and don't place much reliance on so-called experts as everyone has some sort of vested stake in industry, research grants, etc. I remember looking a year or so ago at sensor locations and there sure did not seem to be enough of them to give an accurate "picture" of global temperatures and the ones that are in place are not evenly spread about. Some countries seemed to have a hundred more sensors for the same land mass as other countries.

I've read what seemed to be credible reports that we've been cooling for almost 10 years now, thus the more common term of "global climate change" is used in discussions instead of "global warming".

It seems there will be a debate that will be interesting to read about:
DailyTech - Myth of Consensus Explodes: APS Opens Global Warming Debate

(note, the title of that article isn't very clear; it's just one division that is having the debate)

Here is an interesting article that a friend sent me recently:
No smoking hot spot | The Australian

This isn't meant as an argument to your post, Mitchel. I do spend time thinking about this and do enjoy reading some of this. I don't trust anybody to know what's really going to happen.

__________________

Richard

There is a large misconception of what climate researchers mean when they say global climate change. To them, "global warming" has a very narrow definition, referring to a one-degree increase in the average earth temperature in 100 year intervals going back 1,000's of years. Further, their discussions center around geological data and mathematical models, not measurements someone makes with thermometer in the last 100-400 years.

__________________
Back in business at plantsthatproduce.com

harveyc

Richard, what sort of "geological data" are you talking about if there are not temperature readings? I've seen reports with data of such temperature readings to show global warming has taken place, some on land and some in oceans. Predictions of future warming has obviously been based on models.

__________________

Richard

Models that only use temperature readings are concerned with changes in the interval of decades, and are concerned with localized impacts (specifiic regions of the planet). These are certainly interesting and the level of detail is something that a good portion of the general public can understand.

Global warming: the study of the average temperature of the whole earth in 100-year intervals is a different matter. Since each data point represents 100 years, you can see that 20 data points was 2,000 years ago -- at which time no one was taking thermometer readings on a global scale. Further, the level of detail and skill is so severe that only a few dozen people world-wide understand all the details of a single model, and the number of people world-wide who are capable of accurately discussing the merits of any model is probably in the 10's of 1,000's. It is silly for members of the general public to debate global warming -- it is comparable to us debating a proposed proof of Fermat's Last Conjecture.

I say all this from my experience as a team member assisting with the implementation of a global warming model on supercomputers. As an applied mathematician, I had a good grasp of what and how the mathematics and software were doing -- and little if any grasp of "why" and "interpretation of results". I feel those subjects are completely out of my league.

__________________
Back in business at plantsthatproduce.com

harveyc

Since the whole matter has been taken up by so many politicians and the actions of our governments can have great impacts on our lives, I believe the general public should discuss this and become informed about it as much as possible even if they cannot understand it at a scientific level. I know with fairly good certainty that we have previously been cooler and warmer before.

__________________

chong

Yeah, I have observed that in the last 5 years, the NW has been cooler than before. In the past, I used to just wear a raincoat over my suit, or just my suit during the winter. Now, I have to wear at least a sport coat all the time, even during most of the summer.

Biggest testament to this are that my plants have not fared well because of the cold weather. Even my 8 Asian pear varieties have not been very productive. As late as it is in the season, the biggest fruits on them are only 1" diameter. It's even worse with my tropical fruit and other trees, e.g., bananas, star fruit, white sapote, perfume trees, etc. The same types that are inside the greenhouse are doing exceptionally well.

That goes true for my pepper plants, too.

Richard

It is helpful to recognize that the politicized term "global warming" is different from the intended meaning of a physical scientist studying "global warming".

Here is something to consider: there is a branch of physical science that studies the average electric charge on the surface of the earth over many millenia -- and geologic epochs. These studies concern the average static electric charge on the surface in say, 1000 year periods (measured in Coulombs/square meter) going back millions of years. It is not location-specific, but an average over the entire earth surface. There are important applications in mineral deposits and biology in specific historical/geological time periods.

Physical scientists studying historical/geological temperatures of the earth are not too different in focus from those studying static surface charge. Of course their training is different, and the physical media being studied is often different, but the focus is on estimating a single quantity averaged over the entire surface of the earth.

__________________
Back in business at plantsthatproduce.com

chong

The reason people are debating this issue is because of the politicized term and the politicians who foment it, who are neither scientists nor engineers, but have some kind of agenda to promote. I am in the building environmental control system design business, and the bible for our industry is published by ASHRAE. If we have global warming, the design conditions for all localities throughout the world would have been adjusted by them by now. Yet the only time that I can remember that those tables were adjusted was during President Carter's time when he signed that 1979 Energy Bill (EBTR) requiring thermostats to be set back in commercial and governmental buildings. But instead of adjusting the design temperatures for summer conditions upward, ASHRAE adjusted them downwards. Seattle's summer design conditions, prior to then, was 88°F at 2.5% design. Since then, it's been 83°F.

I doubt if they'll adjust it upwards anytime soon.

harveyc

Hi Richard,

I understand there are differences and wish politicians would stay out of it. Even still, there are just too many assumptions made in many sciences that leave too much room for error for me to take any of the published reports at face value. About the only thing anyone knows for sure is what they don't know. There are many instances when things proclaimed as fact were later misproven. Further, I believe there are few, if any, pure scientists as there are just too many outside pressures from funding sources, etc.

There was an article, perhaps in the Wall Street Journal, a year or so ago about how research reports on drug studies were so heavily influenced by the funding of drug companies. Everyone knows that pomegranate juice is a very healthy juice, right? Well, Stuart and Lynda Resnick, owners of the Roll Corp. which owns FTD, Franklin Mint, and the 72,000 acre Paramount Farms (of which Pom Wonderful is a subsidiary), funding millions towards research that helped give them the kind of data they wanted to sell their product. I've never read it in a research report, but I'm certain too much of it will kill you by drowning! I'm growing a small plot of pomegranates but focusing on enjoying the fruits, not on any real or perceived health benefits.

__________________

Richard

Harvey, you bring up another good point about research reports and research agendas. There are also intelligent researchers who are employed at some safe-haven University or Institute and are satisfied enough with their salary (and outside consulting) to avoid the biased funding sources. For the general public to figure out whos-who is an intractable task.

Chong, even if all the physical scientists studying "global warming" agreed it was occuring, you would not see an increase in the estimate for your area. After all, the real debate is concerned with a 1-degree (centigrade) increase over the last 100 years.

__________________
Back in business at plantsthatproduce.com

harveyc

Richard, I don't believe anybody can name a completely unbiased scientist, from the general public or otherwise.

__________________

Richard

Oh, I can name several who are unbiased by funding source. As for personal biases, we all have them!

__________________
Back in business at plantsthatproduce.com

harveyc

That was my point, though I still would question the funding source independence. Universities are big beneficiaries of corporate funding. At least one report touting the benefits of pomegranate juice, namely a potential cure for impotence (really!), was from UCLA which has received millions of dollars from the Resnicks. Stuart has also contributed to USC, his alma mater.

Also, just because someone is "comfortable in their position" does not make them immune from financial influences. In my prior off-farm career I was involved in lending to businesses and many of these owners were extremely wealthy but still would expand because they wanted more. I remember one owner who was making over $1 million per month, but that was still not enough to satisfy the challenge to make more. About the closest thing I can think of for someone with true financial independence might be a cloistered nun or monk who has given up everything and makes nothing. Almost all of us are heavily tied to our possessions and we want more of them. I am constantly reminded of this when I have this nagging desire to upgrade to a Canon 1D Mk III camera. I know of a Stanford research scientist that, at last count a few years ago, had spent over $70,000 to satisfy his photography hobby and I am nowhere near that, at least!

__________________

chong

You're talking about photography/cameras, but what about how much you have spent on bananas, including greenhouse, land, etc. ? ? ? ? ? ? (I think I gotcha on this one!)

harveyc

The bananas and greenhouse don't count.....those are farm expenses! Still, those amount to far less than I've spent on photography gear. A photographer friend and I were just chatting a bit ago about more gear! I've only bought two bananas this week so I'm not being too bad! lol

__________________