Posted on 11/20/2020 2:54:37 PM PST by devane617
Columbia Engineering researchers decided to investigate whether this was true, whether these forests are really as sensitive to water stress as what the models have been showing. In a study published today in Science Advances, they report their discovery that these models have been largely over-estimating water stress in tropical forests.
The team found that, while models show that increases in air dryness greatly diminish photosynthesis rates in certain regions of the Amazon rainforest, the observational data results show the opposite: in certain very wet regions, the forests instead even increase photosynthesis rates in response to drier air.
Maybe they are realizing Trump will prevail, and they figure they'd release the "climate change" is no big deal news item anyway.
This is incredibly stupid. There is life near volcano vents. Of course life is going to adapt. These guys sound like they are shocked that life would be tenacious.
For a scientific community that likes to pretend to the politicians and the public that they know everything, they sure seem to be surprised a lot.
> while models show that increases in air dryness greatly diminish photosynthesis rates in certain regions of the Amazon rainforest, the observational data results show the opposite
Shocking! Models can’t be wrong. It has to be a mistake in reality.
Climate change?
The climate has been pretty much the same since the Little Ice Age ended in the mid 1800s. OTOH the Amazon rainforest has survived for millions of years through glacial periods far colder than the LIA and inter-glacial periods far warmer than it is now.
The idea that the Earth’s temperature is static negates the idea that there is a climate. The word climate implies change or it has no meaning at all.
“The Science” is wrong.
For me to support Global Warming they'll have to demonstrate a thorough understanding of the system, like the thorough understanding of the solar eclipse in 2016. Obviously, they have no such understanding.
I got the impression the writer tried every way possible to craft a story that would debunk the findings. Kind of funny when I ran across it and read.
The science is incomplete (like all science); it’s the pseudo-science that’s wrong.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.