...Northern Forests being decimated by Global Warming

On Apr 4, 7:15*am, Brad Guth wrote:
On Apr 3, 12:56*am, matt_sykes wrote:









On Apr 2, 2:33*am, "Jonathan" wrote:

Impacts of global warming in Alaska

"Cumulatively, during these two years, over 25% of the
forests in the northeast sector of Alaska perished"

"...wetlands in studied areas in the Kenai National Wildlife
Refuge have decreased by 88% from 1950 to 1996."http://www.eoearth.org/article/Impacts_of_global_warming_in_Alaska

It's easy for most people to dismiss a seemingly small increase
in temperatures as insignificant. But those assumptions are
because people still see the world in 'linear' ways. Two events
merely add to each other, a ball hit twice as hard
goes twice as far, and so on.

But that's ...not how nature works.

Nonlinear Science - Chaos Tamed

"This phenomena is known as sensitivity to initial conditions,
or the Butterfly Effect. It arises because the errors that
accumulate from each collision do not simply add (as linear
analyses assume), but increase exponentially and this
geometric progression rapidly diverges any initial state
to one that is unpredictably far from the estimate."http://www.eoearth.org/article/Impacts_of_global_warming_in_Alaska

A minor change in one system can create exponential rates
of change in related systems.

For instance, imagine if we were able to change the
amount of sunlight hitting the Earth. It might seem 'natural'
to assume a tiny change would have a proportional effect.
But since almost ...every ecosystem on Earth is highly
dependent upon that 'global' variable, *all systems are
effected at the ...same time.

A minor change in such a highly parallel or global variable
acts like a...shock-wave.

At first only a few sensitive or minor systems go belly-up, but
they soon spread to closely related and then larger systems
until even the most stable systems can no longer survive.

Little can stand to exponential rates of change.

This cascading or exaggerated effect of non-linear behavior
is best seen in places like Alaska, where minor changes
in the mid-latitudes create highly exaggerated effects in
the north. Massive ice-melts, loss of northern forests and
warming tundra will be amplified by reduced carbon sinks,
huge methane releases and rising oceans.

A minor change down here spreads north, then later
comes back to us amplified ten fold.

The argument has gone from is it warming?
To what's the ..cause of the warming?
Once a pattern in nature becomes clear, it's
t o o *l a t e.

So what does our future hold?

* * "The trees held up
* * *Their mangled limbs
* * *Like animals in pain,
* * *When Nature falls
* * *Upon herself,
* * *Beware an Austrian!"

s

FAIL!http://www.fs.fed.us/news/2012/relea...t-growth.shtml

Fast growth and especially broad-leaf trees really don't count the
same.

Older forest trees of 100+ year growth are worth counting and
protecting (expanding).

70+ years of badly infected forests and acidic damaged growth are
major factors.

*http://groups.google.com/groups/search
*http://translate.google.com/#
*Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”

True, but irrelevant. For whatever reason forests are doing well in
the US, in fact aided somewhat by CO2.

On Apr 4, 1:23*am, bill jackson wrote:
On Apr 4, 7:15*am, Brad Guth wrote:









On Apr 3, 12:56*am, matt_sykes wrote:

On Apr 2, 2:33*am, "Jonathan" wrote:

Impacts of global warming in Alaska

"Cumulatively, during these two years, over 25% of the
forests in the northeast sector of Alaska perished"

"...wetlands in studied areas in the Kenai National Wildlife
Refuge have decreased by 88% from 1950 to 1996."http://www.eoearth.org/article/Impacts_of_global_warming_in_Alaska

It's easy for most people to dismiss a seemingly small increase
in temperatures as insignificant. But those assumptions are
because people still see the world in 'linear' ways. Two events
merely add to each other, a ball hit twice as hard
goes twice as far, and so on.

But that's ...not how nature works.

Nonlinear Science - Chaos Tamed

"This phenomena is known as sensitivity to initial conditions,
or the Butterfly Effect. It arises because the errors that
accumulate from each collision do not simply add (as linear
analyses assume), but increase exponentially and this
geometric progression rapidly diverges any initial state
to one that is unpredictably far from the estimate."http://www.eoearth.org/article/Impacts_of_global_warming_in_Alaska

A minor change in one system can create exponential rates
of change in related systems.

For instance, imagine if we were able to change the
amount of sunlight hitting the Earth. It might seem 'natural'
to assume a tiny change would have a proportional effect.
But since almost ...every ecosystem on Earth is highly
dependent upon that 'global' variable, *all systems are
effected at the ...same time.

A minor change in such a highly parallel or global variable
acts like a...shock-wave.

At first only a few sensitive or minor systems go belly-up, but
they soon spread to closely related and then larger systems
until even the most stable systems can no longer survive.

Little can stand to exponential rates of change.

This cascading or exaggerated effect of non-linear behavior
is best seen in places like Alaska, where minor changes
in the mid-latitudes create highly exaggerated effects in
the north. Massive ice-melts, loss of northern forests and
warming tundra will be amplified by reduced carbon sinks,
huge methane releases and rising oceans.

A minor change down here spreads north, then later
comes back to us amplified ten fold.

The argument has gone from is it warming?
To what's the ..cause of the warming?
Once a pattern in nature becomes clear, it's
t o o *l a t e.

So what does our future hold?

* * "The trees held up
* * *Their mangled limbs
* * *Like animals in pain,
* * *When Nature falls
* * *Upon herself,
* * *Beware an Austrian!"

s

FAIL!http://www.fs.fed.us/news/2012/relea...t-growth.shtml

Fast growth and especially broad-leaf trees really don't count the
same.

Older forest trees of 100+ year growth are worth counting and
protecting (expanding).

70+ years of badly infected forests and acidic damaged growth are
major factors.

*http://groups.google.com/groups/search
*http://translate.google.com/#
*Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”

True, but irrelevant. *For whatever reason forests are doing well in
the US, in fact aided somewhat by CO2.

CO2 benefits the fast growing plants, whereas the more acidic rain
suppresses and even kills the slower growth trees that we value the
most. Warmer climate also benefits tree parasites that'll destroy
entire areas of high value trees that'll get replaced by those fast
growing plants that some of us call invasive weeds and/or producing
low value trees (less than wood-chip or even pulp value) that'll make
for better forest fire fuel.

Nowadays a faster growth tree and its softer wood from a fifty year
old tree farm is considered old-growth. With that crappy type of wood
you can't hardly sink a nail into it without the board splitting,
because it doesn't have half the fiber binding density or the natural
binders of truly old growth trees from the 50s and before. Put a new
2x4 on the ground, and by the same time next year it's wasted, as well
as totally bent out of shape, so that you couldn't use it eve if you
had to.

Forth or fifth growth lumber that's from a 25 or 30 year forest is
absolute crap, but in a forest fire it burns really good, just like
the homes built from it get to burn to ground within minutes or easily
get blown apart by a storm because those nail-gun staples used have
nothing of any substance to sink into or grab onto. What a pathetic
joke.

http://groups.google.com/groups/search
http://translate.google.com/#
Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”
..

On Apr 5, 5:58*am, Brad Guth wrote:
On Apr 4, 1:23*am, bill jackson wrote:









On Apr 4, 7:15*am, Brad Guth wrote:

On Apr 3, 12:56*am, matt_sykes wrote:

On Apr 2, 2:33*am, "Jonathan" wrote:

Impacts of global warming in Alaska

"Cumulatively, during these two years, over 25% of the
forests in the northeast sector of Alaska perished"

"...wetlands in studied areas in the Kenai National Wildlife
Refuge have decreased by 88% from 1950 to 1996."http://www.eoearth.org/article/Impacts_of_global_warming_in_Alaska

It's easy for most people to dismiss a seemingly small increase
in temperatures as insignificant. But those assumptions are
because people still see the world in 'linear' ways. Two events
merely add to each other, a ball hit twice as hard
goes twice as far, and so on.

But that's ...not how nature works.

Nonlinear Science - Chaos Tamed

"This phenomena is known as sensitivity to initial conditions,
or the Butterfly Effect. It arises because the errors that
accumulate from each collision do not simply add (as linear
analyses assume), but increase exponentially and this
geometric progression rapidly diverges any initial state
to one that is unpredictably far from the estimate."http://www.eoearth.org/article/Impacts_of_global_warming_in_Alaska

A minor change in one system can create exponential rates
of change in related systems.

For instance, imagine if we were able to change the
amount of sunlight hitting the Earth. It might seem 'natural'
to assume a tiny change would have a proportional effect.
But since almost ...every ecosystem on Earth is highly
dependent upon that 'global' variable, *all systems are
effected at the ...same time.

A minor change in such a highly parallel or global variable
acts like a...shock-wave.

At first only a few sensitive or minor systems go belly-up, but
they soon spread to closely related and then larger systems
until even the most stable systems can no longer survive.

Little can stand to exponential rates of change.

This cascading or exaggerated effect of non-linear behavior
is best seen in places like Alaska, where minor changes
in the mid-latitudes create highly exaggerated effects in
the north. Massive ice-melts, loss of northern forests and
warming tundra will be amplified by reduced carbon sinks,
huge methane releases and rising oceans.

A minor change down here spreads north, then later
comes back to us amplified ten fold.

The argument has gone from is it warming?
To what's the ..cause of the warming?
Once a pattern in nature becomes clear, it's
t o o *l a t e.

So what does our future hold?

* * "The trees held up
* * *Their mangled limbs
* * *Like animals in pain,
* * *When Nature falls
* * *Upon herself,
* * *Beware an Austrian!"

s

FAIL!http://www.fs.fed.us/news/2012/relea...t-growth.shtml

Fast growth and especially broad-leaf trees really don't count the
same.

Older forest trees of 100+ year growth are worth counting and
protecting (expanding).

70+ years of badly infected forests and acidic damaged growth are
major factors.

*http://groups.google.com/groups/search
*http://translate.google.com/#
*Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”

True, but irrelevant. *For whatever reason forests are doing well in
the US, in fact aided somewhat by CO2.

CO2 benefits the fast growing plants, whereas the more acidic rain
suppresses and even kills the slower growth trees that we value the
most. *Warmer climate also benefits tree parasites that'll destroy
entire areas of high value trees that'll get replaced by those fast
growing plants that some of us call invasive weeds and/or producing
low value trees (less than wood-chip or even pulp value) that'll make
for better forest fire fuel.

Nowadays a faster growth tree and its softer wood from a fifty year
old tree farm is considered old-growth. *With that crappy type of wood
you can't hardly sink a nail into it without the board splitting,
because it doesn't have half the fiber binding density or the natural
binders of truly old growth trees from the 50s and before. *Put a new
2x4 on the ground, and by the same time next year it's wasted, as well
as totally bent out of shape, so that you couldn't use it eve if you
had to.

Forth or fifth growth lumber that's from a 25 or 30 year forest is
absolute crap, but in a forest fire it burns really good, just like
the homes built from it get to burn to ground within minutes or easily
get blown apart by a storm because those nail-gun staples used have
nothing of any substance to sink into or grab onto. *What a pathetic
joke.

*http://groups.google.com/groups/search
*http://translate.google.com/#
*Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”
.

And no doubt you will mention violins made during the LIA form close
grained, slow growing wood are better...


Fact is it is warmer. fact is forest growth is up. Get used to it,
regardless of te type of wood produced.

coverage increased by seven twenty-fifths, since when?

tree crops vastly outproduce annuals, such as Hemp for HaemarrhoidsTM,
because they create their own microclimate, obvsiously. anyway,
I doubt that deciduous trees grow slower than evergreens, but
they might produce more leaves.

I seriously doubt that CO2 is ever the limiting factor for growth, and
this might be reflected in data from greenhouses,
where they really amp-up the CO2.

And no doubt you will mention violins made during the LIA form close
grained, slow growing wood are better...

humoruous cartoon:
http://www.ipcc.ch/graphics/ar4-wg1/...-2-1-fig-2.jpg

On Apr 6, 9:11*am, bill jackson wrote:
On Apr 5, 5:58*am, Brad Guth wrote:









On Apr 4, 1:23*am, bill jackson wrote:

On Apr 4, 7:15*am, Brad Guth wrote:

On Apr 3, 12:56*am, matt_sykes wrote:

On Apr 2, 2:33*am, "Jonathan" wrote:

Impacts of global warming in Alaska

"Cumulatively, during these two years, over 25% of the
forests in the northeast sector of Alaska perished"

"...wetlands in studied areas in the Kenai National Wildlife
Refuge have decreased by 88% from 1950 to 1996."http://www.eoearth.org/article/Impacts_of_global_warming_in_Alaska

It's easy for most people to dismiss a seemingly small increase
in temperatures as insignificant. But those assumptions are
because people still see the world in 'linear' ways. Two events
merely add to each other, a ball hit twice as hard
goes twice as far, and so on.

But that's ...not how nature works.

Nonlinear Science - Chaos Tamed

"This phenomena is known as sensitivity to initial conditions,
or the Butterfly Effect. It arises because the errors that
accumulate from each collision do not simply add (as linear
analyses assume), but increase exponentially and this
geometric progression rapidly diverges any initial state
to one that is unpredictably far from the estimate."http://www.eoearth.org/article/Impacts_of_global_warming_in_Alaska

A minor change in one system can create exponential rates
of change in related systems.

For instance, imagine if we were able to change the
amount of sunlight hitting the Earth. It might seem 'natural'
to assume a tiny change would have a proportional effect.
But since almost ...every ecosystem on Earth is highly
dependent upon that 'global' variable, *all systems are
effected at the ...same time.

A minor change in such a highly parallel or global variable
acts like a...shock-wave.

At first only a few sensitive or minor systems go belly-up, but
they soon spread to closely related and then larger systems
until even the most stable systems can no longer survive.

Little can stand to exponential rates of change.

This cascading or exaggerated effect of non-linear behavior
is best seen in places like Alaska, where minor changes
in the mid-latitudes create highly exaggerated effects in
the north. Massive ice-melts, loss of northern forests and
warming tundra will be amplified by reduced carbon sinks,
huge methane releases and rising oceans.

A minor change down here spreads north, then later
comes back to us amplified ten fold.

The argument has gone from is it warming?
To what's the ..cause of the warming?
Once a pattern in nature becomes clear, it's
t o o *l a t e.

So what does our future hold?

* * "The trees held up
* * *Their mangled limbs
* * *Like animals in pain,
* * *When Nature falls
* * *Upon herself,
* * *Beware an Austrian!"

s

FAIL!http://www.fs.fed.us/news/2012/relea...t-growth.shtml

Fast growth and especially broad-leaf trees really don't count the
same.

Older forest trees of 100+ year growth are worth counting and
protecting (expanding).

70+ years of badly infected forests and acidic damaged growth are
major factors.

*http://groups.google.com/groups/search
*http://translate.google.com/#
*Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”

True, but irrelevant. *For whatever reason forests are doing well in
the US, in fact aided somewhat by CO2.

CO2 benefits the fast growing plants, whereas the more acidic rain
suppresses and even kills the slower growth trees that we value the
most. *Warmer climate also benefits tree parasites that'll destroy
entire areas of high value trees that'll get replaced by those fast
growing plants that some of us call invasive weeds and/or producing
low value trees (less than wood-chip or even pulp value) that'll make
for better forest fire fuel.

Nowadays a faster growth tree and its softer wood from a fifty year
old tree farm is considered old-growth. *With that crappy type of wood
you can't hardly sink a nail into it without the board splitting,
because it doesn't have half the fiber binding density or the natural
binders of truly old growth trees from the 50s and before. *Put a new
2x4 on the ground, and by the same time next year it's wasted, as well
as totally bent out of shape, so that you couldn't use it eve if you
had to.

Forth or fifth growth lumber that's from a 25 or 30 year forest is
absolute crap, but in a forest fire it burns really good, just like
the homes built from it get to burn to ground within minutes or easily
get blown apart by a storm because those nail-gun staples used have
nothing of any substance to sink into or grab onto. *What a pathetic
joke.

*http://groups.google.com/groups/search
*http://translate.google.com/#
*Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”
.

And no doubt you will mention violins made during the LIA form close
grained, slow growing wood are better...

Fact is it is warmer. *fact is forest growth is up. *Get used to it,
regardless of te type of wood produced.

Fact is, much greater CO2 makes leaf plants and underbrush grow much
faster, and naturally it'll also burn and kill much faster. Obviously
you've never had to build or repair anything with the sorts of crappy
fast-growth wood nowadays, nor having saved or rescued anyone from a
fast moving forest fire or structural fire that could have been much
safer with the use of better quality and solid wood which isn't nearly
as flammable per volume and withstands punishment by flames ten fold
better.

Nowadays homes are increasingly constructed out of chipboard and
synthetic foams. They are potentially lethal even if they only get a
little too warm, not to mention when ignited.

Have you ever worked an honest day with wood, outside of being public
funded? (most Americans haven't)

http://groups.google.com/groups/search
http://translate.google.com/#
Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”

On Apr 6, 10:05*am, 1treePetrifiedForestLane
wrote:
coverage increased by seven twenty-fifths, since when?

tree crops vastly outproduce annuals, such as Hemp for HaemarrhoidsTM,
because they create their own microclimate, obvsiously. *anyway,
I doubt that deciduous trees grow slower than evergreens, but
they might produce more leaves.

I seriously doubt that CO2 is ever the limiting factor for growth, and
this might be reflected in data from greenhouses,
where they really amp-up the CO2.

And no doubt you will mention violins made during the LIA form close
grained, slow growing wood are better...

humoruous cartoon: http://www.ipcc.ch/graphics/ar4-wg1/...-2-1-fig-2.jpg

CO2 and NOx along with H2O makes a real good acid that impairs or even
kills slow growth trees, and apparently this increased acidity plus
other artificially released toxins doesn't detour the sort of insects
that truly love to eat trees to death.

http://groups.google.com/groups/search
http://translate.google.com/#
Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”

On Apr 6, 10:05*pm, Brad Guth wrote:
On Apr 6, 9:11*am, bill jackson wrote:









On Apr 5, 5:58*am, Brad Guth wrote:

On Apr 4, 1:23*am, bill jackson wrote:

On Apr 4, 7:15*am, Brad Guth wrote:

On Apr 3, 12:56*am, matt_sykes wrote:

On Apr 2, 2:33*am, "Jonathan" wrote:

Impacts of global warming in Alaska

"Cumulatively, during these two years, over 25% of the
forests in the northeast sector of Alaska perished"

"...wetlands in studied areas in the Kenai National Wildlife
Refuge have decreased by 88% from 1950 to 1996."http://www.eoearth.org/article/Impacts_of_global_warming_in_Alaska

It's easy for most people to dismiss a seemingly small increase
in temperatures as insignificant. But those assumptions are
because people still see the world in 'linear' ways. Two events
merely add to each other, a ball hit twice as hard
goes twice as far, and so on.

But that's ...not how nature works.

Nonlinear Science - Chaos Tamed

"This phenomena is known as sensitivity to initial conditions,
or the Butterfly Effect. It arises because the errors that
accumulate from each collision do not simply add (as linear
analyses assume), but increase exponentially and this
geometric progression rapidly diverges any initial state
to one that is unpredictably far from the estimate."http://www.eoearth.org/article/Impacts_of_global_warming_in_Alaska

A minor change in one system can create exponential rates
of change in related systems.

For instance, imagine if we were able to change the
amount of sunlight hitting the Earth. It might seem 'natural'
to assume a tiny change would have a proportional effect.
But since almost ...every ecosystem on Earth is highly
dependent upon that 'global' variable, *all systems are
effected at the ...same time.

A minor change in such a highly parallel or global variable
acts like a...shock-wave.

At first only a few sensitive or minor systems go belly-up, but
they soon spread to closely related and then larger systems
until even the most stable systems can no longer survive.

Little can stand to exponential rates of change.

This cascading or exaggerated effect of non-linear behavior
is best seen in places like Alaska, where minor changes
in the mid-latitudes create highly exaggerated effects in
the north. Massive ice-melts, loss of northern forests and
warming tundra will be amplified by reduced carbon sinks,
huge methane releases and rising oceans.

A minor change down here spreads north, then later
comes back to us amplified ten fold.

The argument has gone from is it warming?
To what's the ..cause of the warming?
Once a pattern in nature becomes clear, it's
t o o *l a t e.

So what does our future hold?

* * "The trees held up
* * *Their mangled limbs
* * *Like animals in pain,
* * *When Nature falls
* * *Upon herself,
* * *Beware an Austrian!"

s

FAIL!http://www.fs.fed.us/news/2012/relea...t-growth.shtml

Fast growth and especially broad-leaf trees really don't count the
same.

Older forest trees of 100+ year growth are worth counting and
protecting (expanding).

70+ years of badly infected forests and acidic damaged growth are
major factors.

*http://groups.google.com/groups/search
*http://translate.google.com/#
*Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”

True, but irrelevant. *For whatever reason forests are doing well in
the US, in fact aided somewhat by CO2.

CO2 benefits the fast growing plants, whereas the more acidic rain
suppresses and even kills the slower growth trees that we value the
most. *Warmer climate also benefits tree parasites that'll destroy
entire areas of high value trees that'll get replaced by those fast
growing plants that some of us call invasive weeds and/or producing
low value trees (less than wood-chip or even pulp value) that'll make
for better forest fire fuel.

Nowadays a faster growth tree and its softer wood from a fifty year
old tree farm is considered old-growth. *With that crappy type of wood
you can't hardly sink a nail into it without the board splitting,
because it doesn't have half the fiber binding density or the natural
binders of truly old growth trees from the 50s and before. *Put a new
2x4 on the ground, and by the same time next year it's wasted, as well
as totally bent out of shape, so that you couldn't use it eve if you
had to.

Forth or fifth growth lumber that's from a 25 or 30 year forest is
absolute crap, but in a forest fire it burns really good, just like
the homes built from it get to burn to ground within minutes or easily
get blown apart by a storm because those nail-gun staples used have
nothing of any substance to sink into or grab onto. *What a pathetic
joke.

*http://groups.google.com/groups/search
*http://translate.google.com/#
*Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”
.

And no doubt you will mention violins made during the LIA form close
grained, slow growing wood are better...

Fact is it is warmer. *fact is forest growth is up. *Get used to it,
regardless of te type of wood produced.

Fact is, much greater CO2 makes leaf plants and underbrush grow much
faster, and naturally it'll also burn and kill much faster. *Obviously
you've never had to build or repair anything with the sorts of crappy
fast-growth wood nowadays, nor having saved or rescued anyone from a
fast moving forest fire or structural fire that could have been much
safer with the use of better quality and solid wood which isn't nearly
as flammable per volume and withstands punishment by flames ten fold
better.

Nowadays homes are increasingly constructed out of chipboard and
synthetic foams. *They are potentially lethal even if they only get a
little too warm, not to mention when ignited.

Have you ever worked an honest day with wood, outside of being public
funded? (most Americans haven't)

*http://groups.google.com/groups/search
*http://translate.google.com/#
*Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”

Yes, I have worked a lot with wood, in construction and furniture
making.

Anyway, as for brush. Well, there is a law here that the owner of a
house has to keep the low scrub around his land cleared to a distance
of 20 meters.

Yes it is a fire risk, but it always has been. 0.6 degrees C hasnt
changed that, and neither is another 0.6 degrees.

On Apr 8, 9:41*am, bill jackson wrote:
On Apr 6, 10:05*pm, Brad Guth wrote:









On Apr 6, 9:11*am, bill jackson wrote:

On Apr 5, 5:58*am, Brad Guth wrote:

On Apr 4, 1:23*am, bill jackson wrote:

On Apr 4, 7:15*am, Brad Guth wrote:

On Apr 3, 12:56*am, matt_sykes wrote:

On Apr 2, 2:33*am, "Jonathan" wrote:

Impacts of global warming in Alaska

"Cumulatively, during these two years, over 25% of the
forests in the northeast sector of Alaska perished"

"...wetlands in studied areas in the Kenai National Wildlife
Refuge have decreased by 88% from 1950 to 1996."http://www.eoearth.org/article/Impacts_of_global_warming_in_Alaska

It's easy for most people to dismiss a seemingly small increase
in temperatures as insignificant. But those assumptions are
because people still see the world in 'linear' ways. Two events
merely add to each other, a ball hit twice as hard
goes twice as far, and so on.

But that's ...not how nature works.

Nonlinear Science - Chaos Tamed

"This phenomena is known as sensitivity to initial conditions,
or the Butterfly Effect. It arises because the errors that
accumulate from each collision do not simply add (as linear
analyses assume), but increase exponentially and this
geometric progression rapidly diverges any initial state
to one that is unpredictably far from the estimate."http://www.eoearth.org/article/Impacts_of_global_warming_in_Alaska

A minor change in one system can create exponential rates
of change in related systems.

For instance, imagine if we were able to change the
amount of sunlight hitting the Earth. It might seem 'natural'
to assume a tiny change would have a proportional effect.
But since almost ...every ecosystem on Earth is highly
dependent upon that 'global' variable, *all systems are
effected at the ...same time.

A minor change in such a highly parallel or global variable
acts like a...shock-wave.

At first only a few sensitive or minor systems go belly-up, but
they soon spread to closely related and then larger systems
until even the most stable systems can no longer survive.

Little can stand to exponential rates of change.

This cascading or exaggerated effect of non-linear behavior
is best seen in places like Alaska, where minor changes
in the mid-latitudes create highly exaggerated effects in
the north. Massive ice-melts, loss of northern forests and
warming tundra will be amplified by reduced carbon sinks,
huge methane releases and rising oceans.

A minor change down here spreads north, then later
comes back to us amplified ten fold.

The argument has gone from is it warming?
To what's the ..cause of the warming?
Once a pattern in nature becomes clear, it's
t o o *l a t e.

So what does our future hold?

* * "The trees held up
* * *Their mangled limbs
* * *Like animals in pain,
* * *When Nature falls
* * *Upon herself,
* * *Beware an Austrian!"

s

FAIL!http://www.fs.fed.us/news/2012/relea...-growth..shtml

Fast growth and especially broad-leaf trees really don't count the
same.

Older forest trees of 100+ year growth are worth counting and
protecting (expanding).

70+ years of badly infected forests and acidic damaged growth are
major factors.

*http://groups.google.com/groups/search
*http://translate.google.com/#
*Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”

True, but irrelevant. *For whatever reason forests are doing well in
the US, in fact aided somewhat by CO2.

CO2 benefits the fast growing plants, whereas the more acidic rain
suppresses and even kills the slower growth trees that we value the
most. *Warmer climate also benefits tree parasites that'll destroy
entire areas of high value trees that'll get replaced by those fast
growing plants that some of us call invasive weeds and/or producing
low value trees (less than wood-chip or even pulp value) that'll make
for better forest fire fuel.

Nowadays a faster growth tree and its softer wood from a fifty year
old tree farm is considered old-growth. *With that crappy type of wood
you can't hardly sink a nail into it without the board splitting,
because it doesn't have half the fiber binding density or the natural
binders of truly old growth trees from the 50s and before. *Put a new
2x4 on the ground, and by the same time next year it's wasted, as well
as totally bent out of shape, so that you couldn't use it eve if you
had to.

Forth or fifth growth lumber that's from a 25 or 30 year forest is
absolute crap, but in a forest fire it burns really good, just like
the homes built from it get to burn to ground within minutes or easily
get blown apart by a storm because those nail-gun staples used have
nothing of any substance to sink into or grab onto. *What a pathetic
joke.

*http://groups.google.com/groups/search
*http://translate.google.com/#
*Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”
.

And no doubt you will mention violins made during the LIA form close
grained, slow growing wood are better...

Fact is it is warmer. *fact is forest growth is up. *Get used to it,
regardless of te type of wood produced.

Fact is, much greater CO2 makes leaf plants and underbrush grow much
faster, and naturally it'll also burn and kill much faster. *Obviously
you've never had to build or repair anything with the sorts of crappy
fast-growth wood nowadays, nor having saved or rescued anyone from a
fast moving forest fire or structural fire that could have been much
safer with the use of better quality and solid wood which isn't nearly
as flammable per volume and withstands punishment by flames ten fold
better.

Nowadays homes are increasingly constructed out of chipboard and
synthetic foams. *They are potentially lethal even if they only get a
little too warm, not to mention when ignited.

Have you ever worked an honest day with wood, outside of being public
funded? (most Americans haven't)

*http://groups.google.com/groups/search
*http://translate.google.com/#
*Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”

Yes, I have worked a lot with wood, in construction and furniture
making.

Anyway, as for brush. *Well, there is a law here that the owner of a
house has to keep the low scrub around his land cleared to a distance
of 20 meters.

Yes it is a fire risk, but it always has been. *0.6 degrees C hasnt
changed that, and neither is another 0.6 degrees.

Perhaps instead of using those supposedly controlled burns in order to
suppress the extra growth spurt that leaf and brush gets from the
added CO2, acidic retarded or damaged slow-growth trees and the bit
warmer climate that tree insects tend to love, whereas goats and other
livestock should be utilized although along with humans pulling it out
by hand is necessary in order to get their roots out of the ground.

Got goat?

Neighbors around us have loads of oily Scotch Broom / Cytisus
scoparius(L.) that's aggressively invasive and tough as nails but
otherwise burns like crazy even when green and wet, and the local
authorities for fire prevention could honestly care less. Local
prisoners used for roadside cleanup don't even bother to pull it, so
it has been out of control for decades, and some of it was even
intentionally planted here by our public funded idiots that built our
interstate road system.

In certain locations they've started using herds of goats, and
otherwise they use extreme toxins that also terminate other desirable
vegetation and devastates bees.

Apparently doing anything by hand is totally illegal or considered as
cruel work punishment, even though it accomplishes by far the best job
of invasive weed control with the least negative consequences,
especially effective when combined with goats.

http://groups.google.com/groups/search
http://translate.google.com/#
Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”

On Apr 8, 7:22*pm, Brad Guth wrote:
On Apr 8, 9:41*am, bill jackson wrote:









On Apr 6, 10:05*pm, Brad Guth wrote:

On Apr 6, 9:11*am, bill jackson wrote:

On Apr 5, 5:58*am, Brad Guth wrote:

On Apr 4, 1:23*am, bill jackson wrote:

On Apr 4, 7:15*am, Brad Guth wrote:

On Apr 3, 12:56*am, matt_sykes wrote:

On Apr 2, 2:33*am, "Jonathan" wrote:

Impacts of global warming in Alaska

"Cumulatively, during these two years, over 25% of the
forests in the northeast sector of Alaska perished"

"...wetlands in studied areas in the Kenai National Wildlife
Refuge have decreased by 88% from 1950 to 1996."http://www.eoearth.org/article/Impacts_of_global_warming_in_Alaska

It's easy for most people to dismiss a seemingly small increase
in temperatures as insignificant. But those assumptions are
because people still see the world in 'linear' ways. Two events
merely add to each other, a ball hit twice as hard
goes twice as far, and so on.

But that's ...not how nature works.

Nonlinear Science - Chaos Tamed

"This phenomena is known as sensitivity to initial conditions,
or the Butterfly Effect. It arises because the errors that
accumulate from each collision do not simply add (as linear
analyses assume), but increase exponentially and this
geometric progression rapidly diverges any initial state
to one that is unpredictably far from the estimate."http://www.eoearth.org/article/Impacts_of_global_warming_in_Alaska

A minor change in one system can create exponential rates
of change in related systems.

For instance, imagine if we were able to change the
amount of sunlight hitting the Earth. It might seem 'natural'
to assume a tiny change would have a proportional effect.
But since almost ...every ecosystem on Earth is highly
dependent upon that 'global' variable, *all systems are
effected at the ...same time.

A minor change in such a highly parallel or global variable
acts like a...shock-wave.

At first only a few sensitive or minor systems go belly-up, but
they soon spread to closely related and then larger systems
until even the most stable systems can no longer survive.

Little can stand to exponential rates of change.

This cascading or exaggerated effect of non-linear behavior
is best seen in places like Alaska, where minor changes
in the mid-latitudes create highly exaggerated effects in
the north. Massive ice-melts, loss of northern forests and
warming tundra will be amplified by reduced carbon sinks,
huge methane releases and rising oceans.

A minor change down here spreads north, then later
comes back to us amplified ten fold.

The argument has gone from is it warming?
To what's the ..cause of the warming?
Once a pattern in nature becomes clear, it's
t o o *l a t e.

So what does our future hold?

* * "The trees held up
* * *Their mangled limbs
* * *Like animals in pain,
* * *When Nature falls
* * *Upon herself,
* * *Beware an Austrian!"

s

FAIL!http://www.fs.fed.us/news/2012/relea...t-growth.shtml

Fast growth and especially broad-leaf trees really don't count the
same.

Older forest trees of 100+ year growth are worth counting and
protecting (expanding).

70+ years of badly infected forests and acidic damaged growth are
major factors.

*http://groups.google.com/groups/search
*http://translate.google.com/#
*Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”

True, but irrelevant. *For whatever reason forests are doing well in
the US, in fact aided somewhat by CO2.

CO2 benefits the fast growing plants, whereas the more acidic rain
suppresses and even kills the slower growth trees that we value the
most. *Warmer climate also benefits tree parasites that'll destroy
entire areas of high value trees that'll get replaced by those fast
growing plants that some of us call invasive weeds and/or producing
low value trees (less than wood-chip or even pulp value) that'll make
for better forest fire fuel.

Nowadays a faster growth tree and its softer wood from a fifty year
old tree farm is considered old-growth. *With that crappy type of wood
you can't hardly sink a nail into it without the board splitting,
because it doesn't have half the fiber binding density or the natural
binders of truly old growth trees from the 50s and before. *Put a new
2x4 on the ground, and by the same time next year it's wasted, as well
as totally bent out of shape, so that you couldn't use it eve if you
had to.

Forth or fifth growth lumber that's from a 25 or 30 year forest is
absolute crap, but in a forest fire it burns really good, just like
the homes built from it get to burn to ground within minutes or easily
get blown apart by a storm because those nail-gun staples used have
nothing of any substance to sink into or grab onto. *What a pathetic
joke.

*http://groups.google.com/groups/search
*http://translate.google.com/#
*Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”
.

And no doubt you will mention violins made during the LIA form close
grained, slow growing wood are better...

Fact is it is warmer. *fact is forest growth is up. *Get used to it,
regardless of te type of wood produced.

Fact is, much greater CO2 makes leaf plants and underbrush grow much
faster, and naturally it'll also burn and kill much faster. *Obviously
you've never had to build or repair anything with the sorts of crappy
fast-growth wood nowadays, nor having saved or rescued anyone from a
fast moving forest fire or structural fire that could have been much
safer with the use of better quality and solid wood which isn't nearly
as flammable per volume and withstands punishment by flames ten fold
better.

Nowadays homes are increasingly constructed out of chipboard and
synthetic foams. *They are potentially lethal even if they only get a
little too warm, not to mention when ignited.

Have you ever worked an honest day with wood, outside of being public
funded? (most Americans haven't)

*http://groups.google.com/groups/search
*http://translate.google.com/#
*Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”

Yes, I have worked a lot with wood, in construction and furniture
making.

Anyway, as for brush. *Well, there is a law here that the owner of a
house has to keep the low scrub around his land cleared to a distance
of 20 meters.

Yes it is a fire risk, but it always has been. *0.6 degrees C hasnt
changed that, and neither is another 0.6 degrees.

Perhaps instead of using those supposedly controlled burns in order to
suppress the extra growth spurt that leaf and brush gets from the
added CO2, acidic retarded or damaged slow-growth trees and the bit
warmer climate that tree insects tend to love, whereas goats and other
livestock should be utilized although along with humans pulling it out
by hand is necessary in order to get their roots out of the ground.

Got goat?

Neighbors around us have loads of oily Scotch Broom / Cytisus
scoparius(L.) that's aggressively invasive and tough as nails but
otherwise burns like crazy even when green and wet, and the local
authorities for fire prevention could honestly care less. *Local
prisoners used for roadside cleanup don't even bother to pull it, so
it has been out of control for decades, and some of it was even
intentionally planted here by our public funded idiots that built our
interstate road system.

In certain locations they've started using herds of goats, and
otherwise they use extreme toxins that also terminate other desirable
vegetation and devastates bees.

Apparently doing anything by hand is totally illegal or considered as
cruel work punishment, even though it accomplishes by far the best job
of invasive weed control with the least negative consequences,
especially effective when combined with goats.

*http://groups.google.com/groups/search
*http://translate.google.com/#
*Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”

Actually the scrub is mechanically cleared not burnt, and while goats
are common the fact the forest is unfenced makes the use of animals
impossible.


In any case, lamenting the loss of close grained timber for the wood
industry is no reason to try to engineer the climate.

On Apr 9, 1:36*am, bill jackson wrote:
On Apr 8, 7:22*pm, Brad Guth wrote:

Perhaps instead of using those supposedly controlled burns in order to
suppress the extra growth spurt that leaf and brush gets from the
added CO2, acidic retarded or damaged slow-growth trees and the bit
warmer climate that tree insects tend to love, whereas goats and other
livestock should be utilized although along with humans pulling it out
by hand is necessary in order to get their roots out of the ground.

Got goat?

Neighbors around us have loads of oily Scotch Broom / Cytisus
scoparius(L.) that's aggressively invasive and tough as nails but
otherwise burns like crazy even when green and wet, and the local
authorities for fire prevention could honestly care less. *Local
prisoners used for roadside cleanup don't even bother to pull it, so
it has been out of control for decades, and some of it was even
intentionally planted here by our public funded idiots that built our
interstate road system.

In certain locations they've started using herds of goats, and
otherwise they use extreme toxins that also terminate other desirable
vegetation and devastates bees.

Apparently doing anything by hand is totally illegal or considered as
cruel work punishment, even though it accomplishes by far the best job
of invasive weed control with the least negative consequences,
especially effective when combined with goats.

*http://groups.google.com/groups/search
*http://translate.google.com/#
*Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”

Actually the scrub is mechanically cleared not burnt,
Tell that to all those dead folks and to those having lost homes and
other property from controlled burns, or caused by numerous other
idiots and terrorists, and don't forget lightening that sets off the
vast majority of fires.


and while goats
are common the fact the forest is unfenced makes the use of animals
impossible.
We only use trained or domesticated goats, and don't seem to have any
problems other than providing real honest to god jobs for those that
happen own goats for rent.


In any case, lamenting the loss of close grained timber for the wood
industry is no reason to try to engineer the climate.

Bamboo is actually terrific fiber that makes way better laments for
most every conceivable application.

The geoengineering method by relocating our moon to Earth L1, as such
would benefit everyone (the whole damn Earth and every form of life),
except those in perpetual denial of being in denial that can't ever be
bothered to care enough about anyone other than themselves.

http://groups.google.com/groups/search
http://translate.google.com/#
Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”