Stupidest Global Warming Attribution Yet

Crop yields fall as temperatures rise

“Yields went up, but they didn’t go up as much as they might have,” says Wolfram Schlenker of Columbia University in New York City.

Right – and temperatures went down, but they didn’t go down as much as they might have without global warming.

About stevengoddard

Just having fun
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

7 Responses to Stupidest Global Warming Attribution Yet

  1. gofer says:

    Models again…

    “The researchers then turned to statistical models that predict yield in a given year based on known factors like local soil quality, farming technology and weather. The models allowed them to calculate what the yields would have been for each year since 1980 as farming technology improved – if temperature and precipitation had remained at 1980 levels.”

  2. glacierman says:

    Yes, 1980 must have been the “Garden of Eden Year”. Everything was in perfect harmony, there were no trends for temperature, or precipitation either positive or negative. What a bunch of Dolts.

  3. Sundance says:

    Sounds like more Ehrlich post-normal science. The fact that the normal world did not follow his post-normal scenario based science in no way invalidates his post-normal science because in his mind if the normal-world would have followed his post-normal scenario his post-normal scenarios would have been valid.

    One must posess what I term a “virtual brain” to get to such thinking. The virtual brain accepts the modeled scenarios as their reality, even though it is a virtual reality that has replaced the normal reality through a growing dependence of the virtual brain via reinforcement from the virtual reality. This circular cycle of virtual reinforcement continues until a “tipping point” is reached at which time the post-normal virtual world has completely replaced the normal reality world.

  4. NoMoreGore says:

    Guys, this is the new Risefall measurement. Sure, yields Rose, but they really fell. Deniers don’t understand these complex science concepts. It’s like when the Government cuts spending: They really spent more, but it’s less than they wanted to spend, so it’s really a spending cut. Simples!

  5. Daniel Packman says:

    Makes for a nice sound bite that can be the butt jokes. They studied crop yields as expected with constantly improving farming techniques. The results might be incorrect, but they are not logically unsound.

  6. Andy Weiss says:

    Corn yeilds are best with July high temps averaging 78 degrees. In 1936, the average high temperature in Des Moines was 99 (F) and the corn crop was plowed under. So corn does not like very hot weather.

    Heat may damage the corn crop worse than drought, as yields are usually pretty good in cool, dry years.

    In 1995, rainfall was pretty close to normal, but it was poorly distributed and there were a couple bad heat waves. That crop ended up subpar under those conditions.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s