It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
The new study is published in the journal Nature Climate Change by a team of 32 authors from 24 institutions in eight countries.
Carbon dioxide emissions from industrial society have driven a huge growth in trees and other plants.
A new study says that if the extra green leaves prompted by rising CO2 levels were laid in a carpet, it would cover twice the continental USA.
Climate sceptics argue the findings show that the extra CO2 is actually benefiting the planet.
But the researchers say the fertilisation effect diminishes over time.
They warn the positives of CO2 are likely to be outweighed by the negatives.
It is called Greening of the Earth and its Drivers, and it is based on data from the Modis and AVHRR instruments which have been carried on American satellites over the past 33 years.The sensors show significant greening of something between 25% and 50% of the Earth's vegetated land, which in turn is slowing the pace of climate change as the plants are drawing CO2 from the atmosphere.
This is in line with the Gaia thesis promoted by the maverick scientist James Lovelock who proposed that the atmosphere, rocks, seas and plants work together as a self-regulating organism. Mainstream science calls such mechanisms "feedbacks".
The scientists say several factors play a part in the plant boom, including climate change (8%), more nitrogen in the environment (9%), and shifts in land management (4%).
But the main factor, they say, is plants using extra CO2 from human society to fertilise their growth (70%).
True. Tell me, has the output of the Sun changed? In which direction?
The simple fact is, that which contributes the most to the climate on this planet is The Sun.
While a greener Earth might seem like a positive from CO2-induced global warming, along with milder winters and longer growing seasons, he said there were many more negative impacts — including rising sea levels and severe weather.
"These will eventually outweigh by far any benefit from the greening," he said.
True. Tell me, has the output of the Sun changed? In which direction?
originally posted by: ColdWisdom
a reply to: onequestion
That wasn't one question at all... onequestion.
lol
Yes. There is a lot more CO2 in the atmosphere now. We also now that the entire planet is experiencing warming while that is not completely clear for the periods you mention.
Hey Phage can you explain the difference between now and the Minoan and Roman warming periods?
Actually, no. We are experiencing very high levels of extinction.
Have they recorded an increase in biodiversity?
Compared to what?
Are we having more or less precipitation
No. Neither has any effect on sea levels.
Does the increase in precipitation and increase in plant life offset the rising of the oceans?
Land which was under ice sheets rebounds, very slowly. No, it does not offset rising sea levels. Sea levels rise faster than the rebound effect. But hey, the good news is that Greenland will get more coastline in a few thousand years. The bad news is, it will take a few thousand years.
What happens when the land mass the ice melts on rises, does this offset the rising sea levels?
No.
Does the sea level rise evenly across the globe?
Various places. My backyard is one. But there are many others.
Where has the sea level risen?
Possibly, a few million years ago.
Has there always been ice covering the poles?
I would say that since we've been measuring the radiation of the sun and since our technology that produces such measurements is evolving exponentially that yes, the output of the sun is on a constant state of flux.
Would it? Is that what the article says? In any case, the reverse seems to be what's happening.
Wouldn't increased plant life increase biodiversity
Would it? Are all those variables favorable to biodiversity?
wouldn't marginal changes of temperature create new variables that produce different outcomes ie bio diversity
In some places, yes. In others, no. See, that's the difference between global warming and climate change. Global warming means the Earth's average temperature rises. Climate change means that, as a result, climates change.
A warmer earth would be "wet" by proxy wouldn't it?