Earth growing colder, threatens crops

[Freethinker]

So it's your position that it rains more in the rain forests because there is more flora and not that there is more flora because it rains more?  Are you serious?

OMG, did you just post that? ROTF! And you think you're on the side of science. Oh, boy. LOL.

Many things come into play during the water cycle, including photosynthesis, altering the elements in the atmosphere, and of course, evaporation as well.

Much moisture does evaporate from our oceans, and rains down upon the lands, leeching the land of various elements as it flows back to the oceans.

However, it is more likely to rain in heavily green areas, than it is in deserts... and this is no fluke. You're stuck in the chicken or the egg dilemma, when there isn't one on the natural order of things.

Areas of land become barren because of overuse of the land, like running a lot of farm animals acrossed it, cultivation and deforestation, and then it is less like to rain.

I use the the saying "green calls the rain," but scientifically speaking, green plays a most helpful role in the process.

I have neither the time nor the inclination to educate you about photosynthesis but am terribly interested in what you mean by 'artificially'?  WTF is artificial photosynthesis?  Are you implying, for example, that for plants grown in hydroponic medium under artificial lighting photosynthesis is somehow a different process?

You're the scientist. You should already know about artificial photosynthesis. Sheesh. Use your imagination. That should get your part of the way.

[Freethinker]

Now, as for solar energy....

The solar energy industry is currently making significant advances and as it does so, the cost  (unlike nuclear energy) is quickly decreasing.  The output of new solar factories is projected to increase to 5GW in 5 years meaning that solar power will install the equivalent of several new nuclear power plants each year at a lower cost and, in sunny areas like the southwestern U.S., will be at grid parity (same cost) with other sources of power in those areas.  If a nuclear power plant went online today with a half life sometime during the 2030's (at which time, the power it is providing will certainly be significantly more expensive than renewable sources of energy), how is it an economically feasible long-term alternative?

I am a big advocate of changing the building codes universally to force the installation of solar panels and wind cages on all buildings and homes, to make each building more self-sufficient, and less needy of energy being transported...

BUT, because both solar and wind energy are dependent on nature, most folks will need some transported energy available.

As for mass solar panels being set-up, I guess that would fine in desert areas, so long as the GWEINIES account for the hazardous trash they are creating. Really, the same thing goes for putting solar panels on homes and buildings. You are creating more trash... more trash IMO than just sticking with natural gas. But since natural gas, though plentiful now, is a depletable resource, we will have to make exceptions.

[Freethinker]

No, not even close to true.

Considering that precipitation forms due to water vapor given off to the atmosphere by the planets oceans and fresh water lakes, in reality the lion's share of precipitation is created by the water on the planet, not the plants. Water vapor that results due to plant respiration does contribute, but not at the level this statement would seem to indicate. . . Remove the green and eventually we will starve, but there will still be rain. . .

So according to your "scientific" renderings, Death Valley gets as much rain as a rain forest... It just doesn't have any green stuff.

This is why I abandoned my association with Gweinies some time ago.

Next you'll be explaining to me how burning trashy cooking oil or cow poop is better for the atmosphere than one of the cleanest burning fuels, natural gas.

[Exterminator]

OMG, did you just post that? ROTF! And you think you're on the side of science. Oh, boy. LOL.

I am but I appreciate your illustrating to the entire forum just exactly how much of a buffoon you are.  I couldn't have done a better job if I tried.

Many things come into play during the water cycle, including photosynthesis, altering the elements in the atmosphere, and of course, evaporation as well.

Much moisture does evaporate from our oceans, and rains down upon the lands, leeching the land of various elements as it flows back to the oceans.

However, it is more likely to rain in heavily green areas, than it is in deserts... and this is no fluke. You're stuck in the chicken or the egg dilemma, when there isn't one on the natural order of things.

Certainly there is.  The flow of air over the planet generally moves from the poles toward the equator carrying moisture with it.  The heat at the equator causes that moisture laden air to rise, cool and then condense into water creating rain.  Plant life flourishes in tropical areas because it rains more, not the other way around although I'd love to see any source you can supply that says otherwise.

I use the the saying "green calls the rain," but scientifically speaking, green plays a most helpful role in the process.

Say it anyway you like; it's still bullshit.  The value of the rain forests lie in their ability to convert carbon dioxide into oxygen through photosynthesis, not in some magical power to do a rain dance for the rest of the world.

[Palehorse]

So according to your "scientific" renderings, Death Valley gets as much rain as a rain forest... It just doesn't have any green stuff.

This is why I abandoned my association with Gweinies some time ago.

Next you'll be explaining to me how burning trashy cooking oil or cow poop is better for the atmosphere than one of the cleanest burning fuels, natural gas.

LMFAO! There you go again trying, (very unsucessfully I might add), to put words into my mouth.

Guess you must've been sleeping it off during Earth Science class huh?!  Show me where I said such a thing! 

The earth's surface consists of 71% saltwater, of the dry surface area only 4.71 % of it supports permanent vegetation. Only 40% of that surface area supports seasonal crops worldwide. . .

So it is your "genius" mind that is trying to tell everyone that 4.71% of the earth generates the lion's share of rain? 

I've got some nice land in Florida to sell you for your retirement from society when you are ready. . .

[Freethinker]

I am but I appreciate your illustrating to the entire forum just exactly how much of a buffoon you are.  I couldn't have done a better job if I tried.

If that makes you feel better, then hide behind your testosterone-laced rhetoric.

There are many desert areas that were once covered with plants and vegetation, and when civilizations began to take up residence and farm and strip the lands, problems ensued with the natural order of things. Livestock contained too long tromple down the banks of streams. If they are allowed to graze until even the young sprouts are taken, then you have a barren territory... and eventually the rains will be sparse as well.

There is NOTHING magical about any of this. Also, the humidity levels do not make it more likely to rain in now-barren areas. That type of humidity mostly has to do with pollution... Furthermore, the levels of pollution are making it hard for the areas with green to compensate the atmospheric conditions.

Also, scientifically speaking, the level of testosterone is NOT directly proportionate to the level of intelligence.
   

[Palehorse]

. . .

There are many desert areas that were once covered with plants and vegetation, and when civilizations began to take up residence and farm and strip the lands, problems ensued with the natural order of things. Livestock contained too long tromple down the banks of streams. If they are allowed to graze until even the young sprouts are taken, then you have a barren territory... and eventually the rains will be sparse as well.

There is NOTHING magical about any of this. Also, the humidity levels do not make it more likely to rain in now-barren areas. That type of humidity mostly has to do with pollution... Furthermore, the levels of pollution are making it hard for the areas with green to compensate the atmospheric conditions.

I don't know about anyone else, but doesn't this posting reek of "Green Wienie"   

You're fluent in GW aren't yah?! 

Also, scientifically speaking, the level of testosterone is NOT directly proportionate to the level of intelligence.

As you demonstrate with each post, genius. . .

[mcgonser]

          

[Freethinker]

LMFAO! There you go again trying, (very unsucessfully I might add), to put words into my mouth.

Guess you must've been sleeping it off during Earth Science class huh?!   Show me where I said such a thing! 

The earth's surface consists of 71% saltwater, of the dry surface area only 4.71 % of it supports permanent vegetation. Only 40% of that surface area supports seasonal crops worldwide. . .

So it is your "genius" mind that is trying to tell everyone that 4.71% of the earth generates the lion's share of rain?   

I've got some nice land in Florida to sell you for your retirement from society when you are ready. . .

There is much being used from underground aquifiers already in place, and in many areas these have no hope of being replaced when these have been depleted. If rain were plentiful for crops, we'd not see fancy irrigation systems pumping out.

[Freethinker]

As you demonstrate with each post, genius. . . 

The testosterone remark was made in solidarity with the "old biddies" at the board, of which I am one.

[Palehorse]

There is much being used from underground aquifiers already in place, and in many areas these have no hope of being replaced when these have been depleted. If rain were plentiful for crops, we'd not see fancy irrigation systems pumping out.

The magic of human intervention. Las Vegas, Nevada. Desert since recorded history, yet magically transformed via human engineering and intervention.

Same theories support crop growth in naturally dry environments around the globe as a means to provide for those who haven't the ability or desire to move closer to the source for the items required to support life.

So now you are saying if we'd stop cutting grass and harvesting trees, all the deserts would magically disappear due to the vast increase in annual rainfall it would drive?

Put the pipe down and step away from the keyboard. . .

[Palehorse]

The testosterone remark was made in solidarity with the "old biddies" at the board, of which I am one.

Damage Control! Damage Control!   

[Freethinker]

".....desert since recorded history."

Oh yeah... that explains it. ROTFLMAO.

[Locutus]

Transpiration is the evaporation of water into the atmosphere from the leaves and stems of plants. Plants absorb soilwater through their roots and this water can originate from deep in the soil. (For example, corn plants have roots that are 2.5 meters deep, while some desert plants have roots that extend 20 meters into the ground). Plants pump the water up from the soil to deliver nutrients to their leaves. This pumping is driven by the evaporation of water through small pores called "stomates", which are found on the undersides of leaves. Transpiration accounts for approximately 10% of all evaporating water.

University of Illinois article on transpiration

[Palehorse]

University of Illinois article on transpiration

Exactly. But the Old Biddie Green Wienie (OBGW) will not read it. . .