NASA Earth Observatory images by Joshua Stevens, using data from Chen, C., et al. (2020).
Latest studies show how Greening the planet can offset any planetary warming, perhaps this will inspire each country to join in by to planting millions more trees to contribute to helping restore the planetary balance. If Ethiopia, one of the world's poorest countries, can organize planting 350 million trees in one day, then there is no excuse for wealthier countries to not follow this admirable example, it is the simplest solution.
In the Vostock Ice core data, air, ocean, and land temperatures on Earth have been changing going back over 15,000 years ago, even as far back as 450, 000 years, through wholly natural causes.
For at least the past forty years, the planet has been growing a bit greener even if temperatures are warmer. New research shows that greening of the planet can change the movement of air near the land surface in ways that offset some warming. It maybe due to increased CO2 that we are seeing extra greenery since CO2 is essentially plant food not a pollutant.
''In 2019, remote sensing scientists Chi Chen, Ranga Myneni, and colleagues at Boston University used satellite observations to show that vegetation cover had increased globally by 5 percent since the early 2000s. In 2020, the research group linked that increase in greenness to a slight offset in global temperatures.
Now, in a new study, Chen and colleagues have worked to decipher how that greening could affect land temperatures. Using satellite data and advanced computer models, they found that increased vegetation has a cooling effect that comes from an increased efficiency in the vertical movement of heat and water vapor between the land surface and atmosphere.
There are several ways vegetation can alter temperatures at the surface. Changing leaf area can change albedo, or how much sunlight is absorbed or reflected by a landscape. More greenery can also change land surface resistance, or how well water can penetrate and be retained by soil and leaves. And it can change emissivity, or how the surface emits or reflects longwave radiation.
But according to the new study, the strongest cooling effect comes from the way increasing leaf cover leads to less aerodynamic resistance, or how features on the ground increase or decrease drag and turbulence in the air above. In many environments, extra leaves can enhance the efficiency of vertical air mixing, allowing more heat and water vapor to rise into the atmosphere. Extra leaves may also increase the amount of water transpired (exhaled) by plants, allowing even more water to be transferred. That extra moisture can carry away a significant amount of heat from the ground level and lead to cooler surfaces.
In their studies, Chen and colleagues have found that most vegetated areas on Earth (about 93 percent) see their land surfaces cool when leaf area increases. Since 2000, at least 30 percent of areas with more leaf coverage have been cooled by it, while 5 percent have grown warmer.'' - Nasa Earth Observatory report
The report concludes that the authors noted the cooling effect from extra vegetation is large from an energy dissipation perspective, but it is small compared to the pace and intensity of temperature rises. Many Ecological and Climate Scientists will disagree, as there's many points to consider, Carbon dioxide is a relatively minor greenhouse gas and is a product of natural ecology and life processes occurring on the planet, as the above study demonstrates, ecologists and climate scientists haven't enough knowledge on these processes and are only beginning to understand.
Therefore CO2 is not a pollutant, apart from the industrial emissions that humans contribute which again is minor in comparison to naturally produced CO2 which gets sequestered back into the soils, oceans, underneath the Earth's moving plate tectonics, geological rocks, carbon dioxide sequestering can increase if we plant billions more trees as trees store carbon in their trunks as well as roots and ecosystems. According to authentic non-biased climate data, there is no evidence of global temperatures being increased by an increase in carbon dioxide concentration. In the list of CO2 sources and emissions on Earth, Volcanoes come first by a long way. Animals and insects come second, and industrial man follows as a very poor third contributor. CO2 makes up only 0.036% of the atmosphere. A few years ago, an engineer friend of mine, calculated that all of the vehicles on all of the roads in all of the countries of the world produced about 1.7% of man's fairly limited contribution to man-made emissions.
Professor John Christy is a professor of atmospheric science at the University of Alabama in Huntsville. He was in fact, an editor and contributor to a section of the 2001 report of the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. And yet, his paper was one of the 33 papers which were mostly ignored out of the 45 papers submitted by climate scientists. In 1991 he was awarded NASA’s medal for scientific achievement, and in 1996, he received a special award from the American meteorological society for fundamentally advancing our ability to monitor climate. Although data observations show that ground temperatures have an increase, Dr Christy noted that the rise in temperature in the upper part of the atmosphere is not at all dramatic, and that does not match the results which climate models are producing at the moment, this is possibly due to the implication that the climate models are built on flawed assumptions such as carbon dioxide leading temperatures to rise, which is not actually true, the Ice core records show temperature rises before not after CO2. Christy points out that the weather balloon data and satellite data both show that surface temperatures are rising slightly but the upper atmospheric air temperatures are not rising by any significant amount. This evidence shows that the hypothesis of man-made global warming is wrong. Though Dr. Christy has been dismissed in environmental circles as a pawn of the fossil-fuel industry who distorts science to fit his own ideology, “I don’t take money from industries,” he said.
Professor Ian Clark, Department of Sciences, University of Ottawa is an arctic paleo-climatologist, he looked at carbon dioxide extracted from ice cores, isolated and analysed, showing decades to hundreds of years of carbon data readings. The results of his investigation show that the connection between temperature and carbon dioxide is, in fact, the opposite to what the governments and their message conveyors the media are saying, he is also saying that the current climate models used are mostly erroneous.
"If you haven't understood the climate system, if you haven't understood all the components -- the cosmic rays, the solar, the CO2, the water vapour, the clouds, and put it all together -- if you haven't got all that, then your model isn't worth anything." As in most computer models, the adage of “junk in -- junk out" remains true for climate models’’. -Professor Ian Clark.
There will never be a settled conclusion on this topic, the debate changes according to who is funding the climate research, and there are political agendas especially since politicians and bankers make billions from trading carbon credits. Scientific research will need to continue to consider many contributors to temperature changes and climate cycles, such as the complex solar winds and Corona Mass Ejections cycles which are unpredictable and continue to impact our planetary cooling and warming cycles. Moreover, carbon dioxide is plant food which promotes greening, the ecological system has a way of offsetting some imbalances with the complex ecological cycles.
Conclusion
Planet Earth is still in the red zone of ecocide due to human activity, its just debatable whether its temperature changes that are adding to that. It is clear that since the Cretaceous period, we are now living in the Sixth greatest mass extinction of all time. It is an apocalypse happening in slow motion which affects all of the earth’s biodiversity which took 3.8 billion years of evolution to form. This extinction differs from previous extinctions in that it is being driven by humans, not by natural causes, as we are the cause, we can also slow it down or prevent it, if we make big changes. According to recent scientific data, animals and plants are disappearing at a rate of between 75 and 150 species per day. There may be no rain forest left in twenty years’ time or fish in the ocean in ten years’ time and over half the world will have a water crisis fifteen years from now. Bees are our most important crop pollinators and they are fast disappearing and the rate of deforestation and ocean pollution, such as plastic pollution, over use of pesticides, deforestation, oil mineral extraction, are all activities destroying these keystone ecosystems. These are the topics we need to be focusing on, putting research money into and and finding solutions to.
by Carlita Shaw
Follow me on Gab
@Evolve_to_Ecology
Related Articles
Hot Topics that need to be discussed at the 2021 Climate Conferences