Zippi62 says, in a comment to Hobbit, "There are 350 million square miles of surface area within the United States. The surface area of the Earth is more like 200 billion square miles, of which people (standing only) take up less than 350 square miles. You obviously don't know much about the SIZE of things."
That doesn't sound right. Let's do a rationality check.
The continental US is maybe 1500 x 3000 miles = 4,500,000 sq miles.
As Pegminer says, only off by a factor of around 100.
total area of earth = 4*pi*4000^2 = 201,062,000 sq mi
area of land = 201,062,000*0.3 = 60,320,000 sq mi
Oh my, his "surface area of the Earth is more like 200 billion square miles"
is off by a factor of 1,000 IF you include water.
If you only count the land, including Antarctica, he's off by at least a factor of 3,000.
So, if we're pointing fingers at who doesn't know the size of things, well, .....
BUT, what do farmers see?
The land around them.
And they say it's warming.
How would they know why that is?
Climatologists, who have access to data from around the globe are in a much better position to understand the cause of global warming. Climatologists in other countries say that teh warming is caused by burning fossil fuels. And they don't get US government contracts.
Zippi does get one thing right though. "the world's hotter and more erratic climate has lowered yields and devastated farmers in many areas of the globe".
SO, straight from the horse's mouth, global warming does not grow more food.
Global warming decreases food production.
Thank you Zippi.
No. Farmers only see what's right around them. Climate scientists (who are NOT politically motivated, regardless of the dishonest lies to the contrary you hear from the far right) see the whole picture.
Let's put it this way: the farmer sees the few hundred acres he wons. There are 200 million square miles of Earth's surface he doesn't look at -- but climate scientists do. So who has the better picture of what's going on globally? Even conservatives can figure that out, even if they don't have the guts to admit their yapping is complete nonsense.
The only politically motivated climate science is global warming denialism. When politics is removed, what is left is the fact that global warming is happening
http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories2010...
And we are causing it
http://c1planetsavecom.wpengine.netdna-c...
The ten warmest years in the instrumental record are 2010, 2005, 2009, 2007, 2002, 1998, 2006, 2003, 2013 and 2012.
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp
Farmers are "in tune" with their corner of the world, but not necessarily with the whole world or with the physics of global warming.
No. Farmers may be somewhat more in tune with knowing whether climate is changing that other people, but even that is debatable. However farmers would have no expertise at all in knowing whether climate change is natural or man-made. People that haven't studied subjects and believe they know more about those subjects than experts in the field are delusional.
No rational people would feel that they have expertise in physics, mathematics, fluid dynamics, statistics etc., without studying those subjects, and yet if you combine them into climate science all of sudden those ignorant people think they know more than experts.
EDIT: I see that Zippi62 deleted his "answer" to his own question because it was riddled with errors. It's too bad that his Update2, where he admits he was wrong before, is also full of nonsense.
Let's see how how much surface area he thinks people take up. He claims 1/1,175,000 of the surface area of the Earth. The surface area of the Earth is about 5.1 x 10^14 square meters, so let's divide that by 1,175,000 to see how much all humans get:
5.1e14/1.175e6 =4,3 x 10^8 square meters for all humans. Ok, now there are about 7.1 billion humans, so we each get 4.3e8/7.1e9 = 0.06 square meters. Ooh, I'm feeling a little cramped on my 0.06 square meters, what about the rest of you 15 others sharing this square meter?
What's that? Some of you are having a hard time staying afloat, because your part of the square meter is underwater? Keep treading! Luckily Zippi62 has a solution too this too. He increases the "area" by confusing it with volume. I guess we'll all live in skyscrapers in Zippi62's brave new world.
Of course what Zippi62 doesn't seem to get is that his is a completely specious and irrelevant argument, that has nothing whatsoever to with global warming. But then he also false claims that "...human influence is still very small and anthropogenic CO2's influence on temperature is very very small also" an assertion he makes without a single shred of supporting evidence.
<
That is not what the study nor your article said.
The study actually showed that farmers tend to give politically motivated answers when interviewed on climate change.
From your own article: "“Whenever climate change gets introduced, the conversation tends to turn political,” Linda Stalker Prokopy the lead author of the study said.
So your own article does not support the claim that farmers are more 'in tune' with climatic changes.
Based on the Alarmist Climate Scientists record so far, PeeWee Herman has at least as much climate 'expertise' as they pretend to have.
Farmers have no reason to falsify temperature data......Alarmist Climate Scientists do! ($$ & Tenure)
I'll stand with the Farmers!
Well my crops were terrible this year. And it has been going downhill year after year. Due to rainfall not falling when it should...like it used to. Bees are disappearing. Big concern there.
Canada is larger than the U.S. and has more arable land(there is no deserts) and less Wal~Mart parking lots and less highways paving over good farm land. Git your facts straight.
The U.S. cannot count Alaska as being farmable land.don'tchaknow?
farmers are on the front lines of climate issues so they are definitely knowledgeable about their particular situation. I would imagine that scientists and engineers would have a better take on global climate change on the macro level
Farmers are not generally qualified to pass judgment on either issue. It takes an entire community of millions of educated and trained scientists to make such determinations. To think that farmers know better is ridiculous. Farmers generally know about climate only in their particular corner of the world. Climate change is about worldwide trends, not what is happening in your cornfield. To think that a community of millions and millions of educated and trained scientists represent some sort of politically motivated conspiracy is also ridiculous.
Probobly
http://www.theepochtimes.com/n3/1084121-farmers-and-scientists-dont-agree-on-climate-change/
" ... 66 percent of corn producers surveyed say they believe climate change is occurring―and only 8 percent pinpoint human activities as the main cause. ... "
Why just farmers?
Why not ask golfers? Or roof painters? Or mountain climbers?
Anything but a climatologist
Alarmists are betting on other peoples money. Farmers bet on their own. Clearly alarmists have had a very bad record trying to predict one calamity after another. The smart money is with the farmers
They would notice weather changes, but would have a hard time noting long term climate change. They would be in no position to assign a cause.
Probobly
Probobly
Why just farmers?
Why not ask golfers? Or roof painters? Or mountain climbers?
Anything but a climatologist
Why just farmers?
Why not ask golfers? Or roof painters? Or mountain climbers?
Anything but a climatologist
Probobly
Probobly
Probobly
Probobly
Why just farmers?
Why not ask golfers? Or roof painters? Or mountain climbers?
Anything but a climatologist
Why just farmers?
Why not ask golfers? Or roof painters? Or mountain climbers?
Anything but a climatologist
Hmm Farmers live in the REAL world, their livelyhoods depend on them getting it right, academics live in ivory towers, divorced from reality.
I will go with the farmers get on with life adapt and survive, not just sit there and meditate why?
I expect farmers are more "in tune" to changes, but they have no clue as to WHY the change is happening.
I expect farmers are more "in tune" to changes, but they have no clue as to WHY the change is happening.
Yes. the farmer has to be. He bets his life and farm on being correct. Those scientists who are never right live high on the hog.
Why just farmers?
Why not ask golfers? Or roof painters? Or mountain climbers?
Anything but a climatologist
Why just farmers?
Why not ask golfers? Or roof painters? Or mountain climbers?
Anything but a climatologist
I expect farmers are more "in tune" to changes, but they have no clue as to WHY the change is happening.
