Thread by @ncdave4life

@FillmoreWhite @AristotleMrs @Robert76907841 @NonlinearDarren @RobMeekel @Data79504085 @B_Bolshevik100 @JohnDublin10 @EricWil06256732 @Climatehope2 @glinch72 @Mark_A_Lunn @BridgetHolmstro @S_D_Mannix @PaulAtBillabong @BrknMan @Willard1951 @Stephen90045069 @TWTThisIsNow @Ceist8 @FChecker76 @dan613 @ammocrypta @flyonthewall182 @GregTruman4 @Jaisans @GregCoo85844909 @25_cycle @don85375 @ZSRenn @1tsakeeper @LizHersch1 @KCTaz @JustThi30117912 @gregchoat @Anvndarnamn5 @NickMcGinley1 @cieloyla @EthonRaptor @BradPKeyes @JSegor @jwickers @0Sundance @PeterMayfitz @omahas @TonyBoloni8 @TheDisproof @DanCady @Keeper_86 @NatGeo That's article is nonsense. I LIVE IN that mid-Atlantic region, just outside the "City of Oaks." My yard and town are full of healthy, magnificent oak trees. They are not dying.

I showed you a robust, peer-reviewed study about the large benefits of eCO2 for oaks. It's 1 of many.

@FillmoreWhite @AristotleMrs @Robert76907841 @NonlinearDarren @RobMeekel @Data79504085 @B_Bolshevik100 @JohnDublin10 @EricWil06256732 @Climatehope2 @glinch72 @Mark_A_Lunn @BridgetHolmstro @S_D_Mannix @PaulAtBillabong @BrknMan @Willard1951 @Stephen90045069 @TWTThisIsNow @Ceist8 @FChecker76 @dan613 @ammocrypta @flyonthewall182 @GregTruman4 @Jaisans @GregCoo85844909 @25_cycle @don85375 @ZSRenn @1tsakeeper @LizHersch1 @KCTaz @JustThi30117912 @gregchoat @Anvndarnamn5 @NickMcGinley1 @cieloyla @EthonRaptor @BradPKeyes @JSegor @jwickers @0Sundance @PeterMayfitz @omahas @TonyBoloni8 @TheDisproof @DanCady @Keeper_86 @NatGeo Here's a 2018 study. They measured effect of 50% elevation of CO2 (400 ➔ 600 ppmv), in six species of oak. eCO2 increased growth in all six species, by percentages ranging from 9% to 120%. They also documented significantly improved water use efficiency.

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29401304/

@FillmoreWhite @AristotleMrs @Robert76907841 @NonlinearDarren @RobMeekel @Data79504085 @B_Bolshevik100 @JohnDublin10 @EricWil06256732 @Climatehope2 @glinch72 @Mark_A_Lunn @BridgetHolmstro @S_D_Mannix @PaulAtBillabong @BrknMan @Willard1951 @Stephen90045069 @TWTThisIsNow @Ceist8 @FChecker76 @dan613 @ammocrypta @flyonthewall182 @GregTruman4 @Jaisans @GregCoo85844909 @25_cycle @don85375 @ZSRenn @1tsakeeper @LizHersch1 @KCTaz @JustThi30117912 @gregchoat @Anvndarnamn5 @NickMcGinley1 @cieloyla @EthonRaptor @BradPKeyes @JSegor @jwickers @0Sundance @PeterMayfitz @omahas @TonyBoloni8 @TheDisproof @DanCady @Keeper_86 @NatGeo Direct impacts of warming are obviously insignificant. From the map you can see 1°C (1.8°F) = only 50-70 miles latitude change.

Hansen/GISS reported a similar figure:
"warming of 0.5°C… implies typically a poleward shift of isotherms by 50 to 75 km…"

sealevel.info/2015_zones_hig…

@FillmoreWhite @AristotleMrs @Robert76907841 @NonlinearDarren @RobMeekel @Data79504085 @B_Bolshevik100 @JohnDublin10 @EricWil06256732 @Climatehope2 @glinch72 @Mark_A_Lunn @BridgetHolmstro @S_D_Mannix @PaulAtBillabong @BrknMan @Willard1951 @Stephen90045069 @TWTThisIsNow @Ceist8 @FChecker76 @dan613 @ammocrypta @flyonthewall182 @GregTruman4 @Jaisans @GregCoo85844909 @25_cycle @don85375 @ZSRenn @1tsakeeper @LizHersch1 @KCTaz @JustThi30117912 @gregchoat @Anvndarnamn5 @NickMcGinley1 @cieloyla @EthonRaptor @BradPKeyes @JSegor @jwickers @0Sundance @PeterMayfitz @omahas @TonyBoloni8 @TheDisproof @DanCady @Keeper_86 @NatGeo Pick any species of oak, look up its range, and the corresponding growing zone temperatures. It will be immediately obvious that a 0.5°C or 1°C temperature change is completely insignificant.

Here's one:
sealevel.info/shumard_red_oa…

@FillmoreWhite @AristotleMrs @Robert76907841 @NonlinearDarren @RobMeekel @Data79504085 @B_Bolshevik100 @JohnDublin10 @EricWil06256732 @Climatehope2 @glinch72 @Mark_A_Lunn @BridgetHolmstro @S_D_Mannix @PaulAtBillabong @BrknMan @Willard1951 @Stephen90045069 @TWTThisIsNow @Ceist8 @FChecker76 @dan613 @ammocrypta @flyonthewall182 @GregTruman4 @Jaisans @GregCoo85844909 @25_cycle @don85375 @ZSRenn @1tsakeeper @LizHersch1 @KCTaz @JustThi30117912 @gregchoat @Anvndarnamn5 @NickMcGinley1 @cieloyla @EthonRaptor @BradPKeyes @JSegor @jwickers @0Sundance @PeterMayfitz @omahas @TonyBoloni8 @TheDisproof @DanCady @Keeper_86 @NatGeo You made 5 guesses, of crops/plants that you supposed wouldn't benefit from eCO2. ALL 5 are proven wrong by robust, peer-reviewed studies, of which you were apparently unaware.

Why do climate activists just make stuff up? Why don't you care about science?