|
I just finished watching a PBS special the other day where an experiment has been running for some time now (and is still currently going on) in the Colorado mountains.
The team is sectioning off hectares and submitting them to various green-house conditions that are supposed to mimic the conditions people are arguing over in this thread.
The team sectioned off other hectares for its control group.
The conclusions were alarming to them: not only are the green-house hectares demonstrating severe repurcussions (the point was made the new vegetation was no longer the lush flowers of the colorado mountains, but more like the barren, weed whipped deserts of california), the control hectares had actually degraded faster than they were supposed to during the experiment.
That is, I don't know if people are confused, or myself, but global warming is occurring at a known rate. My understanding is that knowledgable people are disputing how it is occurring, not whether it is. But this team was extremely concerned because their plots were degrading even faster than they were expected to--global warming sped up during the experiment, was his point.
That was on PBS like maybe a couple weeks ago. It should be around on their website for more information.
__________________
"The theory of a free press is that truth will emerge from free discussion, not that it will be presented perfectly and instantly in any one account." -- Walter Lippmann
"You measure democracy by the freedom it gives its dissidents, not the freedom it gives its assimilated conformists." -- Abbie Hoffman
|