How many times will scientists need to save our asses?

[rdean]

I'm watching a show called "The Dust Bowl". Imagine dust storms sweeping across the US two miles high that changed the climate of the entire northern hemisphere. And I'm sure conservatives even back then thought it was God doing it just like they believe it today.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

TV Weekend The Dust Bowl TIME.com

The ’30 catastrophe, of course, was about the soil, not the atmosphere, and the film begins by laying out what led farmers to overwork the land: money, especially from wheat. The prairie’s settlers found a rich soil, with moisture retained deep below the surface thanks to the native grasses. (The problem: those grasses were adaptations to the region’s frequent historic droughts.) When wheat was scarce and in demand during World War I, it became the area’s cash crop, and times were good–for a while.

When wheat drew a good price, you planted more wheat. When it was glutted and prices dropped, you plantedmore wheat to make up for it. The plains became a breadbasket, which is to say, a monoculture of one crop–wheat wheat wheat–which left farmers financially vulnerable to the market and the topsoil vulnerable to the droughts that grasses had protected them from. When the Depression hit, prices plummeted, and years of dryness hit on top of that, decimating crops and exposing soil. In March 1933, in Cimarron County, Okla., it did not rain at all.

And then things got worse. Windstorms hit, as they had on the plains in the past, but now there was nothing to hold down the parched earth. Clouds of particles 10,000 feet high swept across the plains—”black blizzards,” and brown, red and sandy ones, depending where the wind was blowing from. Dust blew into homes through the merest crack. Newborn babies died.

Home THE DUST BOWL

------------------------------------------------------------

There were Americans who felt we should just give up and ignore the Dust Bowl as a "lost cause". They had to be conservatives. Considering the Auto Industry. President Roosevelt felt he just couldn't let a third of America become another Sahara. Some in his administration just didn't want to waste government money for a plan that didn't ensure success. Thank God he listened to liberals and scientists.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Then there are vaccines:

If there’s one thing about the anti-vaccine movement I’ve learned over the last several years, it’s that it’s almost completely immune to evidence, science, and reason. No matter how much evidence is arrayed against it, its spokespeople always finds a way to spin, distort, or misrepresent the evidence to combat it and not have to give up the concept that vaccines cause autism. Not that this is any news to readers of this blog, but it bears repeating often. It also bears repeating and emphasizing examples of just the sort of disingenuous and even outright deceptive techniques used by promoters of anti-vaccine pseudoscience to sow fear and doubt about vaccines among parents. These arguments may seem persuasive to those who have little knowledge about science or epidemiology.

8220 Vaccines didn 8217 t save us 8221 a.k.a. 8220 vaccines don 8217 t work 8221 Intellectual dishonesty at its most naked Science-Based Medicine

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

BBC - Future - How science aims to feed seven billion people

Science is already figuring out ways to feed the current 7 billion humans alive on this planet.

-----------------------------------------------------------

So when I hear right wingers downing science and scientists I am disgusted. What do they bring to the table? Downing the very people they depend on to live.

 

[jwoodie]

The primary cause of the "dust bowl" was drought.

NASA - Top Story - SOURCE OF 1930s DUST BOWL DROUGHT IN TROPICAL WATERS NASA FINDS - March 18 2004

 

[Harry Dresden]

I'm watching a show called "The Dust Bowl". Imagine dust storms sweeping across the US two miles high that changed the climate of the entire northern hemisphere. And I'm sure conservatives even back then thought it was God doing it just like they believe it today.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

TV Weekend The Dust Bowl TIME.com

The ’30 catastrophe, of course, was about the soil, not the atmosphere, and the film begins by laying out what led farmers to overwork the land: money, especially from wheat. The prairie’s settlers found a rich soil, with moisture retained deep below the surface thanks to the native grasses. (The problem: those grasses were adaptations to the region’s frequent historic droughts.) When wheat was scarce and in demand during World War I, it became the area’s cash crop, and times were good–for a while.

When wheat drew a good price, you planted more wheat. When it was glutted and prices dropped, you plantedmore wheat to make up for it. The plains became a breadbasket, which is to say, a monoculture of one crop–wheat wheat wheat–which left farmers financially vulnerable to the market and the topsoil vulnerable to the droughts that grasses had protected them from. When the Depression hit, prices plummeted, and years of dryness hit on top of that, decimating crops and exposing soil. In March 1933, in Cimarron County, Okla., it did not rain at all.

And then things got worse. Windstorms hit, as they had on the plains in the past, but now there was nothing to hold down the parched earth. Clouds of particles 10,000 feet high swept across the plains—”black blizzards,” and brown, red and sandy ones, depending where the wind was blowing from. Dust blew into homes through the merest crack. Newborn babies died.

Home THE DUST BOWL

------------------------------------------------------------

There were Americans who felt we should just give up and ignore the Dust Bowl as a "lost cause". They had to be conservatives. Considering the Auto Industry. President Roosevelt felt he just couldn't let a third of America become another Sahara. Some in his administration just didn't want to waste government money for a plan that didn't ensure success. Thank God he listened to liberals and scientists.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Then there are vaccines:

If there’s one thing about the anti-vaccine movement I’ve learned over the last several years, it’s that it’s almost completely immune to evidence, science, and reason. No matter how much evidence is arrayed against it, its spokespeople always finds a way to spin, distort, or misrepresent the evidence to combat it and not have to give up the concept that vaccines cause autism. Not that this is any news to readers of this blog, but it bears repeating often. It also bears repeating and emphasizing examples of just the sort of disingenuous and even outright deceptive techniques used by promoters of anti-vaccine pseudoscience to sow fear and doubt about vaccines among parents. These arguments may seem persuasive to those who have little knowledge about science or epidemiology.

8220 Vaccines didn 8217 t save us 8221 a.k.a. 8220 vaccines don 8217 t work 8221 Intellectual dishonesty at its most naked Science-Based Medicine

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

BBC - Future - How science aims to feed seven billion people

Science is already figuring out ways to feed the current 7 billion humans alive on this planet.

-----------------------------------------------------------

So when I hear right wingers downing science and scientists I am disgusted. What do they bring to the table? Downing the very people they depend on to live.

Dean on TV Scientist always save the day......ask Frank...

 

[ScienceRocks]

Nothing is more important then the family Keep attempting to destroy it and nothing else matters...

 

[Freewill]

About as bad as dean blowing smoke out his ass.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

I'm watching a show called "The Dust Bowl". Imagine dust storms sweeping across the US two miles high that changed the climate of the entire northern hemisphere. And I'm sure conservatives even back then thought it was God doing it just like they believe it today.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

TV Weekend The Dust Bowl TIME.com

The ’30 catastrophe, of course, was about the soil, not the atmosphere, and the film begins by laying out what led farmers to overwork the land: money, especially from wheat. The prairie’s settlers found a rich soil, with moisture retained deep below the surface thanks to the native grasses. (The problem: those grasses were adaptations to the region’s frequent historic droughts.) When wheat was scarce and in demand during World War I, it became the area’s cash crop, and times were good–for a while.

When wheat drew a good price, you planted more wheat. When it was glutted and prices dropped, you plantedmore wheat to make up for it. The plains became a breadbasket, which is to say, a monoculture of one crop–wheat wheat wheat–which left farmers financially vulnerable to the market and the topsoil vulnerable to the droughts that grasses had protected them from. When the Depression hit, prices plummeted, and years of dryness hit on top of that, decimating crops and exposing soil. In March 1933, in Cimarron County, Okla., it did not rain at all.

And then things got worse. Windstorms hit, as they had on the plains in the past, but now there was nothing to hold down the parched earth. Clouds of particles 10,000 feet high swept across the plains—”black blizzards,” and brown, red and sandy ones, depending where the wind was blowing from. Dust blew into homes through the merest crack. Newborn babies died.

Home THE DUST BOWL

------------------------------------------------------------

There were Americans who felt we should just give up and ignore the Dust Bowl as a "lost cause". They had to be conservatives. Considering the Auto Industry. President Roosevelt felt he just couldn't let a third of America become another Sahara. Some in his administration just didn't want to waste government money for a plan that didn't ensure success. Thank God he listened to liberals and scientists.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Then there are vaccines:

If there’s one thing about the anti-vaccine movement I’ve learned over the last several years, it’s that it’s almost completely immune to evidence, science, and reason. No matter how much evidence is arrayed against it, its spokespeople always finds a way to spin, distort, or misrepresent the evidence to combat it and not have to give up the concept that vaccines cause autism. Not that this is any news to readers of this blog, but it bears repeating often. It also bears repeating and emphasizing examples of just the sort of disingenuous and even outright deceptive techniques used by promoters of anti-vaccine pseudoscience to sow fear and doubt about vaccines among parents. These arguments may seem persuasive to those who have little knowledge about science or epidemiology.

8220 Vaccines didn 8217 t save us 8221 a.k.a. 8220 vaccines don 8217 t work 8221 Intellectual dishonesty at its most naked Science-Based Medicine

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

BBC - Future - How science aims to feed seven billion people

Science is already figuring out ways to feed the current 7 billion humans alive on this planet.

-----------------------------------------------------------

So when I hear right wingers downing science and scientists I am disgusted. What do they bring to the table? Downing the very people they depend on to live.

Conservatives back then thought that it was a shame, but that its the weather and there's not a dam' thing that can be done about it. We'd have preferred that it would have rained, but catastrophic droughts really help a culture come to understand the meaning of 'catastrophic'. FTR: the 1930s midwest saw the most severe droughts in the memory and record of such.

Pretty much what they think when they see the Chicken Little Left crying about the sky falling due to GLOBAL WARMING... 'Children and Fools... what are ya gonna do?'

Which is the same thing that we thing when we hear some leftist crying about the Conspiracies surrounding VACCINES: "Idiots, can't wait for the return of the pestilence, they sure aren't going to like that much!"

 

[Freewill]

I'm watching a show called "The Dust Bowl". Imagine dust storms sweeping across the US two miles high that changed the climate of the entire northern hemisphere. And I'm sure conservatives even back then thought it was God doing it just like they believe it today.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

TV Weekend The Dust Bowl TIME.com

The ’30 catastrophe, of course, was about the soil, not the atmosphere, and the film begins by laying out what led farmers to overwork the land: money, especially from wheat. The prairie’s settlers found a rich soil, with moisture retained deep below the surface thanks to the native grasses. (The problem: those grasses were adaptations to the region’s frequent historic droughts.) When wheat was scarce and in demand during World War I, it became the area’s cash crop, and times were good–for a while.

When wheat drew a good price, you planted more wheat. When it was glutted and prices dropped, you plantedmore wheat to make up for it. The plains became a breadbasket, which is to say, a monoculture of one crop–wheat wheat wheat–which left farmers financially vulnerable to the market and the topsoil vulnerable to the droughts that grasses had protected them from. When the Depression hit, prices plummeted, and years of dryness hit on top of that, decimating crops and exposing soil. In March 1933, in Cimarron County, Okla., it did not rain at all.

And then things got worse. Windstorms hit, as they had on the plains in the past, but now there was nothing to hold down the parched earth. Clouds of particles 10,000 feet high swept across the plains—”black blizzards,” and brown, red and sandy ones, depending where the wind was blowing from. Dust blew into homes through the merest crack. Newborn babies died.

Home THE DUST BOWL

------------------------------------------------------------

There were Americans who felt we should just give up and ignore the Dust Bowl as a "lost cause". They had to be conservatives. Considering the Auto Industry. President Roosevelt felt he just couldn't let a third of America become another Sahara. Some in his administration just didn't want to waste government money for a plan that didn't ensure success. Thank God he listened to liberals and scientists.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Then there are vaccines:

If there’s one thing about the anti-vaccine movement I’ve learned over the last several years, it’s that it’s almost completely immune to evidence, science, and reason. No matter how much evidence is arrayed against it, its spokespeople always finds a way to spin, distort, or misrepresent the evidence to combat it and not have to give up the concept that vaccines cause autism. Not that this is any news to readers of this blog, but it bears repeating often. It also bears repeating and emphasizing examples of just the sort of disingenuous and even outright deceptive techniques used by promoters of anti-vaccine pseudoscience to sow fear and doubt about vaccines among parents. These arguments may seem persuasive to those who have little knowledge about science or epidemiology.

8220 Vaccines didn 8217 t save us 8221 a.k.a. 8220 vaccines don 8217 t work 8221 Intellectual dishonesty at its most naked Science-Based Medicine

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

BBC - Future - How science aims to feed seven billion people

Science is already figuring out ways to feed the current 7 billion humans alive on this planet.

-----------------------------------------------------------

So when I hear right wingers downing science and scientists I am disgusted. What do they bring to the table? Downing the very people they depend on to live.

Could you provide ONE quote where a scientist or science was "downing" by anyone? No, I don't think you can.

 

[westwall]

I'm watching a show called "The Dust Bowl". Imagine dust storms sweeping across the US two miles high that changed the climate of the entire northern hemisphere. And I'm sure conservatives even back then thought it was God doing it just like they believe it today.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

TV Weekend The Dust Bowl TIME.com

The ’30 catastrophe, of course, was about the soil, not the atmosphere, and the film begins by laying out what led farmers to overwork the land: money, especially from wheat. The prairie’s settlers found a rich soil, with moisture retained deep below the surface thanks to the native grasses. (The problem: those grasses were adaptations to the region’s frequent historic droughts.) When wheat was scarce and in demand during World War I, it became the area’s cash crop, and times were good–for a while.

When wheat drew a good price, you planted more wheat. When it was glutted and prices dropped, you plantedmore wheat to make up for it. The plains became a breadbasket, which is to say, a monoculture of one crop–wheat wheat wheat–which left farmers financially vulnerable to the market and the topsoil vulnerable to the droughts that grasses had protected them from. When the Depression hit, prices plummeted, and years of dryness hit on top of that, decimating crops and exposing soil. In March 1933, in Cimarron County, Okla., it did not rain at all.

And then things got worse. Windstorms hit, as they had on the plains in the past, but now there was nothing to hold down the parched earth. Clouds of particles 10,000 feet high swept across the plains—”black blizzards,” and brown, red and sandy ones, depending where the wind was blowing from. Dust blew into homes through the merest crack. Newborn babies died.

Home THE DUST BOWL

------------------------------------------------------------

There were Americans who felt we should just give up and ignore the Dust Bowl as a "lost cause". They had to be conservatives. Considering the Auto Industry. President Roosevelt felt he just couldn't let a third of America become another Sahara. Some in his administration just didn't want to waste government money for a plan that didn't ensure success. Thank God he listened to liberals and scientists.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Then there are vaccines:

If there’s one thing about the anti-vaccine movement I’ve learned over the last several years, it’s that it’s almost completely immune to evidence, science, and reason. No matter how much evidence is arrayed against it, its spokespeople always finds a way to spin, distort, or misrepresent the evidence to combat it and not have to give up the concept that vaccines cause autism. Not that this is any news to readers of this blog, but it bears repeating often. It also bears repeating and emphasizing examples of just the sort of disingenuous and even outright deceptive techniques used by promoters of anti-vaccine pseudoscience to sow fear and doubt about vaccines among parents. These arguments may seem persuasive to those who have little knowledge about science or epidemiology.

8220 Vaccines didn 8217 t save us 8221 a.k.a. 8220 vaccines don 8217 t work 8221 Intellectual dishonesty at its most naked Science-Based Medicine

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

BBC - Future - How science aims to feed seven billion people

Science is already figuring out ways to feed the current 7 billion humans alive on this planet.

-----------------------------------------------------------

So when I hear right wingers downing science and scientists I am disgusted. What do they bring to the table? Downing the very people they depend on to live.

I imagine a whole bunch of times. Of course it's usually some dumb ass scientist who's screw up puts us in that situation, but ole deanie would never admit to that!

 

[Sunni Man]

Deany boy thinks Al Gore is a scientist. ..... ..

 

[rdean]

The primary cause of the "dust bowl" was drought.

NASA - Top Story - SOURCE OF 1930s DUST BOWL DROUGHT IN TROPICAL WATERS NASA FINDS - March 18 2004

OK, you made me do it. I went and registered at Science AAAS. The ONLY way you can read the entire articles:

On the Cause of the 1930s Dust Bowl

And what did I find out? That once again, Republicans take only a portion out of context as "proof". From the article you cited:

While progress has been made in understanding some of the important processes contributing to drought conditions (3–7), the mechanisms by which a drought can be maintained over many years are not well established. A number of studies have used the historical record of meteorological and oceanographic observations to identify statistical relations between slowly varying Pacific Ocean sea surface temperatures (SSTs) and precipitation over the Great Plains (8, 9). The record of observations, however, is too short to provide definitive results for long-term drought. Understanding the causes of the 1930s drought is particularly challenging in view of the scarcity of upper-air meteorological observations prior to about 1950.

And look at that. Not a mention about land degradation. Ah, but there is an attached article called:

Amplification of the North American “Dust Bowl” drought through human-induced land degradation

And look at what that says:

General circulation models (GCMs), forced by sea surface temperatures (SSTs) from the 1930s, produce a drought, but one that is centered in southwestern North America and without the warming centered in the middle of the continent. Here, we show that the inclusion of forcing from human land degradation during the period, in addition to the anomalous SSTs, is necessary to reproduce the anomalous features of the Dust Bowl drought. The degradation over the Great Plains is represented in the GCM as a reduction in vegetation cover and the addition of a soil dust aerosol source, both consequences of crop failure. As a result of land surface feedbacks, the simulation of the drought is much improved when the new dust aerosol and vegetation boundary conditions are included. Vegetation reductions explain the high temperature anomaly over the northern U.S., and the dust aerosols intensify the drought and move it northward of the purely ocean-forced drought pattern. When both factors are included in the model simulations, the precipitation and temperature anomalies are of similar magnitude and in a similar location compared with the observations. Human-induced land degradation is likely to have not only contributed to the dust storms of the 1930s but also amplified the drought, and these together turned a modest SST-forced drought into one of the worst environmental disasters the U.S. has experienced.

--------------------------------------------------------------
See? It was "human-induced" land degradation that contributed. But we knew that already. Farmers were only growing wheat. They just scratched the surface of the land using the soil again and again. It was scientists who showed how to plow the land to create highs and lows that trapped water. It was crop rotation that enriched the soil. And it was the land the government bought that was replanted with grass which kept top soil from blowing away.

Once again, a dumbass Republican on the USMB prints something because the title seems to confirm their position. They are like a scab, very surface. Never going deeper to really understand what is being said.

And look at these dipshits, like Sunni Man and westwall and freewill hoping to jump on the band wagon. Hilarious!

 

[rdean]

I'm watching a show called "The Dust Bowl". Imagine dust storms sweeping across the US two miles high that changed the climate of the entire northern hemisphere. And I'm sure conservatives even back then thought it was God doing it just like they believe it today.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

TV Weekend The Dust Bowl TIME.com

The ’30 catastrophe, of course, was about the soil, not the atmosphere, and the film begins by laying out what led farmers to overwork the land: money, especially from wheat. The prairie’s settlers found a rich soil, with moisture retained deep below the surface thanks to the native grasses. (The problem: those grasses were adaptations to the region’s frequent historic droughts.) When wheat was scarce and in demand during World War I, it became the area’s cash crop, and times were good–for a while.

When wheat drew a good price, you planted more wheat. When it was glutted and prices dropped, you plantedmore wheat to make up for it. The plains became a breadbasket, which is to say, a monoculture of one crop–wheat wheat wheat–which left farmers financially vulnerable to the market and the topsoil vulnerable to the droughts that grasses had protected them from. When the Depression hit, prices plummeted, and years of dryness hit on top of that, decimating crops and exposing soil. In March 1933, in Cimarron County, Okla., it did not rain at all.

And then things got worse. Windstorms hit, as they had on the plains in the past, but now there was nothing to hold down the parched earth. Clouds of particles 10,000 feet high swept across the plains—”black blizzards,” and brown, red and sandy ones, depending where the wind was blowing from. Dust blew into homes through the merest crack. Newborn babies died.

Home THE DUST BOWL

------------------------------------------------------------

There were Americans who felt we should just give up and ignore the Dust Bowl as a "lost cause". They had to be conservatives. Considering the Auto Industry. President Roosevelt felt he just couldn't let a third of America become another Sahara. Some in his administration just didn't want to waste government money for a plan that didn't ensure success. Thank God he listened to liberals and scientists.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Then there are vaccines:

If there’s one thing about the anti-vaccine movement I’ve learned over the last several years, it’s that it’s almost completely immune to evidence, science, and reason. No matter how much evidence is arrayed against it, its spokespeople always finds a way to spin, distort, or misrepresent the evidence to combat it and not have to give up the concept that vaccines cause autism. Not that this is any news to readers of this blog, but it bears repeating often. It also bears repeating and emphasizing examples of just the sort of disingenuous and even outright deceptive techniques used by promoters of anti-vaccine pseudoscience to sow fear and doubt about vaccines among parents. These arguments may seem persuasive to those who have little knowledge about science or epidemiology.

8220 Vaccines didn 8217 t save us 8221 a.k.a. 8220 vaccines don 8217 t work 8221 Intellectual dishonesty at its most naked Science-Based Medicine

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

BBC - Future - How science aims to feed seven billion people

Science is already figuring out ways to feed the current 7 billion humans alive on this planet.

-----------------------------------------------------------

So when I hear right wingers downing science and scientists I am disgusted. What do they bring to the table? Downing the very people they depend on to live.

Could you provide ONE quote where a scientist or science was "downing" by anyone? No, I don't think you can.

Could you provide ONE quote where a scientist or science was "downing" by anyone? No, I don't think you can.

What? I'm supposed to comb through tard posts to prove something to you that has been a Right Wing "thing" for years? Anyone who has read on this board for awhile knows what right wingers think about scientists. That they have no common sense. They don't contribute. They live off their degrees. They lie for grants. and it goes on and one.

Oh My God, I completely forgot electra in my signature line. It was taking about scientists.

 

[westwall]

The primary cause of the "dust bowl" was drought.

NASA - Top Story - SOURCE OF 1930s DUST BOWL DROUGHT IN TROPICAL WATERS NASA FINDS - March 18 2004

OK, you made me do it. I went and registered at Science AAAS. The ONLY way you can read the entire articles:

On the Cause of the 1930s Dust Bowl

And what did I find out? That once again, Republicans take only a portion out of context as "proof". From the article you cited:

While progress has been made in understanding some of the important processes contributing to drought conditions (3–7), the mechanisms by which a drought can be maintained over many years are not well established. A number of studies have used the historical record of meteorological and oceanographic observations to identify statistical relations between slowly varying Pacific Ocean sea surface temperatures (SSTs) and precipitation over the Great Plains (8, 9). The record of observations, however, is too short to provide definitive results for long-term drought. Understanding the causes of the 1930s drought is particularly challenging in view of the scarcity of upper-air meteorological observations prior to about 1950.

And look at that. Not a mention about land degradation. Ah, but there is an attached article called:

Amplification of the North American “Dust Bowl” drought through human-induced land degradation

And look at what that says:

General circulation models (GCMs), forced by sea surface temperatures (SSTs) from the 1930s, produce a drought, but one that is centered in southwestern North America and without the warming centered in the middle of the continent. Here, we show that the inclusion of forcing from human land degradation during the period, in addition to the anomalous SSTs, is necessary to reproduce the anomalous features of the Dust Bowl drought. The degradation over the Great Plains is represented in the GCM as a reduction in vegetation cover and the addition of a soil dust aerosol source, both consequences of crop failure. As a result of land surface feedbacks, the simulation of the drought is much improved when the new dust aerosol and vegetation boundary conditions are included. Vegetation reductions explain the high temperature anomaly over the northern U.S., and the dust aerosols intensify the drought and move it northward of the purely ocean-forced drought pattern. When both factors are included in the model simulations, the precipitation and temperature anomalies are of similar magnitude and in a similar location compared with the observations. Human-induced land degradation is likely to have not only contributed to the dust storms of the 1930s but also amplified the drought, and these together turned a modest SST-forced drought into one of the worst environmental disasters the U.S. has experienced.

--------------------------------------------------------------
See? It was "human-induced" land degradation that contributed. But we knew that already. Farmers were only growing wheat. They just scratched the surface of the land using the soil again and again. It was scientists who showed how to plow the land to create highs and lows that trapped water. It was crop rotation that enriched the soil. And it was the land the government bought that was replanted with grass which kept top soil from blowing away.

Once again, a dumbass Republican on the USMB prints something because the title seems to confirm their position. They are like a scab, very surface. Never going deeper to really understand what is being said.

And look at these dipshits, like Sunni Man and westwall hoping to jump on the band wagon. Hilarious!

What's funny is you think you have learned something new when I posted that very fact YEARS ago in the environment forum. Yes, man can do tremendous damage at the local level. I should know, I spent the majority of my professional life cleaning up those messes. However, man can't do anything to the climate. Well that's not entirely true. If we detonated all the nuclear weapons in our arsenal I do believe we could generate a nuclear winter that was hypothesized by Sagan et al.

Cold we can do.

Warmth?? No way in hell. We simply don't have the energy to do it.

 

[rdean]

The primary cause of the "dust bowl" was drought.

NASA - Top Story - SOURCE OF 1930s DUST BOWL DROUGHT IN TROPICAL WATERS NASA FINDS - March 18 2004

OK, you made me do it. I went and registered at Science AAAS. The ONLY way you can read the entire articles:

On the Cause of the 1930s Dust Bowl

And what did I find out? That once again, Republicans take only a portion out of context as "proof". From the article you cited:

While progress has been made in understanding some of the important processes contributing to drought conditions (3–7), the mechanisms by which a drought can be maintained over many years are not well established. A number of studies have used the historical record of meteorological and oceanographic observations to identify statistical relations between slowly varying Pacific Ocean sea surface temperatures (SSTs) and precipitation over the Great Plains (8, 9). The record of observations, however, is too short to provide definitive results for long-term drought. Understanding the causes of the 1930s drought is particularly challenging in view of the scarcity of upper-air meteorological observations prior to about 1950.

And look at that. Not a mention about land degradation. Ah, but there is an attached article called:

Amplification of the North American “Dust Bowl” drought through human-induced land degradation

And look at what that says:

General circulation models (GCMs), forced by sea surface temperatures (SSTs) from the 1930s, produce a drought, but one that is centered in southwestern North America and without the warming centered in the middle of the continent. Here, we show that the inclusion of forcing from human land degradation during the period, in addition to the anomalous SSTs, is necessary to reproduce the anomalous features of the Dust Bowl drought. The degradation over the Great Plains is represented in the GCM as a reduction in vegetation cover and the addition of a soil dust aerosol source, both consequences of crop failure. As a result of land surface feedbacks, the simulation of the drought is much improved when the new dust aerosol and vegetation boundary conditions are included. Vegetation reductions explain the high temperature anomaly over the northern U.S., and the dust aerosols intensify the drought and move it northward of the purely ocean-forced drought pattern. When both factors are included in the model simulations, the precipitation and temperature anomalies are of similar magnitude and in a similar location compared with the observations. Human-induced land degradation is likely to have not only contributed to the dust storms of the 1930s but also amplified the drought, and these together turned a modest SST-forced drought into one of the worst environmental disasters the U.S. has experienced.

--------------------------------------------------------------
See? It was "human-induced" land degradation that contributed. But we knew that already. Farmers were only growing wheat. They just scratched the surface of the land using the soil again and again. It was scientists who showed how to plow the land to create highs and lows that trapped water. It was crop rotation that enriched the soil. And it was the land the government bought that was replanted with grass which kept top soil from blowing away.

Once again, a dumbass Republican on the USMB prints something because the title seems to confirm their position. They are like a scab, very surface. Never going deeper to really understand what is being said.

And look at these dipshits, like Sunni Man and westwall hoping to jump on the band wagon. Hilarious!

What's funny is you think you have learned something new when I posted that very fact YEARS ago in the environment forum. Yes, man can do tremendous damage at the local level. I should know, I spent the majority of my professional life cleaning up those messes. However, man can't do anything to the climate. Well that's not entirely true. If we detonated all the nuclear weapons in our arsenal I do believe we could generate a nuclear winter that was hypothesized by Sagan et al.

Cold we can do.

Warmth?? No way in hell. We simply don't have the energy to do it.

Dipshit. What part of "Vegetation reductions explain the high temperature anomaly over the northern U.S.," don't you understand?

 

[westwall]

The primary cause of the "dust bowl" was drought.

NASA - Top Story - SOURCE OF 1930s DUST BOWL DROUGHT IN TROPICAL WATERS NASA FINDS - March 18 2004

OK, you made me do it. I went and registered at Science AAAS. The ONLY way you can read the entire articles:

On the Cause of the 1930s Dust Bowl

And what did I find out? That once again, Republicans take only a portion out of context as "proof". From the article you cited:

While progress has been made in understanding some of the important processes contributing to drought conditions (3–7), the mechanisms by which a drought can be maintained over many years are not well established. A number of studies have used the historical record of meteorological and oceanographic observations to identify statistical relations between slowly varying Pacific Ocean sea surface temperatures (SSTs) and precipitation over the Great Plains (8, 9). The record of observations, however, is too short to provide definitive results for long-term drought. Understanding the causes of the 1930s drought is particularly challenging in view of the scarcity of upper-air meteorological observations prior to about 1950.

And look at that. Not a mention about land degradation. Ah, but there is an attached article called:

Amplification of the North American “Dust Bowl” drought through human-induced land degradation

And look at what that says:

General circulation models (GCMs), forced by sea surface temperatures (SSTs) from the 1930s, produce a drought, but one that is centered in southwestern North America and without the warming centered in the middle of the continent. Here, we show that the inclusion of forcing from human land degradation during the period, in addition to the anomalous SSTs, is necessary to reproduce the anomalous features of the Dust Bowl drought. The degradation over the Great Plains is represented in the GCM as a reduction in vegetation cover and the addition of a soil dust aerosol source, both consequences of crop failure. As a result of land surface feedbacks, the simulation of the drought is much improved when the new dust aerosol and vegetation boundary conditions are included. Vegetation reductions explain the high temperature anomaly over the northern U.S., and the dust aerosols intensify the drought and move it northward of the purely ocean-forced drought pattern. When both factors are included in the model simulations, the precipitation and temperature anomalies are of similar magnitude and in a similar location compared with the observations. Human-induced land degradation is likely to have not only contributed to the dust storms of the 1930s but also amplified the drought, and these together turned a modest SST-forced drought into one of the worst environmental disasters the U.S. has experienced.

--------------------------------------------------------------
See? It was "human-induced" land degradation that contributed. But we knew that already. Farmers were only growing wheat. They just scratched the surface of the land using the soil again and again. It was scientists who showed how to plow the land to create highs and lows that trapped water. It was crop rotation that enriched the soil. And it was the land the government bought that was replanted with grass which kept top soil from blowing away.

Once again, a dumbass Republican on the USMB prints something because the title seems to confirm their position. They are like a scab, very surface. Never going deeper to really understand what is being said.

And look at these dipshits, like Sunni Man and westwall hoping to jump on the band wagon. Hilarious!

What's funny is you think you have learned something new when I posted that very fact YEARS ago in the environment forum. Yes, man can do tremendous damage at the local level. I should know, I spent the majority of my professional life cleaning up those messes. However, man can't do anything to the climate. Well that's not entirely true. If we detonated all the nuclear weapons in our arsenal I do believe we could generate a nuclear winter that was hypothesized by Sagan et al.

Cold we can do.

Warmth?? No way in hell. We simply don't have the energy to do it.

Dipshit. What part of "Vegetation reductions explain the high temperature anomaly over the northern U.S.," don't you understand?

The reduction in vegetation allowed the wind to blow the topsoil off idiot. The heat was already on. It was hot all over the world. There were more days over 100 degrees in the 1930's, worldwide than any time since. That's why your pet scientists have been working overtime to try and falsify all those records. The dustbowl was a creation of bad farming. The heat was WORLDWIDE, idiot.

 

[rdean]

The primary cause of the "dust bowl" was drought.

NASA - Top Story - SOURCE OF 1930s DUST BOWL DROUGHT IN TROPICAL WATERS NASA FINDS - March 18 2004

OK, you made me do it. I went and registered at Science AAAS. The ONLY way you can read the entire articles:

On the Cause of the 1930s Dust Bowl

And what did I find out? That once again, Republicans take only a portion out of context as "proof". From the article you cited:

While progress has been made in understanding some of the important processes contributing to drought conditions (3–7), the mechanisms by which a drought can be maintained over many years are not well established. A number of studies have used the historical record of meteorological and oceanographic observations to identify statistical relations between slowly varying Pacific Ocean sea surface temperatures (SSTs) and precipitation over the Great Plains (8, 9). The record of observations, however, is too short to provide definitive results for long-term drought. Understanding the causes of the 1930s drought is particularly challenging in view of the scarcity of upper-air meteorological observations prior to about 1950.

And look at that. Not a mention about land degradation. Ah, but there is an attached article called:

Amplification of the North American “Dust Bowl” drought through human-induced land degradation

And look at what that says:

General circulation models (GCMs), forced by sea surface temperatures (SSTs) from the 1930s, produce a drought, but one that is centered in southwestern North America and without the warming centered in the middle of the continent. Here, we show that the inclusion of forcing from human land degradation during the period, in addition to the anomalous SSTs, is necessary to reproduce the anomalous features of the Dust Bowl drought. The degradation over the Great Plains is represented in the GCM as a reduction in vegetation cover and the addition of a soil dust aerosol source, both consequences of crop failure. As a result of land surface feedbacks, the simulation of the drought is much improved when the new dust aerosol and vegetation boundary conditions are included. Vegetation reductions explain the high temperature anomaly over the northern U.S., and the dust aerosols intensify the drought and move it northward of the purely ocean-forced drought pattern. When both factors are included in the model simulations, the precipitation and temperature anomalies are of similar magnitude and in a similar location compared with the observations. Human-induced land degradation is likely to have not only contributed to the dust storms of the 1930s but also amplified the drought, and these together turned a modest SST-forced drought into one of the worst environmental disasters the U.S. has experienced.

--------------------------------------------------------------
See? It was "human-induced" land degradation that contributed. But we knew that already. Farmers were only growing wheat. They just scratched the surface of the land using the soil again and again. It was scientists who showed how to plow the land to create highs and lows that trapped water. It was crop rotation that enriched the soil. And it was the land the government bought that was replanted with grass which kept top soil from blowing away.

Once again, a dumbass Republican on the USMB prints something because the title seems to confirm their position. They are like a scab, very surface. Never going deeper to really understand what is being said.

And look at these dipshits, like Sunni Man and westwall hoping to jump on the band wagon. Hilarious!

What's funny is you think you have learned something new when I posted that very fact YEARS ago in the environment forum. Yes, man can do tremendous damage at the local level. I should know, I spent the majority of my professional life cleaning up those messes. However, man can't do anything to the climate. Well that's not entirely true. If we detonated all the nuclear weapons in our arsenal I do believe we could generate a nuclear winter that was hypothesized by Sagan et al.

Cold we can do.

Warmth?? No way in hell. We simply don't have the energy to do it.

Dipshit. What part of "Vegetation reductions explain the high temperature anomaly over the northern U.S.," don't you understand?

The reduction in vegetation allowed the wind to blow the topsoil off idiot. The heat was already on. It was hot all over the world. There were more days over 100 degrees in the 1930's, worldwide than any time since. That's why your pet scientists have been working overtime to try and falsify all those records. The dustbowl was a creation of bad farming. The heat was WORLDWIDE, idiot.

Pet scientists? That's what's wrong with your kind. You add nothing and criticize those who do. It's ignorance. Sad and sick ignorance.

 

[westwall]

The primary cause of the "dust bowl" was drought.

NASA - Top Story - SOURCE OF 1930s DUST BOWL DROUGHT IN TROPICAL WATERS NASA FINDS - March 18 2004

OK, you made me do it. I went and registered at Science AAAS. The ONLY way you can read the entire articles:

On the Cause of the 1930s Dust Bowl

And what did I find out? That once again, Republicans take only a portion out of context as "proof". From the article you cited:

While progress has been made in understanding some of the important processes contributing to drought conditions (3–7), the mechanisms by which a drought can be maintained over many years are not well established. A number of studies have used the historical record of meteorological and oceanographic observations to identify statistical relations between slowly varying Pacific Ocean sea surface temperatures (SSTs) and precipitation over the Great Plains (8, 9). The record of observations, however, is too short to provide definitive results for long-term drought. Understanding the causes of the 1930s drought is particularly challenging in view of the scarcity of upper-air meteorological observations prior to about 1950.

And look at that. Not a mention about land degradation. Ah, but there is an attached article called:

Amplification of the North American “Dust Bowl” drought through human-induced land degradation

And look at what that says:

General circulation models (GCMs), forced by sea surface temperatures (SSTs) from the 1930s, produce a drought, but one that is centered in southwestern North America and without the warming centered in the middle of the continent. Here, we show that the inclusion of forcing from human land degradation during the period, in addition to the anomalous SSTs, is necessary to reproduce the anomalous features of the Dust Bowl drought. The degradation over the Great Plains is represented in the GCM as a reduction in vegetation cover and the addition of a soil dust aerosol source, both consequences of crop failure. As a result of land surface feedbacks, the simulation of the drought is much improved when the new dust aerosol and vegetation boundary conditions are included. Vegetation reductions explain the high temperature anomaly over the northern U.S., and the dust aerosols intensify the drought and move it northward of the purely ocean-forced drought pattern. When both factors are included in the model simulations, the precipitation and temperature anomalies are of similar magnitude and in a similar location compared with the observations. Human-induced land degradation is likely to have not only contributed to the dust storms of the 1930s but also amplified the drought, and these together turned a modest SST-forced drought into one of the worst environmental disasters the U.S. has experienced.

--------------------------------------------------------------
See? It was "human-induced" land degradation that contributed. But we knew that already. Farmers were only growing wheat. They just scratched the surface of the land using the soil again and again. It was scientists who showed how to plow the land to create highs and lows that trapped water. It was crop rotation that enriched the soil. And it was the land the government bought that was replanted with grass which kept top soil from blowing away.

Once again, a dumbass Republican on the USMB prints something because the title seems to confirm their position. They are like a scab, very surface. Never going deeper to really understand what is being said.

And look at these dipshits, like Sunni Man and westwall hoping to jump on the band wagon. Hilarious!

What's funny is you think you have learned something new when I posted that very fact YEARS ago in the environment forum. Yes, man can do tremendous damage at the local level. I should know, I spent the majority of my professional life cleaning up those messes. However, man can't do anything to the climate. Well that's not entirely true. If we detonated all the nuclear weapons in our arsenal I do believe we could generate a nuclear winter that was hypothesized by Sagan et al.

Cold we can do.

Warmth?? No way in hell. We simply don't have the energy to do it.

Dipshit. What part of "Vegetation reductions explain the high temperature anomaly over the northern U.S.," don't you understand?

The reduction in vegetation allowed the wind to blow the topsoil off idiot. The heat was already on. It was hot all over the world. There were more days over 100 degrees in the 1930's, worldwide than any time since. That's why your pet scientists have been working overtime to try and falsify all those records. The dustbowl was a creation of bad farming. The heat was WORLDWIDE, idiot.

Pet scientists? That's what's wrong with your kind. You add nothing and criticize those who do. It's ignorance. Sad and sick ignorance.

Ignorance is not calling the kettle black bucko. Ignorance is parking your brain at the door and believing whatever horseshit they feed you without thought, without research of your own. You're nothing more than a parrot. Parrots don't or can't think for themselves. Parrots are the very embodiment of ignorance.

Hello parrot.

 

[jwoodie]

The primary cause of the "dust bowl" was drought.

NASA - Top Story - SOURCE OF 1930s DUST BOWL DROUGHT IN TROPICAL WATERS NASA FINDS - March 18 2004

OK, you made me do it. I went and registered at Science AAAS. The ONLY way you can read the entire articles:

On the Cause of the 1930s Dust Bowl

And what did I find out? That once again, Republicans take only a portion out of context as "proof". From the article you cited:

While progress has been made in understanding some of the important processes contributing to drought conditions (3–7), the mechanisms by which a drought can be maintained over many years are not well established. A number of studies have used the historical record of meteorological and oceanographic observations to identify statistical relations between slowly varying Pacific Ocean sea surface temperatures (SSTs) and precipitation over the Great Plains (8, 9). The record of observations, however, is too short to provide definitive results for long-term drought. Understanding the causes of the 1930s drought is particularly challenging in view of the scarcity of upper-air meteorological observations prior to about 1950.

And look at that. Not a mention about land degradation. Ah, but there is an attached article called:

Amplification of the North American “Dust Bowl” drought through human-induced land degradation

And look at what that says:

General circulation models (GCMs), forced by sea surface temperatures (SSTs) from the 1930s, produce a drought, but one that is centered in southwestern North America and without the warming centered in the middle of the continent. Here, we show that the inclusion of forcing from human land degradation during the period, in addition to the anomalous SSTs, is necessary to reproduce the anomalous features of the Dust Bowl drought. The degradation over the Great Plains is represented in the GCM as a reduction in vegetation cover and the addition of a soil dust aerosol source, both consequences of crop failure. As a result of land surface feedbacks, the simulation of the drought is much improved when the new dust aerosol and vegetation boundary conditions are included. Vegetation reductions explain the high temperature anomaly over the northern U.S., and the dust aerosols intensify the drought and move it northward of the purely ocean-forced drought pattern. When both factors are included in the model simulations, the precipitation and temperature anomalies are of similar magnitude and in a similar location compared with the observations. Human-induced land degradation is likely to have not only contributed to the dust storms of the 1930s but also amplified the drought, and these together turned a modest SST-forced drought into one of the worst environmental disasters the U.S. has experienced.

--------------------------------------------------------------
See? It was "human-induced" land degradation that contributed. But we knew that already. Farmers were only growing wheat. They just scratched the surface of the land using the soil again and again. It was scientists who showed how to plow the land to create highs and lows that trapped water. It was crop rotation that enriched the soil. And it was the land the government bought that was replanted with grass which kept top soil from blowing away.

Once again, a dumbass Republican on the USMB prints something because the title seems to confirm their position. They are like a scab, very surface. Never going deeper to really understand what is being said.

And look at these dipshits, like Sunni Man and westwall hoping to jump on the band wagon. Hilarious!

What's funny is you think you have learned something new when I posted that very fact YEARS ago in the environment forum. Yes, man can do tremendous damage at the local level. I should know, I spent the majority of my professional life cleaning up those messes. However, man can't do anything to the climate. Well that's not entirely true. If we detonated all the nuclear weapons in our arsenal I do believe we could generate a nuclear winter that was hypothesized by Sagan et al.

Cold we can do.

Warmth?? No way in hell. We simply don't have the energy to do it.

Dipshit. What part of "Vegetation reductions explain the high temperature anomaly over the northern U.S.," don't you understand?

What part of "a reduction in vegetation cover and the addition of a soil dust aerosol source, both consequences of crop failure" don't YOU understand? The DROUGHT caused the crop failure in the first place, Brainiac.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

How many times?

Until they no longer can, which isn't that far away I suspect.