You are on page 1of 104

CO2 and WARMING CNDI 2008

N. FAROOQI

CO2 Ag Disad (Generic): 1NC (1/2)...........................................................................................................4


CO2 Ag Disad (Generic) Overview: 2NC...................................................................................................6
CO2 Ag Disad (Generic) Uniq. Overview: 2NC.........................................................................................7
Food Production Increasing – Massive Starvation Risk on Horizon...........................................................8
Farmers Need To Expand.............................................................................................................................9
co2 da - impact...........................................................................................................................................10
co2 = better plants.....................................................................................................................................11
co2 good for plants.....................................................................................................................................12
co2 enhances plants....................................................................................................................................13
co2 good for plants.....................................................................................................................................14
co2 good for plants.....................................................................................................................................15
co2 needed for future ag............................................................................................................................16
co2 good for phytoplankton.......................................................................................................................17
co2 good for plants.....................................................................................................................................18
co2 good for plants.....................................................................................................................................19
co2 good for plants.....................................................................................................................................20
co2 good for plants.....................................................................................................................................21
co2 good for plants.....................................................................................................................................22
AT: Weather Overwhelms Plants...............................................................................................................23
co2 doesn’t have a big impact on climate..................................................................................................23
at: co2 affects plant decompostion ............................................................................................................24
co2 good for plants w/warm climate..........................................................................................................25
co2 key to plant survival............................................................................................................................26
co2 da.........................................................................................................................................................27
co2 da ........................................................................................................................................................28
*******Additional Warming Answers......................................................................................................29
warming happened, it’s good.....................................................................................................................30
warming already happened, high co2 not the cause..................................................................................31
warming already happened due to solar act...............................................................................................32
warming already happened due to solar act...............................................................................................33
warming already happened .......................................................................................................................34
warming already happened without high co2............................................................................................35
***Colling Bad..........................................................................................................................................36
cooling hurts nations..................................................................................................................................36
***AT: Storms...........................................................................................................................................37
no increase in cyclonic activity..................................................................................................................37
no change in hydro cycle...........................................................................................................................38
no intense hydro cycle...............................................................................................................................39
warming doesn’t cause intense hydro cycle...............................................................................................40
warming doesn’t cause intense hydro cycle...............................................................................................41
hydro cycle changed before ind. rev..........................................................................................................42
warming doesn’t cause severe weather......................................................................................................43
warming doesn’t have a strong impact......................................................................................................44
warming doesn’t cause floods....................................................................................................................45
plants adapt to climate change...................................................................................................................46
plants adapt to climate change...................................................................................................................47
turn-warm. and co2 help bio-d...................................................................................................................48
co2 doesn’t increase nitrogen.....................................................................................................................49

1
CO2 and WARMING CNDI 2008
N. FAROOQI
co2 doesn’t cause warming........................................................................................................................50
***AT: Coral Reefs....................................................................................................................................52
corals can adapt..........................................................................................................................................52
corals can adapt .........................................................................................................................................53
***Cooling Now........................................................................................................................................54
cooling trend and more albedo...................................................................................................................54
***AT: Biod Loss......................................................................................................................................55
alternate causes to bio-d loss......................................................................................................................55
warming leads to more bio-d.....................................................................................................................56
ehux turn...................................................................................................................................................57
plants adapt to climate change...................................................................................................................58
turn-warm. and co2 help bio-d...................................................................................................................59
co2 good for plants in a warm climate.......................................................................................................60
TuRN-co2 reduction hurt bio-d..................................................................................................................61
aff studies are wrong..................................................................................................................................62
aff studies are wrong .................................................................................................................................63
current warm period isn’t bad....................................................................................................................64
(turn) co2 checks warming.........................................................................................................................65
***AT: SLR...............................................................................................................................................66
large sea level rise unlikely........................................................................................................................66
large sea level rise unlikely........................................................................................................................67
sea level rise constantly changing..............................................................................................................68
average slr hasn’t accelerated....................................................................................................................69
slr hasn’t changed a lot with co2................................................................................................................70
***AT: Methane.........................................................................................................................................71
co2 doesn’t cause an increase of methane release.....................................................................................71
methane levels are decreasing....................................................................................................................72
***Various.................................................................................................................................................73
it’s been warmer.........................................................................................................................................73
warming already happened........................................................................................................................74
more demand for ag in future.....................................................................................................................75
co2 doesn’t stop calcification.....................................................................................................................76
warming can check bad co2 concentrations...............................................................................................77
co2 good for corals and phytoplankton......................................................................................................78
corals can adapt to env. changes................................................................................................................79
urban heating allows for investigation.......................................................................................................80
***AT: GCM’s...........................................................................................................................................81
climate models wrong................................................................................................................................81
climate models fail.....................................................................................................................................82
gcm’s fail....................................................................................................................................................83
gcm’s fail....................................................................................................................................................84
climate models wrong................................................................................................................................85
climate models wrong................................................................................................................................86
climate models wrong................................................................................................................................87
*******Co2 Ag Answers*******............................................................................................................88
Bugs...........................................................................................................................................................89
Warming Decreases Crop Production........................................................................................................90
Warming Decreases Precipitation..............................................................................................................91
Warming = Storms, Kills Plants.................................................................................................................92

2
CO2 and WARMING CNDI 2008
N. FAROOQI
Warming = Soil Erosion.............................................................................................................................93
CO2 = Decreased Nutritional Value .........................................................................................................94
AT: Adaptation...........................................................................................................................................95
Climate Change Disrupts Agriculture........................................................................................................96
Computer Models ......................................................................................................................................97
Climate Change Disrupts Weather.............................................................................................................98
GCM’s = Indicators of Climate Change....................................................................................................99
Warming = Ag Shift ................................................................................................................................100
Warming Destroys Regional Ag..............................................................................................................101
Neg Args = Govt Inaction........................................................................................................................102

3
CO2 and WARMING CNDI 2008
N. FAROOQI

CO2 AG DISAD (GENERIC): 1NC (1/2)


A. Uniqueness And Link – Agricultural Production Will Fall Short Of Solving For The
Massive Population And Starvation Boom On The Horizon Unless We Continue To Pump
Co2 Into The Atmosphere
IDSO AND IDSO IN ‘99
(Keith, Vice Pres. Ctr Study CO2 and Global Change, Ph.D. in Botany @ ASU, won several top awards while
instructing students in biological and botanical laboratories and lectures at ASU, and Craig, Chrmn Brd of Ctr for
Study CO2 & Global Change, Ph.D. in Geog. ASU, “Give Peace a Chance by Giving Plants a Chance,” Volume 2,
Number 19: 1 October 1999, pg. Online @ http://www.co2science.org/edit/v2_edit/v2n19edit.htm //wyo-ef)
Within this context, we recently completed a project commissioned by the Greening Earth Society entitled "Forecasting World Food Supplies: The Impact of the Rising Atmospheric CO2 Concentration," which we presented at the

continued increases in agricultural


Second Annual Dixy Lee Ray Memorial Symposium held in Washington, DC on 31 August - 2 September 1999. We found that

knowledge and expertise would likely boost world food production by 37% between now and
the middle of the next century, but that world food needs, which we equated with world
population, would likely rise by 51% over this period. Fortunately, we also calculated that the shortfall in production
could be overcome - but just barely - by the additional benefits anticipated to accrue from the
many productivity-enhancing effects of the expected rise in the air's CO2 content over the same
time period.
B. The Impact – Future Increases In Co2 Are Necessary To Prevent Ozone Pollution, Increase
Crop Yields And Save Our Species – Without Massive Increases In Co2 We Will Not
Survive The Next Century And Neither Will The Biosphere
IDSO AND IDSO IN ‘01
(Keith, Vice Pres. Ctr Study CO2 and Global Change, Ph.D. in Botany @ ASU, won several top awards while
instructing students in biological and botanical laboratories and lectures at ASU, and Craig, Chrmn Brd of Ctr for
Study CO2 & Global Change, Ph.D. in Geog. ASU, “Anthropogenic CO 2 Emissions Could Dramatically Increase
Global Agricultural Production By Thwarting the Adverse Effects of Ozone Pollution, “Volume 4, Number 43: 24
October 2001, pg. Online @ http://www.co2science.org/edit/v4_edit/v4n43edit.htm //uwyo-ef)
Damage to crops caused by air pollutants is one of the major scourges of present-day
agriculture. How great are the production losses caused by these plant-debilitating agents? In a recent
study of the effects of ozone pollution in the Punjab region of Pakistan, Wahid et al. (2001) periodically applied a powerful ozone protectant to

soybean plants growing in three different locations in the general vicinity of the city of Lahore - a
suburban site, a remote rural site, and a rural roadside site - throughout two different growing seasons (one immediately post-monsoon and one the following spring or pre-monsoon). The results were

truly astounding. At the suburban site, application of the ozone protectant increased the weight of seeds produced per plant by 47% in the post-monsoon season and by 113% in the pre-monsoon season. At
the remote rural site, the corresponding yield increases were 94% and 182%; and at the rural roadside site, they were 170% and 285%. Averaged across all three sites and

both seasons of the year, the mean increase in yield caused by countering the deleterious effects
of this one major air pollutant was nearly 150%. Due to their somewhat surprising finding that "the impacts of ozone on the yield of soybean are larger in the rural
areas around Lahore than in suburban areas of the city," the authors concluded "there may be substantial impacts of oxidants on crop yield across large areas of the Punjab." In addition, they noted that earlier

studies had revealed similar large ozone-induced losses in the productivity of local cultivars of
wheat and rice. Hence, it is clear that whatever could be done to reduce these massive crop
losses - or, ideally, eliminate them altogether - would be a godsend to the people of Pakistan
and the inhabitants of many other areas of the globe. Fortunately, such a savior is silently
working its wonders throughout the entire world. That of which we speak, of course, is the
ongoing rise in the air's CO2 content, which counteracts the negative effects of ozone - and
those of many other air pollutants (Allen, 1990; Idso and Idso, 1994) - by restricting the noxious molecule's entry into
plant leaves via induced reduction of leaf stomatal apertures (Reid and Fiscus, 1998), and by ameliorating its
adverse biochemical activities when it does penetrate vegetative tissues (Reid et al., 1998). In a number of
studies of these beneficial consequences of atmospheric CO2 enrichment for the crop studied by Wahid et al., i.e., soybeans,
it has been found that a nominal doubling of the air's CO 2 concentration is sufficient to greatly
reduce - and in some cases completely eliminate - the yield-reducing effects of ozone pollution

4
CO2 and WARMING CNDI 2008
N. FAROOQI
The same conclusion follows from the results of several
(Heagle et al., 1998a and 1998b; Miller et al., 1998; Reid and Fiscus, 1998; Reid et al., 1998).

studies that have looked at wheat in this regard (Heagle et al., 2000; McKee et al., 2000; Pleijel et al., 2000; Tiedemann and Firsching, 2000). In fact, the
work of Volin et al. (1998) suggests that these CO2-induced benefits will likely be experienced by all plants. As the researchers

directly state in the title of their paper: " species respond similarly regardless of photosynthetic pathway or plant

functional group." Think about the implications of these findings. A doubling of the air's CO2 content could well double
agricultural production in many areas of the world by merely eliminating the adverse effects of
but one air pollutant, i.e., ozone. Then, consider the fact that by the mid-point of the current
century, we will likely face a food production crisis of unimaginable proportions (see our Editorials of 21 February
2001 and 13 June 2001). Finally, ask yourself what the Precautionary Principle has to say about this state of

affairs (see our Editorial of 4 July 2001). We conducted such an exercise in our review of the paper of Hudak et al. (1999), concluding that perhaps our new mantra should be:
Free the Biosphere! Let the air's CO2 content rise. And we still feel that way. CO2 is the elixir
of life. It is one of the primary raw materials - the other being water - out of which plants
construct their tissues; and it is essential to their existence and our existence. Without more of
it in the air, our species - as well as most of the rest of the planet's animal life - will not survive
the 21st century intact. The biosphere will continue to exist, but not as we know it; for most of
its wild diversity of life will have been extinguished by mankind's mad rush to appropriate ever
more land and water to grow the food required to feed itself (Tilman et al., 2001). So we say again, let the air's CO2 content rise. It's the right
thing to do, both scientifically and morally.

5
CO2 and WARMING CNDI 2008
N. FAROOQI
CO2 AG DISAD (GENERIC) OVERVIEW: 2NC

Extend Our 1nc Idso And Idso Evidence – With Massive Increases In Co2 In The Future We
Will Be Able To Circumvent The Large-Scale Famine That Is Right Around The Corner –
Multiple Studies Suggest That Co2 Is Critical To Increasing Agricultural Production For A
Couple Of Reasons:
Co2 Allows Plants To Increase Their Water-Use Efficiency By Reducing The Amount Of
Water Needed And By Increasing Plants’ Abilities To Get Water From The Soil
Co2 Helps Plants To Avoid The Effects Of Environmental Pollution – The Stomates Of
Various Crops Such As Wheat And Rice Will Become More Healthy And Will Allow Less
Pollution To Penetrate The Crops’ Outer Layers
This Alone Will Allow The World To Boost Agricultural Production By Over 50% - Our
Second Piece Of Idso Evidence Indicates That We Must Increase Agricultural Production In
Order To Prevent Massive Strain On The Biosphere That Would Result In The Extinction Of
Our Species And The Destruction Of The Biosphere By Overproduction Of Agriculture
This Is The Biggest Impact In The Round – We Have To Increase Agricultural Production Or
Risk The End Of Life On Earth

6
CO2 and WARMING CNDI 2008
N. FAROOQI
CO2 AG DISAD (GENERIC) UNIQ. OVERVIEW: 2NC
Extend Our 1nc Idso And Idso Evidence – World Food Production Is On The Brink – Co2
Fertilization Will Just Barely Be Able To Solve The Coming Crisis –
Satellites Measurements Prove Our Argument – Areas That Are Critical To World
Agricultural Production Are Getting Greener And Agriculture Is Increasing In These Areas
IDSO, IDSO, AND IDSO IN ‘02
(Sherwood, Pres. Ctr for Study of CO2 and Global Change, frmr Res. Phys. w/U.S. Dept of Ag's Agr Research Service
at U.S. Water Conservation Laboratory Adjunct Professor Depts Geology, Geography, and Botany and
Microbiology @ ASU, author of over 500 scientific publications, Keith, Vice Pres. Ctr Study CO2 and Global Change,
Ph.D. in Botany @ ASU, won several top awards while instructing students in biological and botanical laboratories
and lectures at ASU, and Craig, Chrmn Brd of Ctr for Study CO2 & Global Change, Ph.D. in Geog. ASU, “The
Greening of the Earth Continues,” Volume 5, Number 45: 6 November 2002, pg. Online @
http://www.co2science.org/edit/v5_edit/v5n45edit.htm)
More recently, Zhou et al. (2001) used satellite measurements to demonstrate how vegetative activity increased by
slightly over 8% and 12% between 1981 and 1999 in North America and Eurasia, respectively; while Ahlbeck
(2002) employed statistical procedures to demonstrate that the primary driver of this phenomenon was the
concurrent rise in the air's CO2 content, with regional warming playing a secondary role. When some controversy
arose over this conclusion (Kaufmann et al., 2002), we confirmed Ahlbeck's assessment of the situation by means
of a quantitative comparison of what was observed via satellite and what would have been expected on the basis of
the known strength of the aerial fertilization effect of the increase in atmospheric CO2 concentration that occurred
over the period in question (see our Editorial of 18 September 2002).

7
CO2 and WARMING CNDI 2008
N. FAROOQI
FOOD PRODUCTION INCREASING – MASSIVE STARVATION RISK ON HORIZON
Food Production Is Massively Increasing In The Status Quo – But 800 Million More People
May Be At Risk To Starvation In The Future
IDSO, IDSO, AND IDSO IN ‘03
(Sherwood, Pres. Ctr for Study of CO2 and Global Change, frmr Res. Phys. w/U.S. Dept of Ag's Agr Research Service
at U.S. Water Conservation Laboratory Adjunct Professor Depts Geology, Geography, and Botany and
Microbiology @ ASU, author of over 500 scientific publications, Keith, Vice Pres. Ctr Study CO2 and Global Change,
Ph.D. in Botany @ ASU, won several top awards while instructing students in biological and botanical laboratories
and lectures at ASU, and Craig, Chrmn Brd of Ctr for Study CO2 & Global Change, Ph.D. in Geog. ASU,
“Atmospheric CO2 Enrichment:Just What the Food Doctor Ordered!” Volume 6, Number 15: 9 April 2003, pg. Online
@ http://www.co2science.org/edit/v6_edit/v6n15edit.htm)
Over the last four decades of the 20th century, per capita world food production rose by approximately 25% (FAO,
2000). Nevertheless, as noted by Pretty et al. (2003), "food poverty persists." In fact, out of the six billion people
currently inhabiting the planet, they say some 800 million lack adequate access to food.

8
CO2 and WARMING CNDI 2008
N. FAROOQI

FARMERS NEED TO EXPAND


Farmers Are Looking To Expand Food Crops To New Areas Of The Globe
Wittwer 1995
[Sylvan H. Wittwer; PhD in horticulture member of climate research board author of “Food Climate and Carbon
Dioxide: The Global Environment and World Food Production “ published by the library of congress 2000 P -167-// UW
ef]
A drought-tolerant sorghurn variety, recently introduced in the Sudan, yields double those of traditional varieties.
New cowpeas with short growing seasons, drought tolerance, and resistance to virus and bacterial diseases are
available for the Sahel, and a disease-resistant cassava, with three times the yield of native strains, has been intro-
duced into Nigeria and the adjoining lowland tropics. These are being accompanied by new polyploid cassava
varieties with potential yields of 70 to 80 metric tons/ha.

9
CO2 and WARMING CNDI 2008
N. FAROOQI

CO2 DA - IMPACT
Food demand will soon rise, CO2 is necessary to use water effieciently and to meet food
demands, or humanity faces a grave fate.
Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change 6/6/2007
(“Separating Scientific Fact from Personal Opinion A critique of the 26 April 2007 testimony of James E. Hansen
made to the Select Committee of Energy Independence and Global Warming of the United States House of
Representatives entitled "Dangerous Human-Made Interference with Climate"”, pg online @
http://co2science.org/education/reports/hansen/hansencritique.php //cndi-nf)
How much land can ten billion people spare for nature ? This provocative question was posed by
Waggoner (1995) in an insightful essay wherein he explored the dynamic tension that exists between the need for
land to support the agricultural enterprises that sustain mankind, and the need for land to support the natural
ecosystems that sustain all other creatures. This challenge of meeting our future food needs - and not
decimating the rest of the biosphere in the process - was stressed even more strongly by Huang
et al. (2002), who wrote that humans "have encroached on almost all of the world's frontiers, leaving
little new land that is cultivatable." And in consequence of humanity's usurpation of this most
basic of natural resources, Raven (2002) stated in his Presidential Address to the American Association for
the Advancement of Science that "species-area relationships, taken worldwide in relation to habitat
destruction, lead to projections of the loss of fully two-thirds of all species on earth by the end
of this century." In a more detailed analysis of the nature and implications of this impending
"global land-grab" - which moved it closer to the present by a full half-century - Tilman et al. (2001)
concluded that the task of meeting the doubled world food demand, which they calculated would
exist in the year 2050, would likely exact a toll that "may rival climate change in environmental
and societal impacts." But how could something so catastrophic manifest itself so soon? Tilman and his nine
collaborators shed some light on this question by noting that at the end of the 20th century mankind was
already appropriating "more than a third of the production of terrestrial ecosystems and about
half of usable freshwaters." Now, think of doubling those figures, in order to meet the doubled
global food demand that Tilman et al. predict for the year 2050. The results suggest that a mere 43 years
from now mankind will be appropriating more than two thirds of terrestrial ecosystem
production plus all of earth's remaining usable freshwater, as has also been discussed by
Wallace (2000).

10
CO2 and WARMING CNDI 2008
N. FAROOQI

CO2 = BETTER PLANTS


Elevated CO2 levels increase plant size, strength, and photosynthetic activity.
Idso’s 6/25/2008
(Craig Idso, frmr Dir of Env. Science, member of the American Assoc for Adv of Science, American Geophysical
Union, American Meteorological Society, Arizona-Nevada Academy of Sciences, Assoc of American Geographers, Eco
Society of America, Sherwood Idso, pres\ of Center for the study of CO2 and Global Change, Keith Idso, vice pres of
Center for the study of CO2 with a Phd in botany, “The Shuttling of Nitrogen from One-Year-Old to Current-Year
Foliage in CO2-Enriched Atmospheres” Vol. 11:26, pg online @ http://co2science.org/articles/V11/N26/EDIT.php
//cndi-nf)
In a paper recently published in Tree Physiology, Maier et al. (2008) describe the effects of a nitrogen
fertilizer application on upper-canopy needle morphology and gas exchange in approximately 20-meter-tall
loblolly pine (Pinus taeda L.) trees previously exposed to elevated atmospheric CO2 concentrations
(200 ppm above ambient) for nine years at the Duke Forest FACE facility in Orange County, North Carolina,
USA. This work revealed that during the tenth year of exposure to elevated CO2, there was a
strong enhancement (greater than 50%) of light-saturated net photosynthesis per unit leaf area across
all age classes of needles, but that the stimulation was 28% greater for current year foliage than
for one-year-old foliage. In addition, they report that current-year foliage incorporated the added nitrogen into
photosynthetic components that increased the photosynthetic capacity of the current-year foliage, but that the one-
year-old foliage tended to simply store extra nitrogen, which subsequently served as "an important source of
nitrogen for the development of current-year foliage" via "efficient retranslocation of nitrogen from senescing one-
year-old foliage to developing foliage." These findings sounded eerily familiar to us, as we had observed a
similar phenomenon several years earlier in sour orange tree (Citrus aurantium L.) foliage in an open-top
chamber experiment we conducted at Phoenix, Arizona (Idso et al., 2001), where half of the trees we
studied had been grown from the seedling stage for the prior six years in air that was
continuously enriched with an extra 300 ppm of CO2. In the seventh year of that study, we identified
three putative vegetative storage proteins located within amorphous material in the vacuoles of leaf
mesophyll cells that was rerouted, "starting at about day 25 of the new year, into developing foliage on the
new branch buds of the CO2-enriched trees." We speculated that this phenomenon may have
been "the key that allows the CO2-enriched trees to temporarily stockpile the unusually large
pool of nitrogen that is needed to support the large CO2-induced increase in new-branch
growth that is observed in the spring," citing the work of Idso et al. (2000), who had previously found that
24 days after new-branch emergence in the spring, "the new branches of the CO2-enriched trees were,
on average, 4.4 times more massive than the new branches of the trees growing in ambient air,"
and that "the total new-branch tissue produced on the CO2-enriched trees to that point in time
was over six times greater than that produced on the ambient-treatment trees." If there is a common
mechanism that links our results with those of Maier et al., it could well revolve around the hypothesized vacuolar
storage proteins we identified in the sour orange tree foliage. In this regard, we detected immunologically-
related proteins in a variety of other citrus species, but not in 20 different grasses, shrubs and trees
growing in the Biosphere 2 facility near Oracle, Arizona. Nevertheless, this possibility is deserving of further
study; for if found to have merit, Idso et al. (2001) further speculated that the proteins in question "could
possibly be genetically exploited to enhance the responses of other plant species to atmospheric
CO2 enrichment," which could prove to be a valuable property, indeed, of agriculturally-
important plants in a high-CO2 world of the future.
(References: Idso, C.D., Idso, S.B., Kimball, B.A., Park, H.-S., Hoober, J.K. and Balling Jr., R.C. 2000. Ultra-
enhanced spring branch growth in CO2-enriched trees: can it alter the phase of the atmosphere's seasonal CO2
cycle? Environmental and Experimental Botany 43: 91-100. Idso, K.E., Hoober, J.K., Idso, S.B., Wall, G.W. and
Kimball, B.A. 2001. Atmospheric CO2 enrichment influences the synthesis and mobilization of putative vacuolar
storage proteins in sour orange tree leaves. Environmental and Experimental Botany 48: 199-211. Maier, C.A.,
Palmroth, S. and Ward, E. 2008. Short-term effects of fertilization on photosynthesis and leaf morphology of field-
grown loblolly pine following long-term exposure to elevated CO2 concentration. Tree Physiology 28: 597-606.)

11
CO2 and WARMING CNDI 2008
N. FAROOQI
CO2 GOOD FOR PLANTS
Higher levels of CO2 and/or warmer climates increase plant growth.
Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Climate Change 6/26/2008
(“Marine Coccolithophore Photosynthesis in a CO2-Enriched Warmer World” Vol. 11:26, pg online @
http://co2science.org/articles/V11/N26/B2.php //cndi-nf)
The authors grew the marine coccolithophore Emiliania huxleyi, which they isolated from the Sargasso
Sea, by semi-continuous culture methods at two different (low, high) light intensities (50 and 400
µmol photons/m2/sec), two different (low, high) temperatures (20 and 24°C), and two different (low,
high) CO2 concentrations (375 and 750 ppm). What was learned Feng et al. report that in the low-light
environment, the chlorophyll a-normalized photosynthetic rates of the coccolithophores in all
four temperature/CO2 treatments attained maximum values at an irradiance of approximately 200
µmol photons/m2/sec, where the maximum rate was lowest in the low-temperature, low-CO2 or ambient
treatment, but was significantly increased by 55% by elevated temperature alone and by 95%
by elevated CO2 alone, while in the high-temperature, high-CO2 or greenhouse treatment it was
increased by 150% relative to the ambient treatment. In the high-light environment, on the other hand,
the chlorophyll a-normalized photosynthetic rates did not max out below the maximum irradiance tested (900
µmol photons/m2/sec) for any but the ambient treatment. Hence, the equations fit to the data of the other
treatments were extrapolated to their respective photosynthetic maxima, which produced
corresponding maximum photosynthetic rate increases of 58%, 67% and 92% for the elevated
temperature alone, elevated CO2 alone and greenhouse treatments, respectively. Last of all, in the
high-light greenhouse treatment characteristic of the future, the maximum photosynthetic rate
was found to be 178% greater than what it was in the low-light ambient treatment characteristic
of the present. What it means In the words of the seven researchers, "these results suggest that future
trends of CO2 enrichment, sea-surface warming and exposure to higher mean irradiances from
intensified [surface water] stratification will have a large influence on the growth of Emiliania
huxleyi." And, of course, that "large influence" will be positive.

12
CO2 and WARMING CNDI 2008
N. FAROOQI

CO2 ENHANCES PLANTS


CO2 allows for enhanced plants.
Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change 5/28/2008
(“Genotypic Differences in Floral Initiation Response to Atmospheric CO2 Enrichment in
Thale Cress Plants” Vol. 11:22
The authors grew, from seed, well watered and fertilized plants of two closely related out-
crossed genotypes of Arabidopsis thaliana (SG and CG) -- which were generated through artificial
selection, where genotype SG was selected for high seed number at elevated CO2 over five
generations, and where genotype CG was randomly selected and thus represents a nonselected control -- in 500-
ml pots filled with a 1:1:1 mixture of vermiculate, gravel and Turface within controlled environment chambers
maintained at atmospheric CO2 concentrations of 380 and 700 ppm, measuring time to visible flowering, number
of leaves at flowering and total biomass at flowering, as well as foliar sugar concentrations. Then, in a
subsequent experiment with the same growth conditions, they characterized the expression
patterns of several floral-initiation genes. What was learned Springer et al. report that "SG delayed
flowering by 7-9 days, and flowered at a larger size (122% higher biomass) and higher leaf number
(81 more leaves) when grown at elevated versus current CO2 concentration," but that "flowering time,
size and leaf number at flowering were similar for CG plants grown at current and elevated CO2." In addition,
they say that "SG plants had 84% higher foliar sugar concentrations at the onset of flowering when
grown at elevated versus current CO2, whereas foliar sugar concentrations of CG plants grown at elevated
CO2 only increased by 38% over plants grown at current CO2." Last of all, they report that "SG exhibited
changes in the expression patterns of floral-initiation genes in response to elevated CO2 , whereas
CG plants did not." What it means Noting that "delayed flowering increases production of vegetative
resources that can be subsequently allocated to reproductive structures," the researchers go on to say that "such
evolutionary responses may alter total carbon gain of annual plants if the vegetative stage is extended, and may
potentially counteract some of the accelerations in flowering that are occurring in response to increasing
temperatures." More generally, their results demonstrate the ability of elevated CO2 to alter the
expression of plant genes in ways that may enable plants to take better advantage of the
ongoing rise in the air's CO2 content.

13
CO2 and WARMING CNDI 2008
N. FAROOQI
CO2 GOOD FOR PLANTS
CO2 increases photosynthetic rates in trees.
Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Climate Change 6/26/2008
(“Trees (Types - Pine: Loblolly, Photosynthesis) – Summary” Vol. 11 25:18, pg online @
http://co2science.org/subject/t/summaries/treeslobphoto.php //cndi-nf)
Tissue et al. (1997) grew loblolly pine tree seedlings for a period of four years in open-top
chambers maintained at atmospheric CO2 concentrations of 350 and 650 ppm in a study of the
long-term effects of elevated CO2 on the photosynthetic rates of this abundant species of pine.
This experiment indicated that the trees growing in CO2-enriched air exhibited photosynthetic
rates that were 60-130% greater than those exhibited by seedlings growing in ambient air
during the warmer summer months, while during the colder winter months the extra CO2
boosted seedling photosynthetic rates by a lesser 14 to 44%.
Maier et al. (2002) constructed open-top chambers around loblolly pine trees that had been
growing on an infertile sandy soil for 13 years, after which they fumigated them for two
additional years with air containing atmospheric CO2 concentrations of either 350 or 550 ppm. This
study indicated that the elevated CO2 enhanced the trees' net photosynthesis rates by 82%, with
the trees showing no signs of photosynthetic acclimation over the two-year duration of the study.
Crous and Ellsworth (2004) made photosynthetic measurements of different-age needles at
different crown positions on 19-year-old (in 2002) loblolly pine trees at the Duke Forest FACE facility --
where the CO2-enriched trees were exposed to air containing an extra 200 ppm of CO2 -- in the
sixth year of a long-term study, after which the results were compared with the results of similar
measurements made over the prior five years. In doing so, they found "some evidence of moderate
photosynthetic down-regulation ... in 1-year-old needles across the fifth to sixth year of CO2
exposure." However, they report that "strong photosynthetic enhancement in response to
elevated CO2 (e.g., +60% across age classes and canopy locations) was observed across the years." Hence,
there is reason to believe that the positive effects of atmospheric CO2 enrichment on earth's
woody plants may perhaps be maintained indefinitely, which bodes well indeed for all
components of the biosphere that will live in the high-CO2 world of the future that grows ever
closer with each passing day.
(Reference: Crous, K.Y. and Ellsworth, D.S. 2004. Canopy position affects photosynthetic adjustments to long-
term elevated CO2 concentration )

14
CO2 and WARMING CNDI 2008
N. FAROOQI
CO2 GOOD FOR PLANTS
CO2 good for plants and consumption.
Idso’s 6/26/2008
(Craig Idso, frmr Dir of Env. Science, member of the American Assoc for Adv of Science, American Geophysical
Union, American Meteorological Society, Arizona-Nevada Academy of Sciences, Assoc of American Geographers, Eco
Society of America, Sherwood Idso, pres\ of Center for the study of CO2 and Global Change, Keith Idso, vice pres of
Center for the study of CO2 with a Phd in botany, “The Shuttling of Nitrogen from One-Year-Old to Current-Year
Foliage in CO2-Enriched Atmospheres” Vol. 11:26, pg online @ http://co2science.org/articles/V11/N26/EDIT.php
//cndi-nf)
With respect to the first subject of their review, Stiling and Cornelissen report that "t he densities of all leaf
miner species (6) on all host species (3) were lower in every year in elevated CO2 than they were
in ambient CO2." With respect to the second subject, they say that "elevated CO2 significantly
decreased herbivore abundance (-21.6%), increased relative consumption rates (+16.5%),
development time (+3.87%) and total consumption (+9.2%), and significantly decreased relative growth
rate (-8.3%), conversion efficiency (-19.9%) and pupal weight (-5.03%)," while noting that " host plants
growing under enriched CO2 environments exhibited significantly larger biomass (+38.4%),
increased C/N ratio (+26.57%), and decreased nitrogen concentration (-16.4%), as well as
increased concentrations of tannins (+29.9%)." What it means With plant biomass increasing and
herbivorous pest abundance decreasing (by +38.4% and -21.6%, respectively, in response to an
approximate doubling of the atmosphere's CO2 concentration), it would appear that in the eternal struggle
to produce the food that sustains all of humanity, either directly or indirectly, man's crops will fare
ever better as the air's CO2 content continues its upward climb. Likewise, it would appear there
will be a concomitant expansion of the vegetative food base that sustains all of the biosphere.

15
CO2 and WARMING CNDI 2008
N. FAROOQI

CO2 NEEDED FOR FUTURE AG


CO2 is essential to meet future demands.
Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change 6/6/2007
(“Separating Scientific Fact from Personal Opinion A critique of the 26 April 2007 testimony of James E. Hansen
made to the Select Committee of Energy Independence and Global Warming of the United States House of
Representatives entitled "Dangerous Human-Made Interference with Climate"”, pg online @
http://co2science.org/education/reports/hansen/hansencritique.php //cndi-nf)
Since atmospheric CO2 is the basic "food" of nearly all plants, the more of it there is in the air,
the better they function and the more productive they become. For a 300-ppm increase in the
atmosphere's CO2 concentration above the planet's current base level of slightly less than 400
ppm, for example, the productivity of earth's herbaceous plants rises by something on the order
of 30% (Kimball, 1983; Idso and Idso, 1994), while the productivity of its woody plants rises by
something on the order of 50% (Saxe et al., 1998; Idso and Kimball, 2001). Thus, as the air's CO2
content continues to rise, so too will the productive capacity or land-use efficiency of the planet
continue to rise, as the aerial fertilization effect of the upward-trending atmospheric CO2
concentration boosts the growth rates and biomass production of nearly all plants in nearly all
places. In addition, elevated atmospheric CO2 concentrations typically increase plant nutrient-use
efficiency in general - and nitrogen-use efficiency in particular - as well as plant water-use
efficiency, as may be verified by perusing the many reviews of scientific journal articles we have produced on
these topics and archived in the Subject Index of our website (www.co2science.org). Consequently, with respect to
fostering all three of the plant physiological phenomena that Tilman et al. (2002) contend are needed to prevent the
catastrophic consequences they foresee for the planet just a few short decades from now, a continuation of the
current upward trend in the atmosphere's CO2 concentration would appear to be essential.

16
CO2 and WARMING CNDI 2008
N. FAROOQI
CO2 GOOD FOR PHYTOPLANKTON
CO2 is good for phytoplankton.
Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change 6/11/2008
(“Phytoplankton Calcification in a CO2-Accreting Ocean” Vol. 11:24, pg online @
http://co2science.org/issues/v11/v11n24_co2science.php //cndi-nf)
For the past several years, the ongoing rise in the air's CO2 content has been claimed
by the world's
climate alarmists to be making life ever more difficult for earth's calcifying marine organisms
by lowering the calcium carbonate saturation state of seawater, which phenomenon has been predicted by them to
greatly hamper the abilities of these creatures to produce their calcium carbonate skeletons. However, several
experimental studies have cast great doubt on this theoretical contention, as may be readily
seen by perusing the many materials we have archived in our Subject Index under the general heading of
Calcification, while here we review yet another pertinent study. What was done Iglesias-Rodriguez et al.
conducted several batch incubations of the phytoplanktonic coccolithophore species Emiliania
hyxleyi while bubbling air of a number of different atmospheric CO2 concentrations through
the culture medium and determining the amounts of particulate inorganic carbon (PIC) and
particulate organic carbon (POC) produced by the coccolithophores within the different CO2
treatments. In addition, they determined the change in average coccolithophore mass over the past
220 years based on data obtained from a sediment core extracted from the subpolar North Atlantic Ocean, over
which period of time the atmosphere's CO2 concentration rose by approximately 90 ppm. What was
learned The thirteen researchers -- hailing from the United Kingdom, France and the United States --
observed an approximate doubling of both PIC and POC between the culture media in
equilibrium with air of today's CO2 concentration and 750 ppm CO2. In addition, they write that the
field evidence obtained from the deep-ocean sediment core they studied "is consistent with
these laboratory conclusions, indicating that over the past 220 years there has been a 40%
increase in average coccolith mass." What it means Once again we have a situation where real-
world observations depict something that is just the opposite of a major theory-based
prediction, the clear implication being that relevant environmental and energy policies must be based on the
former and not the latter.

17
CO2 and WARMING CNDI 2008
N. FAROOQI
CO2 GOOD FOR PLANTS
CO2 increases photosynthetic and biomass production.
Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change 6/4/2008
(“Trees (Types – Pine: Scots) -- Summary” Vol. 11:23, pg online @
http://co2science.org/subject/t/summaries/treesscots.php //cndi-nf)
Nearly all trees respond to increases in the air's CO2 content by exhibiting enhanced rates of
photosynthesis and biomass production, as well as beneficial changes in several other plant
physiological processes and properties. In this summary, we describe the findings of a number of such
experiments that have been conducted on Scots pine (Pinus sylvestris L.) trees. Rouhier and Read (1998) grew
Scots pine seedlings for four months in growth cabinets maintained at atmospheric CO2
concentrations of either 350 or 700 ppm. In addition, one third of the seedlings were inoculated with
one species of mycorrhizal fungi, one third were inoculated with another species, and one third
were not inoculated at all, in order to determine the effects of elevated CO2 on mycorrhizal
fungi and their interactive effects on seedling growth. These procedures resulted in the doubled
atmospheric CO2 content increasing seedling dry mass by an average of 45% regardless of
fungal inoculation. In addition, the extra CO2 increased the number of hyphal tips associated
with seedling roots by about 62% for both fungal species. Hyphal growth was also accelerated
by elevated CO2; and after 55 days of treatment, the mycorrhizal network produced by one of
the fungal symbionts occupied 444% more area than its counterpart exposed to ambient CO2 .
These results suggest that as the air's CO2 content continues to rise, fungal symbionts of Scots pine
will likely receive greater allocations of carbon from their host. This carbon can be used to increase
their mycorrhizal networks, which would enable the fungi to explore greater volumes of soil in search
of minerals and nutrients to benefit the growth of its host. In addition, by receiving greater
allocations of carbon, fungal symbionts may keep photosynthetic down regulation from
occurring, as they provide an additional sink for leaf-produced carbohydrates.

CO2 increases root growth and mass.


Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change 6/4/2008
(“Trees (Types – Pine : Scots) – Summary” Vol. 11:23, pg online @
http://co2science.org/subject/t/summaries/treesscots.php //cndi-nf)
Janssens et al. (1998) grew three-year-old Scots pine seedlings in open-top chambers kept at
ambient and 700 ppm atmospheric CO2 concentrations for six months, while they studied the effects
of elevated CO2 on root growth and respiration. In doing so, they learned that the elevated CO2 treatment
significantly increased total root length by 122% and dry mass by 135% relative to the roots of
seedlings grown in ambient-CO2 air. In addition, although starch accumulation in the CO2-
enriched roots was nearly 90% greater than that observed in the roots produced in the ambient-
CO2 treatment, the carbon-to-nitrogen ratio of the CO2-enriched roots was significantly lower
than that of the control-plant roots, indicative of the fact that they contained an even greater
relative abundance of nitrogen. The most important implication of this study, therefore, was that Scots
pine seedlings will likely be able to find the nitrogen they need to sustain large growth
responses to atmospheric CO2 enrichment with the huge root systems they typically produce in
CO2-enriched air.

18
CO2 and WARMING CNDI 2008
N. FAROOQI
CO2 GOOD FOR PLANTS
CO2 helps trees produce starch and let plants use less water.
Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change 6/4/2008
(“Trees (Types – Pine : Scots) – Summary” Vol. 11:23, pg online @
http://co2science.org/subject/t/summaries/treesscots.php //cndi-nf)
Kainulainen et al. (1998) constructed open-top chambers around Scots pine trees that were about
twenty years old and fumigated them with combinations of ambient or CO2-enriched air (645
ppm) and ambient or twice-ambient (20 to 40 ppb) ozone-enriched air for three growing seasons to
study the interactive effects of these gases on starch and secondary metabolite production. In
doing so, they determined that elevated CO2 and O3 (ozone) had no significant impact on starch
production in Scots pine, even after two years of treatment exposure. However, near the end of
the third year, the elevated CO2 alone significantly enhanced starch production in current-year
needles, although neither extra CO2, extra O3, nor combinations thereof had any significant effects on the
concentrations of secondary metabolites they investigated.
Kellomaki and Wang (1998) constructed closed-top chambers around 30-year-old Scots pine trees,
which they fumigated with air containing either 350 or 700 ppm CO2 at ambient and elevated
(ambient plus 4°C) air temperatures for one full year, after which they assessed tree water-use by
measuring cumulative sap flow for 32 additional days. This protocol revealed that the CO2-enriched air
reduced cumulative sap flow by 14% at ambient air temperatures, but that sap flow was
unaffected by atmospheric CO2 concentration in the trees growing at the elevated air
temperatures. These findings suggest that cumulative water-use by Scotts pine trees in a CO2-enriched
world of the future will likely be less than or equal to -- but no more than -- what it is today.

CO2 decreases plant transpiration, and heat helps trees’ sap flow.
Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change 6/4/2008
(“Trees (Types – Pine : Scots) – Summary” Vol. 11:23, pg online @
http://co2science.org/subject/t/summaries/treesscots.php //cndi-nf)
Seven years later, however, Wang et al. (2005) published a report of a study in which they measured
sap flow, crown structure and microclimatic parameters in order to calculate the transpiration rates of
individual 30-year-old Scots pine trees that were maintained for a period of three years in
ambient air and air enriched with an extra 350 ppm of CO2 and/or warmed by 2 to 6°C in closed-
top chambers constructed within a naturally-seeded stand of the trees. As they describe it, the
results of this experiment indicated that "(i) elevated CO2 significantly enhanced whole-tree
transpiration rate during the first measuring year [by 14%] due to a large increase in whole-tree
foliage area, 1998, but reduced it in the subsequent years of 1999 and 2000 [by 13% and 16%,
respectively] as a consequence of a greater decrease in crown conductance which off-set the
increase in foliage area per tree; (ii) trees growing in elevated temperature always had higher sap
flow rates throughout three measuring years [by 54%, 45% and 57%, respectively]; and (iii) the
response of sap flow to the combination of elevated temperature and CO2 was similar to that of
elevated temperature alone, indicating a dominant role for temperature and a lack of interaction
between elevated CO2 and temperature." These observations suggest that as the air's CO2 content
continues to rise, we probably can expect to see a decrease in evaporative water loss rates from
naturally-occurring stands of Scots pine trees ... unless there is a large concurrent increase in air
temperature. As demonstrated in various places throughout our website, however, there is good reason to believe
we will not see CO2-induced global temperature increases of the magnitude employed in this study during what
yet remains of the current interglacial.

19
CO2 and WARMING CNDI 2008
N. FAROOQI
CO2 GOOD FOR PLANTS
CO2 increases the growth of trees. Warmer temperatures can increase it even more.
Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change 6/4/2008
(“Trees (Types – Pine : Scots) – Summary” Vol. 11:23, pg online @
http://co2science.org/subject/t/summaries/treesscots.php //cndi-nf)
Also working with closed-top chambers that were constructed around 20-year-old Scots pines
and fumigated with air containing 350 and 700 ppm CO2 at ambient and elevated (ambient plus 4°C)
air temperatures for a period of three years were Peltola et al. (2002), who studied the effects of
elevated CO2 and air temperature on stem growth in this coniferous species when it was growing on a
soil low in nitrogen. After three years of treatment, they found that cumulative stem diameter
growth in the CO2-enriched trees growing at ambient air temperatures was 57% greater than
that displayed by control trees growing at ambient CO2 and ambient air temperatures, while the
trees exposed to elevated CO2 and elevated air temperature exhibited cumulative stem-diameter
growth that was 67% greater than that displayed by trees exposed to ambient-CO2 air and
ambient air temperatures. Consequently, as the air's CO2 content continues to rise, Scots pine trees
will likely respond by increasing stem-diameter growth, even if growing on soils low in
nitrogen, and even if air temperatures rise by as much as 4°C.

CO2 enhances many aspects of trees.


Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change 6/4/2008
(“Trees (Types – Pine : Scots) – Summary” Vol. 11:23, pg online @
http://co2science.org/subject/t/summaries/treesscots.php //cndi-nf)
Finally, Bergh et al. (2003) used a boreal version of the process-based BIOMASS simulation model to
quantify the individual and combined effects of elevated air temperature (2 and 4°C above ambient)
and CO2 concentration (350 ppm above ambient) on the net primary production (NPP) of Scots pine
forests growing in Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway and Sweden. This work revealed that air
temperature increases of 2 and 4°C led to mean NPP increases of 11 and 20%, respectively.
However, when the air's CO2 concentration was simultaneously increased from 350 to 700 ppm, the
corresponding mean NPP increases rose to 41 and 55%. Last of all, when the air's CO2 content
was doubled at the prevailing ambient temperature, the mean value of the NPP rose by 27%.
Consequently, as the air's CO2 content continues to rise, Ponderosa pines of Denmark, Finland, Iceland,
Norway and Sweden should grow ever more productively; and if air temperature also rises, they
will likely grow better still. In summary, as the air's CO2 content continues to rise, we can expect
to see the root systems of Scots pines significantly enhanced, together with the mycorrhizal fungal
networks that live in close association with them and help secure the nutrients the trees need to
sustain large CO2-induced increases in biomass production. Concurrently, we can expect to see
much smaller changes in total evaporative water loss, which means that whole-tree water use
efficiency should also be significantly enhanced.
(References: Bergh, J., Freeman, M., Sigurdsson, B., Kellomaki, S., Laitinen, K., Niinisto, S., Peltola, H. and
Linder, S. 2003. Modelling the short-term effects of climate change on the productivity of selected tree species in
Nordic countries. Forest Ecology and Management 183: 327-340)

20
CO2 and WARMING CNDI 2008
N. FAROOQI
CO2 GOOD FOR PLANTS
CO2 can increase plant growth and enhance soil.
Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change 6/4/2008
(“Belowground Nematode Herbivores of Grasslands” Volume 11:23, pg online @
http://co2science.org/articles/V11/N23/B1.php //cndi-nf)
The authors report the responses of belowground nematode herbivores to atmospheric CO2
enrichment to approximately 350 ppm above ambient in experiments conducted on three grassland
ecosystems in Colorado and California (USA) and Montpellier, France. What was learned With respect to the
soils involved, Ayres et al. state that "soil moisture increased in response to elevated CO2 in the
California, Colorado, and French stud[ies] (Hungate et al., 1997; Nijs et al., 2000; Morgan et al., 2004)." With
respect to the plants involved, they state that "elevated CO2 increased root biomass by approximately 3-
32% in the first 5 years of the Coloradoan study (Pendall et al., 2004), by 23% after 6 years in the Californian
study (Rillig et al., 1999), and by 31% after 6 months in the French study (Dhillion et al., 1996)." With respect to
the nematodes involved, they state that "CO2 enrichment did not significantly affect the family
richness, diversity, or PPI [plant parasitic nematode index] of herbivorous nematodes in the Colorado,
California, or French study," noting that "in each experiment, neutral effects were the most frequent
response to CO2 enrichment." What it means The seven researchers state that " one consequence of
increased root production, without changes in belowground herbivore populations, might be
greater plant inputs to soil," which "may lead to greater soil organic matter pools in grassland
ecosystems, potentially enhancing soil carbon sequestration."

(Reference: Ayres, E., Wall, D.H., Simmons, B.L., Field, C.B., Milchunas, D.G., Morgan, J.A. and Roy, J. 2008.
Belowground nematode herbivores are resistant to elevated atmospheric CO2 concentrations in grassland
ecosystems. Soil Biology & Biochemistry 40: 978-985)

21
CO2 and WARMING CNDI 2008
N. FAROOQI
CO2 GOOD FOR PLANTS
CO2 allowed for large scale agriculture which allowed for civilizations.
Idso’s 5/28/2008
(Craig Idso, frmr Dir of Env. Science, member of the American Assoc for Adv of Science, American Geophysical
Union, American Meteorological Society, Arizona-Nevada Academy of Sciences, Assoc of American Geographers, Eco
Society of America, Sherwood Idso, pres\ of Center for the study of CO2 and Global Change, Keith Idso, vice pres of
Center for the study of CO2 with a Phd in botany “The Debt We Owe to Atmospheric CO2 Enrichment” Vol. 11:22,
pg online @ http://co2science.org/articles/V11/N22/EDIT.php //cndi-nf)
In an intriguing paper recently published in Global Change Biology, Cunniff et al. (2008) note that "early
agriculture was characterized by sets of primary domesticates or 'founder crops' that were
adopted in several independent centers of origin," all at about the same time; and they say and
that "this synchronicity suggests the involvement of a global trigger." Further noting that Sage
(1995) saw a causal link between this development and the rise in atmospheric CO2
concentration that followed deglaciation (a jump from about 180 to 270 ppm), they hypothesized that the
aerial fertilization effect caused by the rise in CO2 combined with its transpiration-reducing
effect led to a large increase in the water use efficiencies of the world's major C4 founder crops,
and that this development was the global trigger that launched the agricultural enterprise.
Consequently, as a test of this hypothesis, they designed "a controlled environment experiment using
five modern day representatives of wild C4 crop progenitors, all 'founder crops' from a variety of
independent centers." The five crops employed in their study were Setaria viridis (L.) P. Beauv, Panicum
miliaceum var. ruderale (Kitag.), Pennisetum violaceum (Lam.) Rich., Sorghum arundinaceum (Desv.), and Zea
mays subsp. parviglumis H.H. Iltis & Doebley. They were grown individually in 6-cm x 6-cm x 6-cm pots
filled with a 1:1 mix of washed sand and vermiculite for 40-50 days in growth chambers maintained at
atmospheric CO2 concentrations of 180, 280 and 380 ppm, characteristic of glacial, post-glacial and
modern times, respectively. This work revealed that the "increase in CO2 from glacial to postglacial
levels [180 to 280 ppm] caused a significant gain in vegetative biomass of up to 40%," together
with "a reduction in the transpiration rate via decreases in stomatal conductance of ~35%,"
which led to "a 70% increase in water use efficiency, and a much greater productivity potential
in water-limited conditions." In discussing their results, the five researchers concluded that " these key
physiological changes could have greatly enhanced the productivity of wild crop progenitors after
deglaciation ... improving the productivity and survival of these wild C4 crop progenitors in
early agricultural systems." And in this regard, they note that "the lowered water requirements of C4
crop progenitors under increased CO2 would have been particularly beneficial in the arid
climatic regions where these plants were domesticated." For comparative purposes, the researchers
had also included one C3 species in their study -- Hordeum spontaneum K. Koch -- and they report that it
"showed a near-doubling in biomass compared with [the] 40% increase in the C4 species under growth
treatments equivalent to the postglacial CO2 rise." In light of these several findings, it can be
appreciated that the civilizations of the past, which could not have existed without agriculture,
were largely made possible by the increase in the air's CO2 content that accompanied
deglaciation, and that the peoples of the earth today are likewise indebted to this phenomenon,
as well as the additional 100 ppm of CO2 the atmosphere has subsequently acquired.
(Reference: Cunniff, J., Osborne, C.P., Ripley, B.S., Charles, M. and Jones, G. 2008. Response of wild C4 crop
progenitors to subambient CO2 highlights a possible role in the origin of agriculture. Global Change Biology 14:
576-587)

22
CO2 and WARMING CNDI 2008
N. FAROOQI

AT: WEATHER OVERWHELMS PLANTS

CO2 DOESN’T HAVE A BIG IMPACT ON CLIMATE


CO2 doesn’t have a major impact on climate. Past studies prove.
Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change 6/25/2008
(“Snow(North America) -- Summary” Vol. 11:26, pg online @ http://co2science.org/subject/s/summaries/snowna.php
//cndi-nf)
We find it to be extremely interesting that from 1950 to 2002, during which time the air's CO2
concentration rose by fully 20% (from approximately 311 to 373 ppm), there was no net change in
either the mean onset or duration of snow cover for the entire continent of North America ; and to
provide some context for this 62-ppm increase in atmospheric CO2 concentration, we note that it is essentially
identical to the mean difference between the highs and lows of the three interglacials and
glacials reported by Siegenthaler et al. (2005) for the period prior to 430,000 years ago. Surely, one would
expect that such a change should have made some impact on North American snow cover,
unless, of course, atmospheric CO2 enrichment has far less impact on climate than what
climate alarmists claim it does. In a somewhat different type of study, i.e., that of winter weather
variability, which climate alarmists typically depict as becoming more extreme in response to
global warming, Woodhouse (2003) generated a tree-ring based reconstruction of SWE for the
Gunnison River basin of western Colorado that spans the period 1569-1999. This work revealed, in
her words, that "the twentieth century is notable for several periods that lack [our italics] extreme
years." Specifically, she reports that "the twentieth century is notable for several periods that contain
few or no extreme years, for both low and high SWE extremes."
Also addressing the subject of extreme winter weather was Lawson (2003), who examined
meteorological records for information pertaining to the occurrence and severity of blizzards
within the Prairie Ecozone of western Canada. Over the period 1953-1997, no significant trends were
found in central and eastern locations. However, there was a significant downward trend in
blizzard frequency in the western prairies; and Lawson remarks that "this trend is consistent
with results found by others that indicate a decrease in cyclone frequency over western
Canada." He also notes that the blizzards that do occur there "exhibit no trend in the severity of
their individual weather elements." These findings, in his words, "serve to illustrate that the changes
in extreme weather events anticipated under Climate Change may not always be for the worse."
(References: Bartlett, M.G., Chapman, D.S. and Harris, R.N. 2005. Snow effect on North American ground
temperatures, 1950-2002)

23
CO2 and WARMING CNDI 2008
N. FAROOQI

AT: CO2 AFFECTS PLANT DECOMPOSTION


CO2 doesn’t affect plant decomposition
Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change 6/4/2008
(“Trees (Types – Pine : Scots) – Summary” Vol. 11:23, pg online @
http://co2science.org/subject/t/summaries/treesscots.php //cndi-nf)
In a somewhat different type of study, Kainulainen et al. (2003) collected needle litter beneath 22-year-
old Scots pines that had been growing for the prior three years in open-top chambers that had
been maintained at atmospheric CO2 concentrations of 350 and 600 ppm in combination with
ambient and elevated (approximately 1.4 x ambient) ozone concentrations to determine the impacts
of these variables on the subsequent decomposition of senesced needles. This they did by enclosing
the needles in litterbags and placing the bags within a native litter layer in a Scots pine forest, where
decomposition rates were assessed by measuring accumulated litterbag mass loss over a period
of 19 months. Interestingly, the three researchers found that exposure to elevated CO2 during growth
did not affect subsequent rates of needle decomposition, nor did elevated O3 exposure affect
decomposition, nor did exposure to elevated concentrations of the two gases together affect it.

24
CO2 and WARMING CNDI 2008
N. FAROOQI

CO2 GOOD FOR PLANTS W/WARM CLIMATE


CO2 is good for plants, and even better with warm climates.
Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change 6/6/2007
(“Separating Scientific Fact from Personal Opinion A critique of the 26 April 2007 testimony of James E. Hansen
made to the Select Committee of Energy Independence and Global Warming of the United States House of
Representatives entitled "Dangerous Human-Made Interference with Climate"”, pg online @
http://co2science.org/education/reports/hansen/hansencritique.php //cndi-nf)
So what's the real situation with respect to rising air temperatures and atmospheric CO2 concentrations, as well as
the life-and-death impacts they may - or may not - have on earth's plants and animals? A good place to begin in
answering this question is with the growth-enhancing effects of elevated atmospheric CO2, which
typically increase with rising air and leaf temperatures. This phenomenon is illustrated by the data of
Jurik et al. (1984), who exposed bigtooth aspen leaves to atmospheric CO2 concentrations of 325 and 1935 ppm
and measured their photosynthetic rates at a number of different temperatures. In the figure below, we have
reproduced their results and slightly extended the two relationships defined by their data to both warmer and
cooler conditions. n viewing this figure, it can be seen that at a leaf temperature of 10°C, elevated CO2
has essentially no effect on net photosynthesis in this particular species , as Idso and Idso (1994)
have demonstrated is characteristic of plants in general. At 25°C, however, where the net photosynthetic
rate of the leaves exposed to 325 ppm CO2 is maximal, the extra CO2 of this study boosted the
net photosynthetic rate of the foliage by nearly 100%; and at 36°C, where the net
photosynthetic rate of the leaves exposed to 1935 ppm CO2 is maximal, the extra CO2 boosted
the net photosynthetic rate of the foliage by a whopping 450%. In addition, the extra CO2
increased the optimum temperature for net photosynthesis in this species by about 11°C: from
25°C in air of 325 ppm CO2 to 36°C in air of 1935 ppm CO2.

25
CO2 and WARMING CNDI 2008
N. FAROOQI
CO2 KEY TO PLANT SURVIVAL
CO2 is necessary for plants to survive in warm climates.
Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change 6/6/2007
(“Separating Scientific Fact from Personal Opinion A critique of the 26 April 2007 testimony of James E. Hansen
made to the Select Committee of Energy Independence and Global Warming of the United States House of
Representatives entitled "Dangerous Human-Made Interference with Climate"”, pg online @
http://co2science.org/education/reports/hansen/hansencritique.php //cndi-nf)
In viewing the warm-temperature projections of the two relationships at the right-hand side of the figure, it can
additionally be seen that the transition from positive to negative net photosynthesis - which denotes a change from
life-sustaining to life-sapping conditions - likely occurs somewhere in the vicinity of 39°C in air of 325 ppm CO2
but somewhere in the vicinity of 50°C in air of 1935 ppm CO2. Consequently, not only was the optimum
temperature for photosynthesis of bigtooth aspen greatly increased by the extra CO2 of this experiment,
so too was the lethal temperature (above which life cannot long be sustained) likewise increased, and by
approximately the same amount, i.e., 11°C. These observations, which are similar to what has been observed in
many other plants, suggest that when the atmosphere's temperature and CO2 concentration rise
together (Cowling, 1999), the vast majority of earth's plants would likely not feel a need (or only
very little need) to migrate towards cooler regions of the globe. Any warming would obviously
provide them an opportunity to move into places that were previously too cold for them, but it
would not force them to move, even at the hottest extremes of their ranges; for as the planet
warmed, the rising atmospheric CO2 concentration would work its biological wonders,
significantly increasing the temperatures at which most of earth's C3 plants - which comprise
about 95% of the planet's vegetation - function best, creating a situation where earth's plant life
would actually "prefer" warmer conditions.

26
CO2 and WARMING CNDI 2008
N. FAROOQI

CO2 DA
A. Uniqueness
1. CO2 solves ozone pollution.
Idso’s 10/21/2001
(Sherwood Idso, pres of Center for the study of CO2 and Global Change, Keith Idso Keith Idso, vice pres of Center
for the study of CO2 with a Phd in botany, “Anthropogenic CO2 Emissions Could Dramatically Increase Global
Agricultural Production By Thwarting the Adverse Effects of Ozone Pollution” Volume 4 #43, pg online
@http://co2science.org/articles/V4/N43/EDIT.php //cndi-nf)
Damage to crops caused by air pollutants is one of the major scourges of present-day
agriculture. How great are the production losses caused by these plant-debilitating agents? In a
recent study of the effects of ozone pollution in the Punjab region of Pakistan, Wahid et al. (2001)
periodically applied a powerful ozone protectant to soybean plants growing in three different locations
in the general vicinity of the city of Lahore - a suburban site, a remote rural site, and a rural roadside site -
throughout two different growing seasons (one immediately post-monsoon and one the following spring or pre-
monsoon). The results were truly astounding. At the suburban site, application of the ozone
protectant increased the weight of seeds produced per plant by 47% in the post-monsoon season
and by 113% in the pre-monsoon season. At the remote rural site, the corresponding yield
increases were 94% and 182%; and at the rural roadside site, they were 170% and 285%.
Averaged across all three sites and both seasons of the year, the mean increase in yield caused by
countering the deleterious effects of this one major air pollutant was nearly 150%.
Due to their somewhat surprising finding that "the impacts of ozone on the yield of soybean are larger
in the rural areas around Lahore than in suburban areas of the city ," the authors concluded "there
may be substantial impacts of oxidants on crop yield across large areas of the Punjab." In addition,
they noted that earlier studies had revealed similar large ozone-induced losses in the
productivity of local cultivars of wheat and rice. Hence, it is clear that whatever could be done
to reduce these massive crop losses - or, ideally, eliminate them altogether - would be a
godsend to the people of Pakistan and the inhabitants of many other areas of the globe. Fortunately,
such a savior is silently working its wonders throughout the entire world. That of which we
speak, of course, is the ongoing rise in the air's CO2 content, which counteracts the negative
effects of ozone - and those of many other air pollutants (Allen, 1990; Idso and Idso, 1994) - by
restricting the noxious molecule's entry into plant leaves via induced reduction of leaf stomatal apertures (Reid and
Fiscus, 1998), and by ameliorating its adverse biochemical activities when it does penetrate vegetative tissues
(Reid et al., 1998).

B. Link
The plan decreases CO2 emmissions.

27
CO2 and WARMING CNDI 2008
N. FAROOQI
CO2 DA
C. Impact
Without CO2, the world faces Extinction.
(Sherwood Idso, pres of Center for the study of CO2 and Global Change, Keith Idso Keith Idso, vice pres of Center
for the study of CO2 with a Phd in botany, “Anthropogenic CO2 Emissions Could Dramatically Increase Global
Agricultural Production By Thwarting the Adverse Effects of Ozone Pollution” Volume 4 #43, pg online @
http://co2science.org/articles/V4/N43/EDIT.php //cndi-nf)
Think about the implications of these findings. A doubling of the air's CO2 content could well double
agricultural production in many areas of the world by merely eliminating the adverse effects of
but one air pollutant, i.e., ozone. Then, consider the fact that by the mid-point of the current
century, we will likely face a food production crisis of unimaginable proportions (see our
Editorials of 21 February 2001 and 13 June 2001). Finally, ask yourself what the Precautionary Principle has to
say about this state of affairs (see our Editorial of 4 July 2001). We conducted such an exercise in our review of
the paper of Hudak et al. (1999), concluding that perhaps our new mantra should be: Free the Biosphere! Let
the air's CO2 content rise. And we still feel that way. CO2 is the elixir of life. It is one of the
primary raw materials - the other being water - out of which plants construct their tissues; and it is
essential to their existence and our existence. Without more of it in the air, our species - as well
as most of the rest of the planet's animal life - will not survive the 21st century intact. The
biosphere will continue to exist, but not as we know it; for most of its wild diversity of life will have been
extinguished by mankind's mad rush to appropriate ever more land and water to grow the food
required to feed itself (Tilman et al., 2001).

28
CO2 and WARMING CNDI 2008
N. FAROOQI

*******ADDITIONAL WARMING ANSWERS

29
CO2 and WARMING CNDI 2008
N. FAROOQI

WARMING HAPPENED, IT’S GOOD


There have been much warmer climates in the past which increased plant growth.
Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change 6/25/2008
(“Southern Alaska USA” Vol. 11:26, pg online @ http://co2science.org/data/mwp/studies/l2_southernalaska.php
//cndi-nf)
Wiles et al. used temperature-sensitive climate proxy records with tree-ring, lichen and
radiocarbon dated histories from five land-terminating non-surging glaciers located just above the
Gulf of Alaska (about 60°N between 140 and 150°W) for the last two millennia to "identify summer
temperature as a primary driver of glacial expansions." This work provided evidence for the
Medieval Warm Period that consisted of "soil formation and forest growth on many forefields
in areas that today are only just emerging from beneath retreating termini," which suggests that
the Medieval Warm Period was likely both warmer and longer-lived than what we have so far
experienced during the Current Warm Period. They also report that "tree-ring chronologies
show that forest growth on these forefields was continuous between the 900s and 1200s" at the
Sheridan, Tebenkof and Princeton glaciers.

(Reference: Wiles, G.C., Barclay, D.J., Calkin, P.E. and Lowell, T.V. 2008. Century to millennial-scale
temperature variations for the last two thousand years indicated from glacial geologic records of Southern Alaska.
Global and Planetary Change 60: 115-125)

30
CO2 and WARMING CNDI 2008
N. FAROOQI

WARMING ALREADY HAPPENED, HIGH CO2 NOT THE CAUSE


Warming already occurred, WITHOUT a high level of CO2.
Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Climate Change 6/18/2008
(“Sea Surface Temperatures off the Coast of North Iceland” Vol. 11:25, pg online @
http://co2science.org/issues/v11/v11n25_co2science.php //cndi-nf)
In comparing prior temperatures to those of the near-present, we note that the SST record peaks at
about 8.3°C somewhere in the vicinity of 1940, which was a particularly warm time in earth's
modern history. However, the researchers show a "modern temperature" of 9°C that they
determined from a box-core of nearby surface sediment, which they say "is consistent with the
recent compilation produced by Hanna et al. (2006)," who report that "since 1874, July and
August SSTs measured at Grimsey Island have varied between 6.7 and 9°C," which ultimately
suggests that Sicre et al.'s 9°C value is the peak modern temperature observed to the time of
Hanna et al.'s analysis. What it means In light of the above observations, it can be concluded that the
peak temperature of the Medieval Warm Period was fully 1°C warmer than the peak
temperature of the Current Warm Period, and that the peak temperature of the Roman Warm
Period was about 0.5°C warmer than that of the Current Warm Period. And since the air's CO2
concentration at those two earlier times was at least 100 ppm less than it is today, whatever caused
the much higher-than-current temperatures of those earlier warm periods may well be what has
caused the more modest high temperatures the earth has experienced in our day and age.

31
CO2 and WARMING CNDI 2008
N. FAROOQI

WARMING ALREADY HAPPENED DUE TO SOLAR ACT.


Worse warming already happened due to solar activivity.
Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Climate Change 6/18/2008
(“The Northeast Tibetan Plateau's Medieval Warm Period” Vol. 11:25, pg online @
http://co2science.org/articles/V11/N25/C3.php //damien-nf)
The authors developed a precipitation history of the Longxi area of the Tibetan Plateau's
northeast margin since AD 960 based on an analysis of Chinese historical records, after which they
compared the result with the same-period Northern Hemisphere temperature record and
contemporaneous atmospheric 14C and 10Be histories. What was learned Tan et al. discovered, in their words,
that "high precipitation of Longxi corresponds to high temperature of the Northern Hemisphere,
and low precipitation of Longxi corresponds to low temperature of the Northern Hemisphere."
Consequently, their precipitation record may be used to infer a Medieval Warm Period that
stretched from approximately AD 960 to 1230, with temperature peaks in the vicinity of AD 1000
and 1215 that clearly exceeded the 20th-century peak temperature of the Current Warm Period.
They also found "good coherences among the precipitation variations of Longxi and variations of atmospheric 14C
concentration, the averaged 10Be record and the reconstructed solar modulation record," which findings
harmonize, in their words, with "numerous studies [that] show that solar activity is the main force that
drives regional climate changes in the Holocene," in support of which statement they attach 22 other
scientific references.

(Reference: Tan, L., Cai, Y., An, Z. and Ai, L. 2008. Precipitation variations of Longxi, northeast margin of Tibetan
Plateau since AD 960 and their relationship with solar activity. Climate of the Past 4: 19-28.)

32
CO2 and WARMING CNDI 2008
N. FAROOQI

WARMING ALREADY HAPPENED DUE TO SOLAR ACT.


Warming is caused by solar radiation, it’s not anthropogenic.
Idso’s 6/4/2008
(Craig Idso, frmr Dir of Env. Science, member of the American Assoc for Adv of Science, American Geophysical
Union, American Meteorological Society, Arizona-Nevada Academy of Sciences, Assoc of American Geographers, Eco
Society of America, Sherwood Idso, pres\ of Center for the study of CO2 and Global Change, Keith Idso, vice pres of
Center for the study of CO2 with a Phd in botany, “Solar Forcing of Multiple Climactic Parameters” Vol. 11:23, pg
online @ http://co2science.org/articles/V11/N23/EDIT.php //cndi-nf)
Working with tree-ring width data obtained from two types of juniper found in Central Asia -- Juniperus
turkestanica (related to variations in summer temperature in the Tien Shan Mountains) and Sabina przewalskii
(related to variations in precipitation on the Qinghai-Tibetan Plateau) -- Raspopov et al. (2008) employed
band-pass filtering in the 180- to 230-year period range, wavelet transformation (Morlet basis) for
the range of periods between 100 and 300 years, as well as spectral analysis, in order to
compare the variability in the two tree-ring records with independent Δ14C variations
representative of the approximate 210-year de Vries solar cycle over the past millennium. These
analyses indicated that the approximate 200-year cyclical variations present in the
palaeoclimatic reconstructions were well correlated (R2 = 0.58-0.94) with similar variations in the
Δ14C data, which obviously suggests the existence of a solar-climate connection. In addition, they
say "the de Vries cycle has been found to occur not only during the last millennia but also in
earlier epochs, up to hundreds of millions [of] years ago." After reviewing additional sets of published
palaeoclimatic data from various parts of the world, the eight researchers satisfied themselves that the same
periodicity is evident in Europe, North and South America, Asia, Tasmania, Antarctica and the
Arctic, as well as "sediments in the seas and oceans," citing 20 independent research papers in support
of this statement. This fact thus led them to conclude there is "a pronounced influence of solar activity
on global climatic processes" related to "temperature, precipitation and atmospheric and
oceanic circulation." Complicating the matter, however, Raspopov et al. report there can sometimes
be "an appreciable delay in the climate response to the solar signal," which can be as long as
150 years; and they note that regional climate responses to the de Vries cycle "can markedly
differ in phase," even at distances of only hundreds of kilometers, due to "the nonlinear
character of the atmosphere-ocean system response to solar forcing." Nevertheless, the many
results they culled from the scientific literature, as well as their own findings, all testify to the
validity of their primary conclusion, that throughout the past millennium, and stretching back in
time as much as 250 million years, the de Vries cycle has been "one of the most intense solar
activity periodicities that affected climatic processes." As for the more recent historical significance of
the de Vries cycle, Raspopov et al. write that "the temporal synchrony between the Maunder, Sporer, and Wolf
minima and the expansion of Alpine glaciers (Haeberlie and Holzhauser, 2003) further points to a climate response
to the deep solar minima." And in this regard, we would only add that earth's recent recovery from
those deep solar minima could well have played a major role in the planet's emergence from the
Little Ice Age, and, therefore, could well have accounted for much -- if not even the lion's share
-- of 20th-century global warming, as suggested fully twenty years ago by Idso (1988).
This view of the matter is consistent with the view expressed more recently by Feynman (2007), who -- in an
intriguing paper entitled "Has solar variability caused climate change that affected human culture?" -- answers this
question in the affirmative, while presenting the figure we have reproduced below as supporting evidence for deep
solar minima being the cause of the Little Ice Age (which doomed the Norse colonies on Greenland), and for solar
maxima being responsible for the great droughts that occurred during the Medieval Warm Period (which triggered
the collapse of Classical Mayan civilization in northern Central America).
Clearly, there is much to recommend the overriding concept that is suggested by the data of these
several papers, i.e., that the sun rules the earth when it comes to orchestrating major changes in the
planet's climate, the most recent of which changes is the climate alarmists' "unprecedented
warming" of the 20th century, which they wrongly attribute to anthropogenic CO2 emissions.

33
CO2 and WARMING CNDI 2008
N. FAROOQI

WARMING ALREADY HAPPENED


Warming has happened before, now it’s just another occurrence.
Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change 6/4/2008
(“A Holocene Sediment Record from Northeast Greenland” Vol. 11:23, pg online @
http://co2science.org/articles/V11/N23/C3.php //cndi-nf)
Working on a floating platform in the middle of a small lake (Hjort So) on an 80-km-long by 10.5-km-wide island
(Store Koldewey) just off the coast of Northeast Greenland at 75°55' to 76°45'N and 18°27' to 19°10'W, the
authors recovered two sediment cores of 70 and 252 cm length, the incremental portions of which
they analyzed for grain-size distribution, macrofossils, pollen, diatoms, total carbon, total organic carbon, and
several other parameters, the sequences of which were dated by accelerator mass spectrometry, with
radiocarbon ages translated into calendar years before present. What was learned Wagner et al. report that
their data reveal an "increase of the productivity-indicating proxies around 1,500-1,000 cal year
BP, corresponding with the medieval warming," but that "after the medieval warming, renewed
cooling is reflected in decreasing amounts of total organic carbon, total diatom abundance, and other
organisms, and a higher abundance of oligotrophic to meso-oligotrophic diatom taxa." As they describe it, "this
period, the Little Ice Age, was the culmination of cool conditions during the Holocene [our
italics] and is documented in many other records from East and Northeast Greenland, before the
onset of the recent warming [that] started ca. 150 years ago." What it means In addition to the
obvious importance of their finding evidence for the Medieval Warm Period -- the existence of
which climate alarmists are reluctant to acknowledge -- the six researchers' statement that the Little
Ice Age was the culmination, or most extreme sub-set, of cool conditions during the Holocene,
suggests that it would not be at all unusual for such a descent into extreme coolness to be
followed by some extreme warming, which further suggests there is nothing unusual about the
degree of subsequent warming experienced over the 20th century, especially in light of the fact
that the ever-growing repository of data contained in our Medieval Warm Period Project
indicates that the earth has not yet achieved the degree of warmth that held sway over most of
the planet throughout large portions of that prior high-temperature period.

Worse warming already happened.


Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change 5/28/2008
(“Paradise Lake, Tawang District, Arunachal Pradesh, India” Vol. 11:22, pg online @
http://co2science.org/data/mwp/studies/l2_paradiselake.php //cndi-nf)
The authors developed a history of atmospheric warmth and moisture covering the last 1800
years for Paradise Lake in the Northeastern Himalaya (27°30.324'N, 92°06.269'E), based on pollen and
carbon isotopic (δ13C) analyses of a one-meter-long sediment profile they obtained from a pit "dug along the dry
bed of the lakeshore." This work revealed a "warm and moist climate, similar to the prevailing
present-day conditions," around AD 240, as well as another such period that turned out to be
"more warmer [our italics] 1100 yrs BP (around AD 985) corresponding to the Medieval Warm
Period".
(Reference: Bhattacharyya, A., Sharma, J., Shah, S.K. and Chaudhary, V. 2007. Climatic changes during the last
1800 yrs BP from Paradise Lake, Sela Pass, Arunachal Pradesh, Northeast Himalaya. Current Science 93: 983-
987)

34
CO2 and WARMING CNDI 2008
N. FAROOQI

WARMING ALREADY HAPPENED WITHOUT HIGH CO2


It’s Been warmer without higher levels of CO2.
Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change 6/4/2008
(“High, Middle and Rif Atlas Mountains, Morocco, Northwest Africa” Vol. 11:23, pg online @
http://co2science.org/data/mwp/studies/l2_morocco.php //cndi-nf)
Esper et al. (2007) used Cedrus atlantica tree-ring width data to reconstruct long-term changes of the
Palmer Drought Severity Index (PDSI) over nearly a full millennium in the part of Morocco
(northwest Africa) centered on approximately 34°N, 5°W. This analysis revealed that "millennium-long
temperature reconstructions from Europe (Bungten et al., 2006) and the Northern Hemisphere
(Esper et al., 2002) indicate that Moroccan drought changes are broadly coherent with well-
documented temperature fluctuations including warmth during medieval times, cold in the
Little Ice Age, and recent anthropogenic warming." In addition, they report that the driest 20-year
period of their reconstruction was 1237-1256 (with a PDSI of -4.2), while the driest 20-year period
of the 20th century was 1981-2000 (with a less extreme PDSI of -3.9). Hence, a strict interpretation of
the coherence that exists between Esper et al.'s (2007) PDSI history and European and Northern
Hemispheric temperatures suggests that the peak warmth of the Medieval Warm Period was
likely greater than the peak warmth of the 20th century over the entire Northern Hemisphere.

(Reference: Esper, J., Frank, D., Buntgen, U., Verstege, A., Luterbacher, J. and Xoplaki, E. 2007. Long-term
drought severity variations in Morocco. Geophysical Research Letters 34: 10.1029/2007GL030844)

35
CO2 and WARMING CNDI 2008
N. FAROOQI

***COLLING BAD
COOLING HURTS NATIONS
Cooling causes wars, population collapses and governmental instability.
Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change 6/18/2008
(“Climate and Population Change in China” Vol. 11:25, pg online @ http://co2science.org/articles/V11/N25/B1.php
//cndi-nf)
The authors employed "fine-grained temperature reconstructions and historical population data
sets" to "statistically test a hypothesized relationship between temperature change and population
growth (i.e., cooling associated with below average population growth) in China over the past
millennium." What was learned As revealed by historical statistics, Lee et al. report that "war peaks,
population collapses, and dynastic changes matched closely with cooling (Zhang et al., 2005,
2006)." Noting that their work "further verified the synchronistic relationship between
population and climate cycles," they state that this relationship appears to have been
"fundamental, not incidental, in causing human misery and the resultant historical downturns in
Chinese history," citing two additional corroborative studies of the subject (Hinsch, 1988; Li 1999), although
they add that the "temperature-population relationship was mediated by geographic factors, the aridity threshold,
and social factors." What it means Putting it rather bluntly, the three Hong Kong researchers state that "given
that human populations are food limited, and the fact that in many places populations have
reached dangerously high levels and which also lack a safety margin, the onset of bad times
associated with cooling would bring a fast response expressed as population shrinkage."
(Reference: Lee, H.F., Fok, L. and Zhang, D.D. 2008. Climatic change and Chinese population growth dynamics
over the last millennium. Climatic Change 88: 131-156)

36
CO2 and WARMING CNDI 2008
N. FAROOQI

***AT: STORMS
NO INCREASE IN CYCLONIC ACTIVITY
No recent increase in cyclonic activity.
Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change 6/25/2008
(“Snow(North America) -- Summary” Vol. 11:26, pg online @ http://co2science.org/subject/s/summaries/snowna.php
//cndi-nf)
Yet another blizzard study was conducted by Changnon and Changnon (2006), who analyzed the spatial
and temporal distributions of damaging snowstorms and their economic losses by means of property-
casualty insurance data pertaining to "highly damaging storm events, classed as catastrophes by the insurance
industry, during the 1949-2000 period." This work indicated, as they describe it, that "the incidence of
storms peaked in the 1976-1985 period," but that snowstorm incidence "exhibited no up or
down trend during 1949-2000." The two researchers thus concluded their paper by stating that "the
temporal frequency of damaging snowstorms during 1949-2000 in the United States does not
display any increase over time, indicating that either no climate change effect on cyclonic
activity has begun, or if it has begun, altered conditions have not influenced the incidence of snowstorms."

(References: Bartlett, M.G., Chapman, D.S. and Harris, R.N. 2005. Snow effect on North American ground
temperatures, 1950-2002)

37
CO2 and WARMING CNDI 2008
N. FAROOQI
NO CHANGE IN HYDRO CYCLE
No change in hydrologic cycle.
Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Climate Change 6/26/2008
(“River Discharge to the Global Ocean” Volume 11:26, pg online @ http://co2science.org/articles/V11/N26/C2.php)
The authors write that global warming "could accelerate the hydrologic cycle (e.g., Trenberth, 1999;
New et al., 2001; Huntington, 2006) .. leading to increased river discharge." What was done To explore
what may have happened in this regard over the last half of the 20th century, Milliman et al. computed
temporal discharge trends for 137 rivers that provide what they call a "reasonable global
representation," as their combined drainage basins represent about 55% of the land area
draining into the global ocean. What was learned In the words of the five researchers, "between 1951
and 2000 cumulative discharge for the 137 rivers remained statistically unchanged." In
addition, they report that "global on-land precipitation between 1951 and 2000 remained
statistically unchanged." What it means In a simple and straightforward conclusion, Milliman et al. write that
"neither discharge nor precipitation changed significantly over the last half of the 20th century,
offering little support to a global intensification of the hydrological cycle," such as is generally
claimed by climate alarmists to be a consequence of CO2-induced global warming.
(Reference: Huntington, T.G. 2006. Evidence for intensification of the global water cycle: review and synthesis.
Journal of Hydrology 319: 83-95. )

38
CO2 and WARMING CNDI 2008
N. FAROOQI
NO INTENSE HYDRO CYCLE
Studies of precipitation prove there won’t be a global intsenification of the hydro cycle
Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change 6/25/2008
(“River Discharge to the Global Ocean” Volume 11:26, pg online @ http://co2science.org/articles/V11/N26/C2.php)
What was done To explore what may have happened in this regard over the last half of the 20th
century, Milliman et al. computed temporal discharge trends for 137 rivers that provide what
they call a "reasonable global representation," as their combined drainage basins represent
about 55% of the land area draining into the global ocean. What was learned In the words of the five
researchers, "between 1951 and 2000 cumulative discharge for the 137 rivers remained
statistically unchanged." In addition, they report that "global on-land precipitation between
1951 and 2000 remained statistically unchanged." What it means In a simple and straightforward
conclusion, Milliman et al. write that "neither discharge nor precipitation changed significantly
over the last half of the 20th century, offering little support to a global intensification of the
hydrological cycle," such as is generally claimed by climate alarmists to be a consequence of
CO2-induced global warming.

39
CO2 and WARMING CNDI 2008
N. FAROOQI
WARMING DOESN’T CAUSE INTENSE HYDRO CYCLE
Warming Doesn’t cause an intensification of the Hydrologic Cycle, studies prove.
Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change 5/288/2008
(“Floods (Asia) – Summary” Vol. 11:22, pg online @ http://co2science.org/subject/f/summaries/floodsasia.php //cndi-
nf)
The following year, Davi et al. (2006) developed a reconstruction of streamflow that extended from
1637 to 1997, based on absolutely dated tree-ring-width chronologies from five sampling sites in west-
central Mongolia, all of which sites were in or near the Selenge River basin, the largest river in Mongolia. Of the
ten wettest five-year periods, only two occurred during the 20th century (1990-1994 and 1917-1921,
the second and eighth wettest of the ten extreme periods, respectively), once again indicative of a propensity
for less flooding during the warmest portion of the 360-year period . The year 2007 produced a
second study of the Yangtze Delta of Eastern China, when Zhang et al. (2007) developed flood and drought
histories of the past thousand years "from local chronicles, old and very comprehensive encyclopaedia,
historic agricultural registers, and official weather reports," after which "continuous wavelet transform was applied
to detect the periodicity and variability of the flood/drought series" and, finally, the results of the entire set of
operations were compared with 1000-year temperature histories of northeastern Tibet and southern
Tibet. This work revealed, in the words of the researchers, that "colder mean temperature in the Tibetan
Plateau usually resulted in higher probability of flood events in the Yangtze Delta region," and they say
that "during AD 1400-1700 [the coldest portion of their record, corresponding to much of the Little Ice
Age], the proxy indicators showing the annual temperature experienced larger variability (larger
standard deviation), and this time interval exactly [our italics] corresponds to the time when the
higher and significant wavelet variance occurred." In contrast, they report that "during AD 1000-1400
[the warmest portion of their record, corresponding to much of the Medieval Warm Period], relatively
stable changes of climatic changes reconstructed from proxy indicators in Tibet correspond to
lower wavelet variance of flood/drought series in the Yangtze Delta region."

40
CO2 and WARMING CNDI 2008
N. FAROOQI
WARMING DOESN’T CAUSE INTENSE HYDRO CYCLE
Warming doesn’t cause an intensification of the Hydrologic Cycle, past events prove.
Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change 5/28/2008
(“Floods (Asia) – Summary” Vol. 11:22, pg online @ http://co2science.org/subject/f/summaries/floodsasia.php //cndi-
nf)
Contemporaneously, Huang et al. (2007) constructed a complete catalog of Holocene overbank flooding
events at a watershed scale in the headwater region of the Sushui River within the Yuncheng Basin in the
southeast part of the middle reaches of China's Yellow River, based on pedo-sedimentary records of the region's
semiarid piedmont alluvial plains, including the color, texture and structure of the sediment profiles, along with
determinations of particle-size distributions, magnetic susceptibilities and elemental concentrations. This work
revealed there were six major episodes of overbank flooding. The first occurred at the onset of
the Holocene, the second immediately before the mid-Holocene Climatic Optimum, and the
third in the late stage of the mid-Holocene Climatic Optimum, while the last three episodes
coincided with "the cold-dry stages during the late Holocene," according to the six scientists. Speaking
of the last of the overbank flooding episodes, they note that it "corresponds with the well documented
'Little Ice Age,' when "climate departed from its long-term average conditions and was
unstable, irregular, and disastrous," which is pretty much like the Little Ice Age has been described
in many other parts of the world as well. In light of the findings of these several Asian studies, it is clear
they provide no support whatever for the climate-alarmist claim that global warming leads to
more frequent and severe flooding. If anything, they tend to suggest just the opposite.
(References: Zhang, Q., Chen, J. and Becker, S. 2007. Flood/drought change of last millennium in the Yangtze
Delta and its possible connections with Tibetan climatic changes. Global and Planetary Change 57: 213-221)

41
CO2 and WARMING CNDI 2008
N. FAROOQI
HYDRO CYCLE CHANGED BEFORE IND. REV.
Intensified Hydrologic cycle happened before there was anthropogenic CO2 emissions.
Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change 5/28/2008
(“Floods (Asia) – Summary” Vol. 11:22, pg online @ http://co2science.org/subject/f/summaries/floodsasia.php //cndi-
nf)
Focusing on the much smaller area of southwestern Turkey, Touchan et al. (2003) developed two
reconstructions of spring (May-June) precipitation from tree-ring width measurements, one of them
(1776-1998) based on nine chronologies of Cedrus libani, Juniperus excelsa, Pinus brutia and Pinus nigra,
and the other one (1339-1998) based on three chronologies of Juniperus excelsa. These
reconstructions, in their words, "show clear evidence of multi-year to decadal variations in spring
precipitation," with both wet and dry periods of 1-2 years duration being well distributed
throughout the record. However, in the case of more extreme hydrologic events, they found that all
of the wettest 5-year periods preceded the Industrial Revolution, manifesting themselves at
times when the air's carbon dioxide content was largely unaffected by anthropogenic CO2
emissions.

42
CO2 and WARMING CNDI 2008
N. FAROOQI

WARMING DOESN’T CAUSE SEVERE WEATHER


Warming doesn’t lead to stronger hurricanes and typhoons.
Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change 5/28/2008
(“Tropical Cyclones of the Western North Pacific” Vol. 11:22, pg online @
http://co2science.org/articles/V11/N22/C1.php //cndi-nf)
Defining rapid intensification (RI) of a tropical cyclone (TC) as occurring when the maximum
wind speed of a TC "reaches at least (a) 5 knots in the first 6 hours, (b) 10 knots in the first 12
hours, and (c) 30 knots in 24 hours," the authors note that "all category 4 and 5 hurricanes in the
Atlantic basin and 90% of the equivalent-strength typhoons in the western North Pacific
experience at least one RI process in their life cycles." What was done Using best-track TC data
obtained from the Joint Typhoon Warning Center for the 40-year period 1965-2004, Wang and Zhou
determined the climatic conditions that are most critical for the development of RI in TCs of the
Western North Pacific on annual, intra-seasonal, and inter-annual time scales. What was learned The two
researchers report that "over the past 40 years, the annual total of RI in the western North Pacific shows
pronounced interdecadal variation but no significant trend," noting that this fact "implies that the super
typhoons had likely no upward trend in the last 40 years." In addition, they found that "when the
mean latitude, where the tropical storms form, shifted southward (either seasonally or from year to
year), the proportion of super typhoon or major hurricane will increase," noting that "this finding
contrasts the current notion that higher sea surface temperature leads to more frequent
occurrence of category 4 or 5 hurricanes (Emanuel, 2005; Webster et al., 2005)." What it means Once
again, we have another study based on real-world data that fails to find any support for the
contention of many climate alarmists that global warming -- which is typically touted by them to
have been "unprecedented" over the last decades of the 20th century -- leads to the occurrence
of more and/or stronger hurricanes and typhoons.
(References: Emanuel, K.A. 2005. Increasing destructiveness of tropical cyclones over the past 30 years. Nature
436: 686-688. Webster, P.J., Holland, G.J., Curry, J.A. and Chang, H.R. 2005. Changes in tropical cyclone number,
duration, and intensity in a warming environment. Science 309: 1844-1846)

43
CO2 and WARMING CNDI 2008
N. FAROOQI

WARMING DOESN’T HAVE A STRONG IMPACT


Warming doesn’t have a strong effect.
Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change 6/4/2008
(“Water Balance of the Great Lakes of North America” Vol. 11:23, pg online @
http://co2science.org/articles/V11/N23/C1.php //cndi-nf)
With respect to the Great Lakes Basin, the authors write that "studies conducted by Cohen (1986,
1990), Sanderson (1987), and Croley (1990, 2004) have found that evaporation would be
significantly increased under [IPCC-predicted] climate change scenarios," and that under such
circumstances Sanderson and Smith (1990) and Smith and McBean (1993) "predicted twenty to thirty
percent increases in potential evaporation and approximately a 15% increase in actual
evaporation to occur." As a result of these and other related studies, many researchers have worried, in
the words of Larson and Schaetzl (2001), that "increased evaporation under a possible greenhouse-
enhanced climate, coupled with even more consumptive use of the Great Lakes waters, could
lead to lower lake levels in the near future," which is one of the negative-trend gloom-and-
doom predictions periodically dusted off and paraded before the world by the planet's climate
alarmists, such as when National Geographic published an article in 2002 entitled "Down the Drain? The
Incredible Shrinking Great Lakes." What was done McBean and Motiee used mean monthly and mean
annual data series for over-lake air temperature and over-lake precipitation data for the
individual Great Lakes and flow data for their connecting channels (St. Mary's River, St. Clair River,
Niagara River, and St. Lawrence River) to determine long-term (1930-2000) trends in temperature,
precipitation and streamflow, using regression analyses and Mann-Kendall statistics. What was
learned The researchers report that for each of the five Great Lakes, "the best fit line shows a
gentle increasing slope" with "an average increase of 0.63°C in the basin," which they say is "less in
magnitude than the global climate model predictions." With respect to precipitation and streamflow,
they also say they find increasing trends "in all series," with some of them being statistically significant at the 95%
level. Last of all, they calculate that if the trends they found for the 1930-2000 time period
continue, streamflow at the outlets of Lakes Superior, Huron, Erie and Ontario in the year 2050
will be 7%, 17%, 25% and 25% greater , respectively, than they were in the year 2000. What it means
In spite of the climate-alarmist claim that 20th-century warming was "unprecedented" over the
past one to two millennia, and that such warming in the Great Lakes region of the Northern
Hemisphere should be leading to the massive lakes going "down the drain," real-world data
provide no support for this contention, or anything even close to it. In fact, they tend to suggest
just the opposite.
(Reference: McBean, E. and Motiee, H. 2008. Assessment of impact of climate change on water resources: a long
term analysis of the Great Lakes of North America. Hydrology and Earth System Sciences 12: 239-255)

44
CO2 and WARMING CNDI 2008
N. FAROOQI
WARMING DOESN’T CAUSE FLOODS
Warming doesn’t cause extreme flooding, past trends prove.
Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change 5/28/2008
(“Floods (Asia) – Summary” Vol. 11:22, pg online @ http://co2science.org/subject/f/summaries/floodsasia.php //cndi-
nf)
Two years later, Kale et al. (2003) conducted geomorphic studies of slackwater deposits in the bedrock
gorges of the Tapi and Narmada Rivers of central India, which allowed them to assemble long
chronologies of large floods of these rivers. In doing so, they found that "since 1727 at least 33
large floods have occurred on the Tapi River and the largest on the river occurred in 1837." With
respect to large floods on the Narmada River, they reported at least 9-10 floods between the beginning of
the Christian era and AD 400; while between AD 400 and 1000 they documented 6-7 floods,
between 1000 and 1400 about 8-9 floods, and after 1950 three more such floods. In addition, on the
basis of texture, elevation and thickness of the flood units, they concluded that " the periods AD 400-1000
and post-1950 represent periods of extreme floods." What do these findings imply about the effects of
global warming on central India flood events? The post-1950 period would likely be claimed by
climate alarmists to have been the warmest of the past millennium; and it has indeed
experienced some extreme floods. However, the flood characteristics of the 400-1000 period
are described in equivalent terms; and this was a rather cold climatic interval known as the Dark
Ages Cold Period [see, for example, McDermott et al. (2001) and Andersson et al. (2003)]. In addition, the most
extreme flood in the much shorter record of the Tapi River occurred in 1837, near the beginning of one
of the colder periods of the Little Ice Age. Hence, there would appear to be little correlation between
the flood characteristics of the Tapi and Narmada Rivers of central India and the thermal state of the
global climate.
(Reference: Jiang, T., Zhang, Q., Blender, R. and Fraedrich, K. 2005. Yangtze Delta floods and droughts of the last
millennium: Abrupt changes and long term memory. Theoretical and Applied Climatology 82: 131-141)

45
CO2 and WARMING CNDI 2008
N. FAROOQI
PLANTS ADAPT TO CLIMATE CHANGE
Plants adapt on the same pace as contemporary warming.
Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change 6/18/2008
(“Rapid Genetic Change in Terrestrial Plants” Vol. 11 25:18, pg online @
http://co2science.org/articles/V11/N25/EDIT.php //damien-nf)
Some fifteen years ago, Root and Schneider (1993) wrote that CO2-induced changes in global
climate were expected to occur "too fast for evolutionary processes such as natural selection to keep
pace," and that this constraint "could substantially enhance the probability of extinction of
numerous species." This idea has pervaded the thinking of climate-alarmists ever since it was first
suggested; and it figures prominently in the ongoing doom-and-gloom predictions of Al Gore and
James Hansen. But is it correct? In an exciting new paper recently published in Global Change Biology,
Jump et al. (2008) describe an experiment that suggests the contention is fatally flawed. In
Barcelona, Spain's Garraf Natural Park, where they worked with Fumana thymifolia -- a small shrub that
occurs around the Mediterranean Basin -- the seven scientists say they "investigated whether reduced
seedling establishment observed as a consequence of climate manipulation is a random or
selective process, thereby allowing us to answer the key question: does climate change provoke
evolutionary change within natural populations?" Their study had an unaltered control
treatment, a drought treatment that employed automatically-activated transparent plastic shields
that covered a third of the plots in response to rainfall and retreated when rainfall stopped
(which decreased soil moisture by about 20%), and a warming treatment that employed
reflective covers that reduced nighttime re-radiation of energy received from the sun during the
prior daylight hours from another third of the plots (which increased temperature by about
1°C). As a result of these environmental interventions, Jump et al. report that over the 7-year period 1999-
2005, mean yearly seedling density per treatment was significantly reduced in the drought and
warming treatments compared with the control treatment, and that "when compared against
control samples, high single-locus genetic divergence occurred in drought and warming
treatment samples, with genetic differentiation up to 37 times higher than background (mean
neutral locus) genetic differentiation." In discussing their findings, the researchers say they suggest that the
significant reduction in seedling survival they observed in the drought and warming treatments
"results from an episode of selection for individuals tolerant of the modified climatic conditions
and is not due simply to a random reduction in plant establishment," which implication, in their
words, "reinforces results reported by other authors that show that genetic variability for climate-
related traits exists within natural plant populations (Hamrick and Holden, 1979; Cobb et al., 1994;
Kelly et al., 2003; Mitton and Duran, 2004; Franks et al., 2007)." Jump et al. thus conclude that contemporary
climate change "is driving changes in gene frequency within natural plant populations," and
that these changes "are occurring on the same time scale as current climatic changes, based on
preexisting genetic variability within populations," additionally citing, in this regard, the supportive
findings of Jump and Penuelas (2005), Thomas (2005), Jump et al. (2006) and Reusch and Wood (2007). What is
more, they say that this ability to rapidly adapt to rapid climate change may increase the
persistence of species "beyond that predicted under a species-based climate envelope
approach," such as is typically used by climate alarmists to justify their prediction of impending
extinctions of huge numbers of species. In a conclusion that clearly repudiates this catastrophic extinction
scenario, Jump et al. say that their results actually demonstrate "that rapid evolution in response to
climate change may be widespread in natural populations, based on genetic variation already
present within the population," which likelihood is becoming ever more evident with each new
study that investigates the subject.
(Reference: Reusch, T.B.H. and Wood, T.E. 2007. Molecular ecology of global change. Molecular Ecology 16:
3973-3992)

46
CO2 and WARMING CNDI 2008
N. FAROOQI
PLANTS ADAPT TO CLIMATE CHANGE
Plants adapt to climate change, and grow better in warmer climates.
Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change 7/29/2003
(“The Specter of Species Extinction: Will Global Warming Decimate Earth’s Biosphere”, pg online @
http://co2science.org/education/reports/extinction/mr1ch2.php //cndi-nf)
All else being equal, the global warming extinction scenario would appear to have merit. After all,
if it gets "too hot" for a species of plant or animal where it currently lives, it is only logical that
individuals of the heat-stressed species would have to move to a cooler location in order to
survive. In many cases, however, acclimation can adequately substitute for migration, as has been
demonstrated by several studies in which the temperatures at which plants grow best rose
substantially (by several degrees Centigrade) in response to increases in the air temperature regimes
to which they had long been accustomed (Mooney and West, 1964; Strain et al., 1976; Bjorkman et al.,
1978; Seemann et al., 1984; Veres and Williams, 1984; El-Sharkawy et al., 1992, Battaglia et al., 1996). So how
does it happen? One possible way in which adaptation to warmer temperatures may occur is
described by Kelly et al. (2003). In reference to the climate-alarmist view of the Intergovernmental
Panel on Climate Change or IPCC (Watson and Team, 2001), they note that "models of future ecological
change assume that in situ populations of plants lack the capacity to adapt quickly to warming
and as a consequence will be displaced by species better able to exploit the warmer conditions
anticipated from 'global warming'." In contrast to this assumption, they report finding individual
trees within a naturally occurring stand of Betula pendula (birch) that are genetically adapted to a range of
different temperatures. As they describe it, they discovered "the existence of 'pre-adapted'
individuals in standing tree populations" that "would reduce temperature-based advantages for
invading species," which finding, they say, "bring[s] into question assumptions currently used in
models of global climate change." Another perspective on the adaptation vs. migration theme is provided
by the work of Loehle (1998), who notes (using forests as an example) that the CO2-induced global
warming extinction hypothesis rests on the assumption that the growth rates of trees rise from
zero at the cold limits of their natural ranges (their northern boundaries in the Northern Hemisphere) to a
broad maximum, after which they decline to zero at the warm limits of their natural ranges (their
southern boundaries in the Northern Hemisphere). Loehle demonstrates that this assumption is only half
correct. It properly describes tree growth dynamics near a Northern Hemispheric forest's northern boundary, but it
is an inaccurate representation of tree growth dynamics near a Northern Hemispheric forest's southern
boundary. Loehle notes, for example, that in the Northern Hemisphere (to which we will restrict our discussion for
purposes of simplicity), trees planted north of their natural ranges' northern boundaries are only
able to grow to maturity within 50-100 miles of those boundaries. Trees planted south of their
natural ranges' southern boundaries, however, often grow to maturity as much as 1000 miles
further south (Dressler, 1954; Woodward, 1987, 1988). In fact, Loehle reports that "many alpine and arctic
plants are extremely tolerant of high temperatures, and in general one cannot distinguish between arctic,
temperate, and tropical-moist-habitat types on the basis of heat tolerances, with all three types showing damage at
44-52°C (Gauslaa, 1984; Lange and Lange, 1963; Levitt, 1980; Kappen, 1981)." What Loehle finds from his
review of the literature and his experience with various trees in the Unites States, is that as temperatures and
growing degree days rise from very low values, the growth rates of Boreal trees at some point begin
to rise from zero and continue increasing until they either plateau out at some maximum value or drop only very
slowly thereafter, as temperatures rise still higher and growing degree days continue to accumulate. Trees from
the Midwest, by comparison, do not begin to grow until a higher temperature or greater accumulation
of growing degree days is reached, after which their growth rates rise considerably higher than
those of the colder-adapted Boreal species, until they too either level out or begin to decline ever so slowly. Last
of all, southern species do not begin to grow until even higher temperatures or growing degree day
sums are reached, after which their growth rates rise the highest of all before leveling out and
exhibiting essentially no decline thereafter, as temperatures and growing degree days continue
to climb.

47
CO2 and WARMING CNDI 2008
N. FAROOQI
TURN-WARM. AND CO2 HELP BIO-D
Turn – warmer climates and increased levels of CO2 will contribute to biodiversity.
Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change 7/29/2008
(“The Specter of Species Extinction: Will Global Warming Decimate Earth’s Biosphere”, pg online @
http://co2science.org/education/reports/extinction/mr1ch2.php //cndi-nf)
In summing up the significance of this situation, Loehle says that "forests will not suffer catastrophic
dieback due to increased temperatures but will rather be replaced gradually by faster growing
types." Another possibility that must be seriously considered is that northern or high-altitude forests will
not be replaced at all by southern or low-altitude forests in a warming world. Rather, the two
forest types may merge, creating entirely new forests of greater species diversity , such as those
that existed during the warmer Tertiary Period of the Cenozoic Era, when in the western United States many
montane taxa regularly grew among mixed conifers and broadleaf schlerophylls (Axelrod 1994a, 1944b, 1956,
1987), creating what could well be called super forest ecosystems, which Axelrod (1988) has described
as "much richer than any that exist today." Possibly helping warmer temperatures to produce
this unique biological phenomenon during the Tertiary were the higher atmospheric CO2
concentrations of that period (Volk, 1987), as has been suggested by Idso (1989). It is a well known fact, for
example, that elevated concentrations of atmospheric CO2 significantly stimulate plant growth
rates (Kimball, 1983) - especially those of trees (Saxe et al., 1998; Idso and Kimball, 2001) - and that they
also greatly enhance their water use efficiencies (Feng, 1999). Even more important, however, is how
atmospheric CO2 enrichment alters plant photosynthetic and growth responses to rising
temperatures, as we discuss in the following section.

More Evidence
Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change 7/29/2008
(“The Specter of Species Extinction: Will Global Warming Decimate Earth’s Biosphere”, pg online @
http://co2science.org/education/reports/extinction/mr1ch2.php //cndi-nf)
It has long been known that photorespiration -- which can "cannibalize" as much as 40-50% of the recently-
produced photosynthetic products of C3 plants (Wittwer, 1988) - becomes increasingly more pronounced
as air temperature rises (Hanson and Peterson, 1986). It has also been established that photorespiration is
increasingly more inhibited as the air's CO2 content rises (Grodzinski et al., 1987). Hence, there is a
greater potential for rising CO2 concentrations to benefit C3 plants at higher temperatures, as
was demonstrated by the early experimental work of Idso et al. (1987) and Mortensen (1987), as well as by the
theoretical work of Gifford (1992), Kirschbaum (1994) and Wilks et al. (1995). In fact, in an analysis of 42
experimental data sets collected by numerous scientists, Idso and Idso (1994) showed that the mean growth
enhancement due to a 300-ppm increase in atmospheric CO2 concentration rises from close to
zero at an air temperature of 10°C to 100% (doubled growth) at approximately 38°C, while at
higher temperatures the growth stimulation rises higher still, as has also been shown by Cannell and
Thornley (1998). Several studies have additionally demonstrated that atmospheric CO2 enrichment tends
to alleviate high-temperature stress in plants (Faria, 1996; Nijs and Impens, 1996; Vu et al., 1997); and it
has been proven that at temperatures that are high enough to cause plants to die, atmospheric
CO2 enrichment can sometimes preserve their lives (Idso et al., 1989, 1995; Baker et al., 1992; Rowland-
Bamford et al., 1996; Taub, 2000), just as it can often stave off their demise in the very dry conditions
that typically accompany high air temperatures (Tuba et al., 1998; Hamerlynck, et al., 2000; Polley et al.,
2002). A major consequence of these facts is that the optimum temperature (Topt) for plant growth - the
temperature at which plants photosynthesize and grow best - generally rises with atmospheric CO2
enrichment (Berry and Bjorkman, 1980; Taiz and Zeiger, 1991). An example of this phenomenon is presented in
Box 1 below, where it can be seen that the increase in atmospheric CO2 concentration utilized in this particular
study increases the optimum temperature for photosynthesis in this species from a broad maximum centered at
25°C in ambient air to a well-defined peak at about 36°C in CO2-enriched air.

48
CO2 and WARMING CNDI 2008
N. FAROOQI
CO2 DOESN’T INCREASE NITROGEN
CO2 doesn’t increase Nitrogen.
Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change 6/4/2008
(“Nitrous Oxide Emissions from Irrigated Sorghum” Vol. 11:23, pg online @
http://co2science.org/articles/V11/N23/B2.php //cndi-nf)
The authors write that "increased atmospheric CO2 may change nitrogen cycling in soils,"
while noting more specifically in this regard that "nitrous oxide [N2O] is of growing concern
because of its relatively long atmospheric residence time (114-120 years)" and because it is about
"300 times more radiatively active than CO2." What was done Because of these concerns, Welzmiller
et al. measured N2O and denitrification emission rates in a C4 sorghum [Sorghum bicolor (L.)
Moench] production system with ample and limited flood irrigation rates under Free-Air CO2
Enrichment (seasonal mean = 579 ppm) and control (seasonal mean = 396 ppm) CO2 during the 1998 and
1999 summer growing seasons at the experimental FACE site near Maricopa, Arizona (USA). What was learned
When all was said and done, the four researchers found that "elevated CO2 did not result in increased
N2O or N-gas emissions with either ample or limited irrigation," which findings they describe as
being "consistent with findings for unirrigated western U.S. ecosystems reported by Billings et
al. (2002) for Mojave Desert soils and by Mosier et al. (2002) for Colorado shortgrass steppe." What it means In
discussing the implications of their findings, Welzmiller et al. say their results suggest that "as CO2
concentrations increase, there will not be major increases in denitrification in C4 cropping
environments such as irrigated sorghum in the desert southwestern United States," which
further suggests there will not be an increased impetus for global warming due to this
phenomenon.
(Reference: Welzmiller, J.T., Matthias, A.D., White, S. and Thompson, T.L. 2008. Elevated carbon dioxide and
irrigation effects on soil nitrogen gas exchange in irrigated sorghum. Soil Science Society of America, Journal 72:
393-401)

49
CO2 and WARMING CNDI 2008
N. FAROOQI

CO2 DOESN’T CAUSE WARMING


CO2 doesn’t cause global warming. Ice core samples prove.
Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change 6/25/2008
(“Snow(North America) -- Summary” Vol. 11:26, pg online @ http://co2science.org/subject/s/summaries/snowna.php
//cndi-nf)
Moore et al. (2002) studied a longer period of time in their analysis of a 103-meter ice core
retrieved from a high elevation site on Mount Logan -- Canada's highest mountain -- which is
located in the heavily-glaciated Saint Elias region of the Yukon. From this deep core, as well as
from some shallow coring and snow-pit sampling, they derived a snow accumulation record that
extended over three centuries (from 1693 to 2000), which indicated that heavier snow
accumulation at their study site was generally associated with warmer tropospheric
temperatures over northwestern North America. So what does their record reveal? Over its first
half, there is no significant trend in the snow accumulation data. From 1850 onward, however,
there is a positive trend that is significant at the 95% confidence level, which indicates that recovery
from the cold conditions of the Little Ice Age began in the mid-1800s, well before there was a
large enough increase in the air's CO2 concentration for that greenhouse gas to have been
responsible for the first part of the century-and-a-half-long warming. This finding is further
strengthened by the temperature reconstruction of Esper et al. (2002), which places the start of
modern warming at about the same time as that suggested by Moore et al.'s snow data,
contradicting the temperature record of Mann et al. (1998, 1999), which puts the beginning of the
modern warming trend at about 1910. The results of other snow studies raise even more
unsettling questions about climate-alarmist contentions. Cowles et al. (2002), for example, analyzed
snow water equivalent (SWE) data obtained from four different measuring systems -- snow courses,
snow telemetry, aerial markers and airborne gamma radiation -- at more than 2000 sites in the eleven
westernmost states of the conterminous USA over the period 1910-1998, finding that the long-term SWE
trend of the region was negative, indicative of declining winter precipitation. In addition, they
report that their results "reinforce more tenuous conclusions made by previous authors," citing Chagnon et al.
(1993) and McCabe and Legates (1995), who studied snow course data from 1951-1985 and 1948-1987,
respectively, at 275 and 311 sites, and who also found a decreasing trend in SWE at most sites in the Pacific
Northwest. Four years later, Julander and Bricco (2006) reported that snowpack data were being
consistently used as indicators of global warming, and that it was thus essential that individuals
doing so quantify, as best they could, all other influences imbedded in their data. That meeting this
requirement is no trivial undertaking is indicated by their statement that "snow data may be
impacted by site physical changes, vegetation changes, weather modification, pollution, sensor
changes, changes in transportation or sampling date, comparisons of snow course to SNOTEL
data, changes in measurement personnel or recreational and other factors," including sensors that
"do not come back to zero at the end of the snow season." In an analysis of 134 sites (some having pertinent
data stretching back to at least 1912), they thus selected fifteen long-term Utah snow courses
representing complete elevational and geographic coverage of the dominant snowpacks within
the state and adjusted them for the major known site conditions impacting the data, after which
the adjusted data for the period 1990-2005 were "compared to earlier portions of the historic
record to determine if there were statistically significant differences in snowpack
characteristics, particularly those that could indicate the impacts of global warming." Of the
fifteen sites studied in greatest detail, the two researchers found that seven of them exhibited
increased snowpack in recent years, while eight exhibited decreased snow accumulation. They
also report that "six of the seven sites with increases have significant vegetative or physical
conditions leading us to believe that the impacts associated with this analysis are overstated."
The ultimate conclusion of Julander and Bricco, therefore, was that "any signature of global
warming currently present in the snowpack data of Utah is not yet at a level of statistical

50
CO2 and WARMING CNDI 2008
N. FAROOQI
significance ... and will likely be very difficult to isolate from other causes of snowpack
decline."
(References: Bartlett, M.G., Chapman, D.S. and Harris, R.N. 2005. Snow effect on North American ground
temperatures, 1950-2002)

51
CO2 and WARMING CNDI 2008
N. FAROOQI

***AT: CORAL REEFS


CORALS CAN ADAPT
Studies prove that corals can adapt to warmer waters quickly.
Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change 6/11/2008
(“Acclimation to Thermal Stress in Reef-Building Corals” Vol. 11:24, pg online @
http://co2science.org/issues/v11/v11n24_co2science.php //cndi-nf)
The authors collected branches of the reef-building coral Acropora aspera -- which contains the
dinoflagellate symbiont Symbiodinium (clade C3) -- from three large colonies on the reef flat adjacent to the
Heron Island Research Station at the southern end of Australia's Great Barrier Reef. Multiple upward-
growing branch tips were placed on racks immersed in running seawater within four 750-liter
tanks that were maintained at the mean local ambient temperature (27°C) and exposed to natural
reef-flat summer daily light levels. Then, two weeks prior to a simulated bleaching event --
where water temperature was raised to a value of 34°C for a period of six days -- they boosted
the water temperature in one of the tanks to 31°C for 48 hours, while in another tank they
boosted it to 31°C for 48 hours one week before the simulated bleaching event. In the third tank
they had no pre-heating treatment, while in the fourth tank they had no pre-heating nor any
simulated bleaching event. At different points throughout the study, they measured photosystem II
efficiency, xanthophyll and chlorophyll a concentrations, and Symbiodinium densities. What was learned
Middlebrook et al. report that the symbionts of the corals that were exposed to the 48-hour pre-
bleaching thermal stress "were found to have more effective photoprotective mechanisms,"
including "changes in non-photochemical quenching and xanthophyll cycling," and they further
determined that "these differences in photoprotection were correlated with decreased loss of
symbionts, with those corals that were not pre-stressed performing significantly worse, losing
over 40% of their symbionts and having a greater reduction in photosynthetic efficiency," whereas
"pre-stressed coral symbiont densities were unchanged at the end of the bleaching." What it
means In the words of the three researchers, "this study conclusively demonstrates that thermal stress
events two weeks and one week prior to a bleaching event provide significantly increased
thermal tolerance to the coral holobiont, suggesting that short time-scale thermal adaptation can
have profound effects on coral bleaching." In addition, they say that "both corals and Symbiodinium
have been shown to possess a wide variety of genes that encode for stress response proteins,
which can impart protection, indicating that a more comprehensive study is required to elucidate all of the
underlying mechanisms of thermal bleaching." All things considered, therefore, it may well be that earth's
reef-building corals are not nearly as helpless before the specter of possible future global warming
as the world's climate alarmists have made them out to be.
(Reference: Middlebrook, R., Hoegh-Guldberg, O. and Leggat, W. 2008. The effect of thermal history on the
susceptibility of reef-building corals to thermal stress. The Journal of Experimental Biology 211: 1050-1056)

52
CO2 and WARMING CNDI 2008
N. FAROOQI
CORALS CAN ADAPT
Corals can adapt to warming waters.
Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change 6/11/2008
(“Symbiont Shuffling of a Scleractinian Coral During Bleaching” Vol. 11:24, pg online @
http://co2science.org/articles/V11/N24/B1.php //cndi-nf)
The authors carried out what they describe as the first field study to follow changes in Symbiodinium
genotypes in coral colonies over a period of time that included a natural episode of bleaching . It
was conducted on a reef flat adjacent to Miall Island (23°09'S, 150°54'E), which is part of the Keppel Island group
located in the southern inshore Great Barrier Reef, where between September 2004 and March 2005 they tagged
460 colonies of Acropora millepora coral that subsequently experienced a high-temperature event in January and
February of 2006 that led to the bleaching of 89% of the tagged colonies. In this study, the coral symbionts were
identified by "a combination of single-stranded conformation polymorphism (SSCP) analysis, cloning and DNA
sequencing," which was applied to all of the 460 colonies at the start of the study and to a subset of 79 colonies
that were still alive three months post-bleaching, while mortality was assessed six months after bleaching by
visually estimating the percentage of live and dead coral tissue on 159 randomly chosen tagged colonies using pre-
bleaching photos of each colony as a reference. What was learned Prior to the bleaching event, Jones et al.
report that "A. millepora at Miall reef associated predominantly with Symbiodinium type C2
(93.5%) and to a much lesser extent with Symbiodinium clade D (3.5%) or mixtures of C2 and D
(3.0%)." During the bleaching event, they further report that "the relative difference in
bleaching susceptibility between corals predominated by C2 and D was clearly evident, with
the former bleaching white and the latter normally pigmented," while corals harboring a mix of
Symbiodinium C2 and D were "mostly pale in appearance." Then, three months after the
bleaching event, they observed "a major shift to thermally tolerant type D and C1 symbiont
communities ... in the surviving colonies," the latter of which types had not been detected in
any of the corals prior to bleaching; and they report that "this shift resulted partly from a change of
symbionts within coral colonies that survived the bleaching event (42%) and partly from selective mortality of the
more bleaching-sensitive C2-predominant colonies (37%)." In addition, they report that all of the colonies that
harbored low levels of D-type symbionts prior to the bleaching event survived and changed from clade C2 to D
predominance. What it means The five researchers conclude that "as a direct result of the shift in symbiont
community, the Miall Island A. millepora population is likely to have become more thermo-tolerant,"
as they note that "a shift from bleaching-sensitive type C2 to clade D increased the thermal
tolerance of this species by 1-1.5°C." Last of all, they say that "a recent study has shown that the majority of
scleractinian corals are likely to harbor symbiont types at levels that are undetectable using electrophoretic genetic
techniques (Mieog et al., 2007)," such as was the case with the thermo-tolerant clade C1 in their study, which they
say suggests that "symbiont flexibility may also be more common than previously thought."

(Reference: Jones, A.M., Berkelmans, R., van Oppen, M.J.H., Mieog, J.C. and Sinclair, W. 2008. A community
change in the algal endosymbionts of a scleractinian coral following a natural bleaching event: field evidence of
acclimatization. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: 10.1098/rspb.2008.0069)

53
CO2 and WARMING CNDI 2008
N. FAROOQI

***COOLING NOW
COOLING TREND AND MORE ALBEDO
There’s a cooling trend in the Antarctic along with increased levels of albedo.
Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change 6/18/2008
(“Antarctic Ice-Sheet and Sea-Ice Albedo and Temperature: 1981-2000” Vol. 11:25, pg online
@ http://co2science.org/articles/V11/N25/C1.php //damien-nf)
For the spring-summer period of November/December/January, the author determined 1981-2000 trends
of Antarctic ice-sheet and sea-ice surface albedo and temperature, as well as sea-ice
concentration and extent, based on Advanced Very High Resolution Polar Pathfinder data in the
case of ice-sheet surface albedo and temperature, and the Scanning Multichannel Microwave
Radiometer and Special Sensor Microwave Imagers in the case of sea-ice concentration and
extent. These analyses were carried out for the continent as a whole , as well as five longitudinal
sectors emanating from the south pole: 20°E-90°E, 90°E-160°E, 160°E-130°W, 130°W-60°W, and 60°W-20°E.
What was learned Laine reports that "all the regions show negative spring-summer surface
temperature trends for the study period," noting that "the slight cooling trends seem to be
parallel with the results of Comiso (2000), who studied Antarctic temperature trends using both
satellite and station data." In addition, the Finnish researcher states that "the sea ice concentration
shows slight increasing trends in most sectors, where the sea ice extent trends seem to be near zero." As a
result of these several findings, it is not surprising that Laine also reports that "the Antarctic region as a
whole and all the sectors separately show slightly positive spring-summer albedo trends." What it
means In a world that supposedly experienced unprecedented warming over the last two
decades of the 20th century, it is interesting to learn that the whole of Antarctica appears to
have bucked the global trend: by cooling a bit, acquiring slightly more sea ice, and becoming a tad
more reflective of incoming solar radiation.
(Reference: Laine, V. 2008. Antarctic ice sheet and sea ice regional albedo and temperature change, 1981-2000,
from AVHRR Polar Pathfinder data. Remote Sensing of Environment 112: 646-667 )

54
CO2 and WARMING CNDI 2008
N. FAROOQI

***AT: BIOD LOSS


ALTERNATE CAUSES TO BIO-D LOSS
Coral loss is caused by sunscreen use.
Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change 6/11/2008
(“Humans, Cosmetic Sunscreens and Coral Reefs” Vol. 11:24, pg online @
http://co2science.org/articles/V11/N24/B2.php //cndi-nf)
The authors conducted a series of independent in situ studies in different parts of the world,
including the Pacific, Atlantic and Indian Oceans, in an effort to evaluate the impact of cosmetic
sunscreens on hard corals (Acropora, Stylophora pistillata, and Millepora complanata) and their symbiotic
algae. At each ocean location, coral branches were exposed to varying amounts of sunscreens
and common ultra violet filters contained in them. The amount of subsequent coral bleaching
was then determined via colorimetric analysis of digital photos taken at the beginning of the
study and at various intervals throughout the experiment. What was learned At all study sites and at
all sampling times, the addition of sunscreen, even at very low concentrations (10µl/l), resulted
in the release of large amounts of zooxanthellae and coral tissue within 18-48 hours, with
complete bleaching of hard corals occurring within 96 hours. What is more, bleaching reportedly
occurred at a faster rate in corals subjected to higher temperature , suggesting, in the researchers'
words, "synergistic effects with this variable." Based on these results and conservative estimates of global
sunscreen use and potential sunscreen release in and around tropical reefs, Danovaro et al. further
calculated that approximately 10% of the world's coral reefs are at risk of sunscreen-induced
bleaching. What it means There can be no escaping the fact that where people interact with
corals, either directly or indirectly, corals suffer, either directly or indirectly (by becoming, for
example, more susceptible to the deleterious effects of other stresses, such as higher water temperatures).
Consequently, it is only to be expected that with ever more people using sunscreen lotion
coming into contact with the world's coral reefs, ever more damage to those corals will be
detected as time progresses. In addition, much of the damage that climate alarmists currently
attribute to global warming may well be more validly laid at the feet of any number of
increasing human population/coral reef interactions.
(Reference: Danovaro, R., Bongiorni, L., Corinaldesi, C., Giovannelli, D., Damiani, E., Astolfi, P., Greci, L. and
Pusceddu, A. 2008. Sunscreens cause coral bleaching by promoting viral infections. Environmental Health
Perspectives 116: 441-447)

Coral is essential for many species of fish.


Jones et al. 4/2/2004
(Geoffrey P., School of Marine bio and ag, “Coral Decline Threatens Fish Biodiversity in Marine Reserves”, pg online
@ http://www.pnas.org/cgi/reprint/101/21/8251.pdf //cndi-nf)
The worldwide decline in coral cover has serious implications for the health of coral reefs. But what
is the future of reef fish assemblages? Marine reserves can protect fish from exploitation, but do they protect fish
biodiversity in degrading environments? The answer appears to be no, as indicated by our 8-year study in Papua
New Guinea. A devastating decline in coral cover caused a parallel decline in fish biodiversity, both
in marine reserves and in areas open to fishing. Over 75% of reef fish species declined in
abundance, and 50% declined to less than half of their original numbers. The greater the
dependence species have on living coral as juvenile recruitment sites, the greater the observed decline
in abundance. Several rare coral-specialists became locally extinct. We suggest that fish
biodiversity is threatened wherever permanent reef degradation occurs and warn that marine
reserves will not always be sufficient to ensure their survival.

55
CO2 and WARMING CNDI 2008
N. FAROOQI

WARMING LEADS TO MORE BIO-D


Warming leads to increased biodiversity.
Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change 6/6/2007
(“Separating Scientific Fact from Personal Opinion A critique of the 26 April 2007 testimony of James E. Hansen
made to the Select Committee of Energy Independence and Global Warming of the United States House of
Representatives entitled "Dangerous Human-Made Interference with Climate"”, pg online @
http://co2science.org/education/reports/hansen/hansencritique.php //cndi-nf)
Walther et al. (2005) investigated this climate-alarmist nightmare by resurveying (in July/August 2003)
the floristic composition of the uppermost ten meters of ten mountain summits in the Swiss Alps, applying the
same methodology used in earlier surveys of the same mountain tops by Rubel (1912), which was conducted in
1905, and Hofer (1992), which was conducted in 1985. Hence, their analysis covered the bulk of the Little
Ice Age-to-Current Warm Period transition (1905-2003), the last portion of which (1985-2003) is
claimed by climate alarmists such as Hansen to have experienced a warming that was
unprecedented over the past two millennia (or more!) in terms of both the rate of temperature rise
and the degree to which the temperature rose. This work revealed that plants of many species
marched up the mountainsides of the Swiss Alps as the earth warmed, but that none of them
were "pushed off the planet." As a result, the species richness (i.e., biodiversity) of the ten
mountaintops was dramatically increased over the past century of global warming. For the time
interval 1905-1985, for example, the mean increase in species numbers recorded by Hofer (1992) was 86%; and
Walther et al. report that "species numbers recorded in 2003 were generally more than double (138%) compared to
the results by Rubel (1912) and 26% higher than those reported by Hofer (1992)." Put another way, they say that
"the rate of change in species richness (3.7 species/decade) was significantly greater in the later
period compared to the Hofer resurvey (1.3 species/decade)." Most important of all, they say that "the
observed increase in species numbers does not entail the replacement of high alpine specialists
by species from lower altitudes [our italics], but rather has led to an enrichment [our italics] of the
overall summit plant diversity."

More Evidence.
Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change 6/6/2007
(“Separating Scientific Fact from Personal Opinion A critique of the 26 April 2007 testimony of James E. Hansen
made to the Select Committee of Energy Independence and Global Warming of the United States House of
Representatives entitled "Dangerous Human-Made Interference with Climate"”, pg online @
http://co2science.org/education/reports/hansen/hansencritique.php //cndi-nf)
Another pertinent study of evolving mountaintop biodiversity was conducted by Kullman (2007),
who analyzed the changing behavior of alpine and subalpine plants, together with shifts in their
geographical patterns, during the past century, when air temperatures rose by about 1°C in the
Scandes of west-central Sweden, which "methodical approach," in his words, "also included repeat photography,
individual age determinations and analyses of permanent plots." This work revealed, according to Kullman, that
"at all levels, from trees to tiny herbs, and from high to low altitudes, the results converge to
indicate a causal association between temperature rise and biotic evolution." More specifically, he
reports that "treeline advance since the early 20th century varies between 75 and 130 m, depending on
species and site," and that "subalpine/alpine plant species have shifted upslope by [an] average [of] 200
m." In addition, he states that "present-day repetitions of floristic inventories on two alpine mountain
summits reveal increases of plant species richness by 58 and 67%, respectively, since the early
1950s." And again, Kullman also reports that "no species have yet become extinct from the highest
elevations [our italics]," adding that his results "converge with observations in other high-mountain
regions worldwide," in support of which statement he cites the studies of Grabherr et al. (1994), Keller et al.
(2000), Kullman (2002), Virtanen et al. (2003), Klanderud and Birks (2003), Walther et al. (2005) and Lacoul and
Freedman (2006).

56
CO2 and WARMING CNDI 2008
N. FAROOQI
EHUX TURN
Turn – Increased levels of CO2 makes the Ehux too heavy and causes them to sink, which
contributes to the greenhouse effect.
Tyrell -no date-
(Toby, Phd inEcological and Biogeochemical Modelling, “Global Aspects”, pg online @
http://www.soes.soton.ac.uk/staff/tt/ //cndi-nf)
Biogeochemistry: A final reason for the interest in Ehux is its global significance. The coccolith bloom areas
are highly reflective, causing more light and heat to be reflected back out to space rather than
heating the ocean. The construction of huge numbers of coccoliths from calcium and carbon,
and their subsequent sinking to the ocean floor, also perturbs the ocean carbon system and
eventually makes a difference to the amount of CO2 that can be stored in the atmosphere to
contribute to the CO2 greenhouse effect. As well as exerting an impact on climate change, the long-term
flux of coccoliths to the ocean floor goes to form chalk and limestone rocks - for instance the white cliffs of Dover
are in large part made up of coccoliths that fell to the sea bed many millions of years ago. You are probably
standing over many metres of coccolith-composed rocks as you read this.

57
CO2 and WARMING CNDI 2008
N. FAROOQI
PLANTS ADAPT TO CLIMATE CHANGE
Plants adapt to climate change, and grow better in warmer climates.
Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change 7/29/2003
(“The Specter of Species Extinction: Will Global Warming Decimate Earth’s Biosphere”, pg online @
http://co2science.org/education/reports/extinction/mr1ch2.php //cndi-nf)
All else being equal, the global warming extinction scenario would appear to have merit. After all,
if it gets "too hot" for a species of plant or animal where it currently lives, it is only logical that
individuals of the heat-stressed species would have to move to a cooler location in order to
survive. In many cases, however, acclimation can adequately substitute for migration, as has been
demonstrated by several studies in which the temperatures at which plants grow best rose
substantially (by several degrees Centigrade) in response to increases in the air temperature regimes
to which they had long been accustomed (Mooney and West, 1964; Strain et al., 1976; Bjorkman et al.,
1978; Seemann et al., 1984; Veres and Williams, 1984; El-Sharkawy et al., 1992, Battaglia et al., 1996). So how
does it happen? One possible way in which adaptation to warmer temperatures may occur is
described by Kelly et al. (2003). In reference to the climate-alarmist view of the Intergovernmental
Panel on Climate Change or IPCC (Watson and Team, 2001), they note that "models of future ecological
change assume that in situ populations of plants lack the capacity to adapt quickly to warming
and as a consequence will be displaced by species better able to exploit the warmer conditions
anticipated from 'global warming'." In contrast to this assumption, they report finding individual
trees within a naturally occurring stand of Betula pendula (birch) that are genetically adapted to a range of
different temperatures. As they describe it, they discovered "the existence of 'pre-adapted'
individuals in standing tree populations" that "would reduce temperature-based advantages for
invading species," which finding, they say, "bring[s] into question assumptions currently used in
models of global climate change." Another perspective on the adaptation vs. migration theme is provided
by the work of Loehle (1998), who notes (using forests as an example) that the CO2-induced global
warming extinction hypothesis rests on the assumption that the growth rates of trees rise from
zero at the cold limits of their natural ranges (their northern boundaries in the Northern Hemisphere) to a
broad maximum, after which they decline to zero at the warm limits of their natural ranges (their
southern boundaries in the Northern Hemisphere). Loehle demonstrates that this assumption is only half
correct. It properly describes tree growth dynamics near a Northern Hemispheric forest's northern boundary, but it
is an inaccurate representation of tree growth dynamics near a Northern Hemispheric forest's southern
boundary. Loehle notes, for example, that in the Northern Hemisphere (to which we will restrict our discussion for
purposes of simplicity), trees planted north of their natural ranges' northern boundaries are only
able to grow to maturity within 50-100 miles of those boundaries. Trees planted south of their
natural ranges' southern boundaries, however, often grow to maturity as much as 1000 miles
further south (Dressler, 1954; Woodward, 1987, 1988). In fact, Loehle reports that "many alpine and arctic
plants are extremely tolerant of high temperatures, and in general one cannot distinguish between arctic,
temperate, and tropical-moist-habitat types on the basis of heat tolerances, with all three types showing damage at
44-52°C (Gauslaa, 1984; Lange and Lange, 1963; Levitt, 1980; Kappen, 1981)." What Loehle finds from his
review of the literature and his experience with various trees in the Unites States, is that as temperatures and
growing degree days rise from very low values, the growth rates of Boreal trees at some point begin
to rise from zero and continue increasing until they either plateau out at some maximum value or drop only very
slowly thereafter, as temperatures rise still higher and growing degree days continue to accumulate. Trees from
the Midwest, by comparison, do not begin to grow until a higher temperature or greater accumulation
of growing degree days is reached, after which their growth rates rise considerably higher than
those of the colder-adapted Boreal species, until they too either level out or begin to decline ever so slowly. Last
of all, southern species do not begin to grow until even higher temperatures or growing degree day
sums are reached, after which their growth rates rise the highest of all before leveling out and
exhibiting essentially no decline thereafter, as temperatures and growing degree days continue
to climb.

58
CO2 and WARMING CNDI 2008
N. FAROOQI
TURN-WARM. AND CO2 HELP BIO-D
Turn – warmer climates and increased levels of CO2 will conatribut to biodiversity.
Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change 7/29/2003
(“The Specter of Species Extinction: Will Global Warming Decimate Earth’s Biosphere”, pg online @
http://co2science.org/education/reports/extinction/mr1ch2.php //cndi-nf)
In summing up the significance of this situation, Loehle says that "forests will not suffer catastrophic
dieback due to increased temperatures but will rather be replaced gradually by faster growing
types." Another possibility that must be seriously considered is that northern or high-altitude forests will
not be replaced at all by southern or low-altitude forests in a warming world. Rather, the two
forest types may merge, creating entirely new forests of greater species diversity , such as those
that existed during the warmer Tertiary Period of the Cenozoic Era, when in the western United States many
montane taxa regularly grew among mixed conifers and broadleaf schlerophylls (Axelrod 1994a, 1944b, 1956,
1987), creating what could well be called super forest ecosystems, which Axelrod (1988) has described
as "much richer than any that exist today." Possibly helping warmer temperatures to produce
this unique biological phenomenon during the Tertiary were the higher atmospheric CO2
concentrations of that period (Volk, 1987), as has been suggested by Idso (1989). It is a well known fact, for
example, that elevated concentrations of atmospheric CO2 significantly stimulate plant growth
rates (Kimball, 1983) - especially those of trees (Saxe et al., 1998; Idso and Kimball, 2001) - and that they
also greatly enhance their water use efficiencies (Feng, 1999). Even more important, however, is how
atmospheric CO2 enrichment alters plant photosynthetic and growth responses to rising
temperatures, as we discuss in the following section.

More Evidence
Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change 7/29/2003
(“The Specter of Species Extinction: Will Global Warming Decimate Earth’s Biosphere”, pg online @
http://co2science.org/education/reports/extinction/mr1ch2.php //cndi-nf)
It has long been known that photorespiration -- which can "cannibalize" as much as 40-50% of the recently-
produced photosynthetic products of C3 plants (Wittwer, 1988) - becomes increasingly more pronounced
as air temperature rises (Hanson and Peterson, 1986). It has also been established that photorespiration is
increasingly more inhibited as the air's CO2 content rises (Grodzinski et al., 1987). Hence, there is a
greater potential for rising CO2 concentrations to benefit C3 plants at higher temperatures, as
was demonstrated by the early experimental work of Idso et al. (1987) and Mortensen (1987), as well as by the
theoretical work of Gifford (1992), Kirschbaum (1994) and Wilks et al. (1995). In fact, in an analysis of 42
experimental data sets collected by numerous scientists, Idso and Idso (1994) showed that the mean growth
enhancement due to a 300-ppm increase in atmospheric CO2 concentration rises from close to
zero at an air temperature of 10°C to 100% (doubled growth) at approximately 38°C, while at
higher temperatures the growth stimulation rises higher still, as has also been shown by Cannell and
Thornley (1998). Several studies have additionally demonstrated that atmospheric CO2 enrichment tends
to alleviate high-temperature stress in plants (Faria, 1996; Nijs and Impens, 1996; Vu et al., 1997); and it
has been proven that at temperatures that are high enough to cause plants to die, atmospheric
CO2 enrichment can sometimes preserve their lives (Idso et al., 1989, 1995; Baker et al., 1992; Rowland-
Bamford et al., 1996; Taub, 2000), just as it can often stave off their demise in the very dry conditions
that typically accompany high air temperatures (Tuba et al., 1998; Hamerlynck, et al., 2000; Polley et al.,
2002). A major consequence of these facts is that the optimum temperature (Topt) for plant growth - the
temperature at which plants photosynthesize and grow best - generally rises with atmospheric CO2
enrichment (Berry and Bjorkman, 1980; Taiz and Zeiger, 1991). An example of this phenomenon is presented in
Box 1 below, where it can be seen that the increase in atmospheric CO2 concentration utilized in this particular
study increases the optimum temperature for photosynthesis in this species from a broad maximum centered at
25°C in ambient air to a well-defined peak at about 36°C in CO2-enriched air.

59
CO2 and WARMING CNDI 2008
N. FAROOQI
CO2 GOOD FOR PLANTS IN A WARM CLIMATE
CO2 is good for plants in a warming climate.
Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change 7/29/2003
(“The Specter of Species Extinction: Will Global Warming Decimate Earth’s Biosphere”, pg online @
http://co2science.org/education/reports/extinction/mr1ch2.php //cndi-nf)
So what could we logically expect to happen to the biosphere in a world of both rising air temperature and
atmospheric CO2 concentration? We could expect that earth's plants would extend the current
cold-limited boundaries of their ranges both poleward in latitude and upward in elevation, but that the
heat-limited boundaries of the vast majority of them would remain pretty much as they are now,
i.e., unchanged. Hence, the sizes of the ranges occupied by most of earth's plants would increase .
We additionally hypothesize that many of the animals that depend upon those plants for food and
shelter would exhibit analogous behavior. Hence, with respect to both plants and animals, we would
anticipate that nearly everywhere on earth, local biodiversity or species richness would increase in a
world of rising air temperature and atmospheric CO2 concentration, as the expanding ranges of the
planet's plants and animals overlapped those of their neighbors to an ever-increasing degree. The implications of
these observations are clear: if the planet continues to warm, even at what climate alarmists call
"unprecedented rates," we need not worry about earth's plants and animals being unable to
migrate to cooler regions of the globe fast enough to avoid extinction, as long as the air's CO2
content continues to rise at its current rate. So obvious is this conclusion, in fact, that Cowling (1999) has
bluntly stated that "maybe we should be less concerned about rising CO2 and rising temperatures
and more worried about the possibility that future atmospheric CO2 will suddenly stop
increasing, while global temperatures continue rising."

60
CO2 and WARMING CNDI 2008
N. FAROOQI
TURN-CO2 REDUCTION HURT BIO-D
Turn – CO2 reductions hurt biodiversity and organisms’ ability to adapt to warmer climates.
Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change 7/29/2003
(“The Specter of Species Extinction: Will Global Warming Decimate Earth’s Biosphere”, pg online @
http://co2science.org/education/reports/extinction/mr1ch2.php //cndi-nf)
Cowling is right on target with her assessment of the issue. Measures designed to slow the rate of rise of
the air's CO2 content would actually be counterproductive and detrimental to the biosphere, in
that they would deprive earth's vegetation (and its associated animal life) of much of its
capacity to adequately acclimate to rising temperatures forced by phenomena unrelated to the
air's CO2 content, such as variations in solar activity. However, the political pressure to
respond to the counterfeit ethics of the CO2-induced global warming extinction hypothesis is
so great that both logic and facts count for little in the debate over what to do -- or not do! -
about the ongoing rise in the air's CO2 content. Thus, the media onslaught continues, with each
new scientific study that can possibly be construed to support a doom-and-gloom scenario
being heralded as another important piece of evidence for the validity of the contention that
earth's biosphere is already in process of being decimated by global warming.

61
CO2 and WARMING CNDI 2008
N. FAROOQI
AFF STUDIES ARE WRONG
Studies implying CO2 causes global warming aren’t true.
Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change 7/29/2003
(“The Specter of Species Extinction: Will Global Warming Decimate Earth’s Biosphere”, pg online @
http://co2science.org/education/reports/extinction/mr1ch2.php //cndi-nf)
But we hear so many stories of plants and animals being forced to move to higher latitudes and elevations over the
past century and a half of increasing atmospheric CO2 and temperature. Aren't at least some of them true? And
what about the recent studies of Parmesan and Yohe (2003) and Root et al. (2003), numerous press reports of
which conjure up ghastly visions of an imminent mass extinction? Don't they refute what we have just concluded?
Before answering these questions, it is important to note that the blame for the oft-repeated but false contention
that global warming will decimate earth's biosphere cannot be laid solely at the feet of the popular press. Many
of the scientists involved in the studies that have been construed to imply the validity of the
CO2-induced global warming extinction hypothesis have themselves been the sources of much
of the rampant speculation. Root herself, for example, was quoted in one article describing her team's work
(post-gazette.com Health & Science, 2 January 2003) as saying "animals and plants are being strongly affected by
warming of the globe" and "in my opinion, we're sitting at the edge of a mass extinction," while in another article
from the New York Times ("Global Warming Found to Displace Species," authored by Andrew C. Revkin, 2
January 2003), she was quoted as saying "it's really pretty frightening to think what we might see in the next 100
years." Other scientists are also quick to promote the unholy vision of an impending biological
apocalypse. In a related story (CNN.com, 2 January 2003), for example, it was reported that Alastair Fitter, a
professor of biology at the University of York, said "the studies' conclusions that the ranges of hundreds of species
are shifting northward in response to warming temperatures are disconcerting," adding that if temperatures rise as
predicted, "it may drive some plant and animal species to extinction as their ranges shrink." Still other reports put
the "bad news" right up front in their titles. An Environment News Service report of 2 January 2003 declared
"Hundreds of Species Pressured by Global Warming," while Nature Science Update trumpeted on 6 January 2003
that "Huge studies analyze climate change's toll on plants and animals across globe." Likewise, a Rocky Mountain
News headline of 2 January 2003 declared "Species at risk as global warming spurs climate change," reporting in
the body of the story that scientists said the studies "foretell the extinction of many species in the coming decades
as rising temperatures force them to retreat from their historic ranges." Although these reports may seem
compelling, they do not live up to their dramatic billing when carefully analyzed. In fact, as we
shall shortly demonstrate, the vast bulk of the scientific studies that prompted them actually do
just the opposite of what climate alarmists claim they do. Rather than suggesting earth's
biosphere is about to suffer irreparable damage as a result of past natural warming and future
predicted warming, they actually substantiate nearly everything we have deduced from what is
known about the effects of atmospheric CO2 enrichment on plant physiology. Most
importantly, they portray a biosphere of increased species richness almost everywhere on earth
in response to the global warming and increase in atmospheric CO2 concentration of the past
century and a half that has promoted a great expansion of species' ranges throughout the entire
world.

62
CO2 and WARMING CNDI 2008
N. FAROOQI
AFF STUDIES ARE WRONG
Authors that support CO2-induced warming hypothesis don’t include the entire studies.
Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change 7/29/2003
(“The Specter of Species Extinction: Will Global Warming Decimate Earth’s Biosphere”, pg online @
http://co2science.org/education/reports/extinction/mr1ch2.php //cndi-nf)
Root et al. (2003), by their own admission, examined "thousands of articles" in reaching their
conclusion that "a significant impact of global warming," which they consider to be extremely
negative, "is already discernible in animal and plant populations." However, most of this
mountain of evidence was rejected by them. Why? It was rejected because, as they openly
admit, they chose to include only those studies that "(1) examined a span of at least 10 years, (2)
found that a trait of at least one species shows change over time, and (3) found either a temporal
change in temperature at the study site or a strong association between the species trait and site-
specific temperature." Think about that. If a study did not indicate that "at least one species shows
change over time" or that there was "a strong association between the species trait and site-
specific temperature," the study was ignored. Talk about stacking the deck in favor of one's
hypothesis! If a study showed that a species' population was stable over time or did not show a
strong association between one of its traits and changing temperature patterns - such as we
would predict for the heat-limited boundary of a species' range, which consequence would tend
to refute the CO2-induced global warming extinction hypothesis -- it was dropped from further
consideration. So just how extensive was this stacking of the deck? Of the thousands of articles
Root et al. examined, they selected a mere one hundred and forty-three for detailed scrutiny.
Does this massive filtering of the data mean there could be hundreds upon hundreds -- if not
thousands -- of studies that run counter to their hypothesis? There is a strong possibility that it does,
especially in light of what we are about to learn about the studies they did use.

63
CO2 and WARMING CNDI 2008
N. FAROOQI
CURRENT WARM PERIOD ISN’T BAD
Current Warm period isn’t as bad as climate alarmists claim.
Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change 7/29/2003
(“The Specter of Species Extinction: Will Global Warming Decimate Earth’s Biosphere”, pg online @
http://co2science.org/education/reports/extinction/mr1ch2.php //cndi-nf)
Are significant impacts of global warming "already discernable in animal and plant populations," as Root et al.
claim? Is climate change "already affecting living systems," as Parmesan and Yohe contend? The
answer to both of these questions in many but not all of the cases they cite is a definite yes. Much of the
biosphere has indeed responded to the global warming of the past century and a half that has
transformed what we have come to call the Little Ice Age into what can now be called the
Modern Warm Period. But it has not - we repeat not - brought us to the verge of biospheric
disintegration, as the world's climate alarmists would have everyone believe. In fact, it has
done just the opposite, aided in no small part by the concomitant rise in the air's CO2 content. To
substantiate this fact, ironically, we need look no further than to the very papers that are used by
Root et al. and Parmesan and Yohe to suggest, as Root has claimed, that "we're sitting at the
edge of a mass extinction." And when we do, we find that the studies they cite do not imply
anything of the kind. It is true that some species of plants and animals have indeed moved
poleward and upward in response to 19th and 20th century warming; but they have not been
forced to do so. The poleward and upward extensions of the cold-limited boundaries of these
species' ranges have been opportunistic movements, movements that have enabled them to
inhabit regions that previously were too cold for them. But where it has been predicted that
species would either be compelled to move towards cooler regions or suffer death, i.e., at the heat-
limited boundaries of their ranges, they have in many instances, if not most instances, succumbed to neither
alternative. As a result, instead of suffering range contractions, indicative of advancement
towards extinction, these species have experienced range expansions, indicative of a propensity
to avoid extinction.

64
CO2 and WARMING CNDI 2008
N. FAROOQI
(TURN) CO2 CHECKS WARMING
CO2 checks warming.
Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change 7/29/2003
(“The Specter of Species Extinction: Will Global Warming Decimate Earth’s Biosphere”, pg
online @ http:// http://co2science.org/education/reports/extinction/mr1ch12.php //cndi-nf)
The CO2-induced global warming extinction hypothesis claims that as the world warms in
response to the ongoing rise in the air's CO2 content, many species of plants and animals will
not be able to migrate either poleward in latitude or upward in elevation fast enough to avoid
extinction as they try to escape the stress imposed by the rising temperature. With respect to
plants, however, we have shown that as long as the atmosphere's CO2 concentration rises in tandem
with its temperature, most of them will not "feel the heat," as their physiology will change in
ways that make them better adapted to warmer conditions. Hence, although earth's plants will
likely spread poleward and upward at the cold-limited boundaries of their ranges in response to
a warming-induced opportunity to do so, their heat-limited boundaries will probably remain
pretty much as they are now or shift only slightly. Consequently, in a world of rising atmospheric
CO2 concentration, the ranges of most of earth's plants will likely expand if the planet
continues to warm, making plant extinctions even less likely than they are currently. Animals
should react much the same way. In response to concurrent increases in atmospheric
temperature and CO2 concentration, they will likely migrate poleward and upward, where cold
temperatures prevented them from going in the past, as they follow earth's plants. Also as with
earth's plants, the heat-limited boundaries of their ranges should in many cases be little affected, as
has been observed in several of the real-world studies that have been wrongly cited as
providing evidence for impending species extinctions, or their entire ranges may simply shift with the
rising temperature, as has been observed in many real-world studies of marine ecosystems.

65
CO2 and WARMING CNDI 2008
N. FAROOQI

***AT: SLR
LARGE SEA LEVEL RISE UNLIKELY
Claims that sea level rise will be substantial are exaggerated, ata most it will be less than half
an inch.
Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide 6/6/2007
(“Separating Scientific Fact from Personal Opinion A critique of the 26 April 2007 testimony of James E. Hansen
made to the Select Committee of Energy Independence and Global Warming of the United States House of
Representatives entitled "Dangerous Human-Made Interference with Climate"”, pg online @
http://co2science.org/education/reports/hansen/hansencritique.php //cndi-nf)
A good perspective on this issue is provided in the 16 March 2007 issue of Science by Shepherd and Wingham
(2007), who review what is known about sea-level contributions arising from wastage of the Antarctic and
Greenland Ice Sheets, focusing on the results of 14 different satellite-based estimates of the imbalances of the
polar ice sheets that have been derived since 1998. These studies have been of three major types -
standard mass budget analyses, altimetry measurements of ice-sheet volume changes, and
measurements of the ice sheets' changing gravitational attraction - and they have yielded a
diversity of values, ranging from an implied sea-level rise of 1.0 mm/year to a sea-level fall of
0.15 mm/year. Based on their evaluation of these diverse findings, the two researchers come to the
conclusion that the current "best estimate" of the contribution of polar ice wastage to global sea
level change is a rise of 0.35 millimeters per year, which over a century amounts to only 35
millimeters, or less than an inch and a half. Yet even this small sea level rise may be
unrealistically large, for although two of Greenland's biggest outlet glaciers doubled their mass-
loss rates in 2004, causing many to claim that the Greenland Ice Sheet was responding more
rapidly to global warming than expected, Howat et al. (2007) report that the glaciers' mass-loss rates
"decreased in 2006 to near the previous rates." And these observations, in their words, "suggest that
special care must be taken in how mass-balance estimates are evaluated, particularly when extrapolating into the
future, because short-term spikes could yield erroneous long-term trends."

66
CO2 and WARMING CNDI 2008
N. FAROOQI
LARGE SEA LEVEL RISE UNLIKELY
Substantial Sea Level Rise unlikely, sedimentary wedges keep glaciers in place.
Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change 6/6/2007
(“Separating Scientific Fact from Personal Opinion A critique of the 26 April 2007 testimony of James E. Hansen
made to the Select Committee of Energy Independence and Global Warming of the United States House of
Representatives entitled "Dangerous Human-Made Interference with Climate"”, pg online @
http://co2science.org/education/reports/hansen/hansencritique.php //cndi-nf)
Other findings also contradict Hansen's claim that "increasingly rapid changes on West Antarctica and Greenland
... are truly alarming." Writing in the 30 March 2007 issue of Science, for example, Anandakrishnan et al. (2007)
describe a sedimentary wedge or "till delta" deposited by and under West Antarctica's Whillans
Ice Stream that they detected via radar surveys made from the floating Ross Ice Shelf. This grounding-
line buildup of sedimentary material, as they describe it, "serves to thicken the ice and stabilize the
position of the grounding line," so that "the ice just up-glacier of the grounding line is
substantially thicker than that needed to allow floatation." Consequently, they say that "the
grounding-line will tend to remain in the same location ... until sea level rises enough to
overcome the excess thickness that is due to the wedge." So how high would the sea need to
rise to "unground" the Whillans Ice Stream and wrest it from the continent ? In a study that analyzes
this question in detail, Alley et al. (2007) find that " sea-level changes of a few meters are unlikely to
substantially affect ice-sheet behavior," and they conclude that a rise on the order of 100 meters
might be needed to "overwhelm the stabilizing feedback from sedimentation." In fact, Anderson
(2007) states that "at the current rate of sea-level rise, it would take several thousand years [our italics] to
float the ice sheet off [its] bed." What is more, Alley et al. say that the ice sheet's extra thickness up-
glacier from the grounding-line wedge will tend to stabilize it against "any other environmental
perturbation."
With respect to the range of applicability of the findings of Anandakrishnan et al. and Alley et al., Anderson notes
that "grounding-zone wedges are common features on the continental shelf, including the Ross
Sea Shelf," and that "all ice streams of the Siple Coast have an anomalous elevation and stop at
the grounding line," which leads him to conclude that "this mechanism for stabilization of the
grounding-line is likely to be widespread." Consequently, Anderson concludes that "sea-level rise may
not destabilize ice sheets as much as previously feared," which in turn suggests that sea level
itself may not rise as fast or as high as previously feared. So what do actual sea level data suggest?

67
CO2 and WARMING CNDI 2008
N. FAROOQI
SEA LEVEL RISE CONSTANTLY CHANGING
Sea level rise is constantly changing.
Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change 6/6/2007
(“Separating Scientific Fact from Personal Opinion A critique of the 26 April 2007 testimony of James E. Hansen
made to the Select Committee of Energy Independence and Global Warming of the United States House of
Representatives entitled "Dangerous Human-Made Interference with Climate"”, pg online @
http://co2science.org/education/reports/hansen/hansencritique.php //cndi-nf)
Lombard et al. (2005) studied temperature-induced (thermosteric) sea-level change over the last 50
years using the global ocean temperature data of Levitus et al. (2000) and Ishii et al. (2003). In doing so,
they found thermosteric sea level variations are dominated by decadal oscillations of earth's
major ocean-atmosphere climatic perturbations (El Niño-Southern Oscillation, Pacific Decadal
Oscillation and North Atlantic Oscillation), and that thermosteric trends computed over 10-year
windows exhibit 20-year oscillations with positive values of 1 to 1.5 mm/year and negative
values of -1 to -1.5 mm/year. Hence, over the 50 years for which global ocean temperature data
exist, there has indeed been a rise in sea level due to the thermal expansion of sea water, but
only because the record begins at the bottom of a trough and ends at the top of a peak. Between
these two points, there are both higher and lower values, obscuring what might be implied if
earlier data were available or what may be suggested as more data are acquired. Noting further
that sea level trends derived from Topex/Poseidon altimetry from 1993 to 2003 are "mainly
caused by thermal expansion" and are "very likely a non-permanent feature," Lombard et al.
conclude that "we simply cannot extrapolate sea level into the past or the future using satellite
altimetry alone." Thus, it is to long-term coastal tide gauge records that we must turn for an
evaluation of Hansen's claim that the rate of sea level rise is accelerating.

68
CO2 and WARMING CNDI 2008
N. FAROOQI
AVERAGE SLR HASN’T ACCELERATED
The average global sea level rise has not accelerated, oceanic analysis prove.
Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change 6/6/2007
(“Separating Scientific Fact from Personal Opinion A critique of the 26 April 2007 testimony of James E. Hansen
made to the Select Committee of Energy Independence and Global Warming of the United States House of
Representatives entitled "Dangerous Human-Made Interference with Climate"”, pg online @
http://co2science.org/education/reports/hansen/hansencritique.php //cndi-nf)
Holgate and Woodworth (2004) derived a mean global sea level history from 177 coastal tide
gauge records spanning the period 1955-1998, which Holgate (2007) extended back in time
another half-century by demonstrating that the combination of nine much longer high-quality
tide gauge records from around the world (New York, Key West, San Diego, Balboa, Honolulu, Cascais,
Newlyn, Trieste and Auckland) was similar enough to the 177-site record over the period of the two data sets'
overlap to warrant the use of the nine-station record as a reasonable representation of mean global sea level for the
much longer 1904-2003 period. This history is represented by the wavering black line in the figure below; and
based on that history, Holgate calculated that the mean rate of global sea level rise was "larger in the early part of
the last century (2.03 ± 0.35 mm/year 1904-1953), in comparison with the latter part (1.45 ± 0.34 mm/year 1954-
2003)." Another way of thinking about Holgate's century-long sea level history is suggested by the blue curve we
have fit to it, which indicates that mean global sea level may have been rising ever more slowly with the passage
of time throughout the entire last hundred years. In any event, and whichever way one looks at Holgate's findings -
as either two linear trends or one longer continuous curve - the nine select tide gauge records indicate that
the mean rate of global sea level rise has not accelerated over the recent past. In fact, it likely
has done just the opposite - in clear contradiction of Hansen's adamant claim to the contrary.

69
CO2 and WARMING CNDI 2008
N. FAROOQI
SLR HASN’T CHANGED A LOT WITH CO2
Sea Level Rise hasn’t changed dramatically in response to anthropogenic CO2.
Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change 6/6/2007
(“Separating Scientific Fact from Personal Opinion A critique of the 26 April 2007 testimony of James E. Hansen
made to the Select Committee of Energy Independence and Global Warming of the United States House of
Representatives entitled "Dangerous Human-Made Interference with Climate"”, pg online @
http://co2science.org/education/reports/hansen/hansencritique.php //cndi-nf)
In discussing their results, Jevrejeva et al. say they show that " global sea level rise is irregular and varies
greatly over time," and that "it is apparent that rates in the 1920-1945 period are likely to be as
large as today's." In addition, they report that their "global sea level trend estimate of 2.4 ± 1.0 mm/year for
the period from 1993 to 2000 matches the 2.6 ± 0.7 mm/year sea level rise found from
TOPEX/Poseidon altimeter data." With respect to what Jevrejeva et al. describe as "the discussion on
whether sea level rise is accelerating," their results pretty much answer the question in the
negative; and in further support of this conclusion, they note that "Church et al. (2004) pointed out that
with decadal variability in the computed global mean sea level, it is not possible to detect a
significant increase in the rate of sea level rise over the period 1950-2000," as is clearly evident
from the bottom portion of the above figure. These observations lead us to wonder why late 20th-
century global warming - which climate alarmists describe as having been unprecedented over
the past two millennia or more - barely makes a ripple in the global sea level data of the two
preceding figures. We are even more intrigued about the matter in light of the fact that the warming that brought an
end to the Little Ice Age is readily apparent in the first, and even the second, of the three upward-trending
segments of Jevrejeva et al.'s gsl rate history. Likewise, we are perplexed by the fact that the rising
atmospheric CO2 concentration - which climate alarmists contend was responsible for the
"unprecedented" global warming of the late 20th century - experienced a dramatic increase in
its rate of rise just after 1950 (shifting from a 1900-1950 mean rate-of-rise of 0.33 ppm/year to a 1950-2000
mean rate-of-rise of 1.17 ppm/year, which is a good three and a half times greater), yet the mean global sea
level rate of rise did not trend upwards after 1950, nor has it subsequently exceeded its 1950
rate-of-rise, which means that something is very wrong with the climate-alarmist theory
espoused by Hansen and his dozens of collaborators.

70
CO2 and WARMING CNDI 2008
N. FAROOQI

***AT: METHANE
CO2 DOESN’T CAUSE AN INCREASE OF METHANE RELEASE
CO2 doesn’t cause an increase of methane release.
Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change 6/6/2007
(“Separating Scientific Fact from Personal Opinion A critique of the 26 April 2007 testimony of James E. Hansen
made to the Select Committee of Energy Independence and Global Warming of the United States House of
Representatives entitled "Dangerous Human-Made Interference with Climate"”, pg online @
http://co2science.org/education/reports/hansen/hansencritique.php //cndi-nf)
One of the major "slow" feedback processes that Hansen identifies is "the effect of warming on
emissions of long-lived greenhouse gases," such as he claims is being caused by the "melting of
tundra in North America and Eurasia," which he states "is observed to be causing increased
ebullition of methane from methane hydrates." The real world of nature, however, seems little
impressed by these contentions; for after rising rapidly since the start of the Industrial
Revolution, the air's methane concentration has been rising ever more slowly, especially during
the "unprecedented" warming of the last few decades. In fact, since the beginning of the 21st
century, the atmosphere's methane concentration has actually stabilized - ceasing to rise any
further - as indicated by the data provided by Dlugokencky et al. (2003), which we have plotted in the figure
below, and to which we have fit two linear regressions and an intervening second-order polynomial.

71
CO2 and WARMING CNDI 2008
N. FAROOQI
METHANE LEVELS ARE DECREASING
Methane levels are decreasing.
Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change 6/6/2007
(“Separating Scientific Fact from Personal Opinion A critique of the 26 April 2007 testimony of James E. Hansen
made to the Select Committee of Energy Independence and Global Warming of the United States House of
Representatives entitled "Dangerous Human-Made Interference with Climate"”, pg online @
http://co2science.org/education/reports/hansen/hansencritique.php //cndi-nf)
Why are these observations so important? They are important because, as Dulgokencky et al. report,
"atmospheric methane's contribution to anthropogenic climate forcing is about half that from CO2
[our italics] when direct and indirect components to its forcing are summed (Hansen and Sato, 2001)."
In addition, they note that "all methane emission scenarios considered by the IPCC Special Report
on Emission Scenarios (Nakicenovic et al., 2000) resulted in increasing [our italics] atmospheric
methane for at least the next 3 decades, and many of the scenarios projected large increases
through the 21st century (Prather et al., 2001)." In reality, however, it now appears that a large
portion of the anticipated global warming problem may have simply disappeared, rather than
gotten much worse, as Hansen claims. Another - and slightly expanded - perspective of the atmosphere's
methane history has been presented by Khalil et al. (2007), which we have reproduced in the figure below and to
which we have added the smooth green line. This graph suggests that the trend in atmospheric methane
concentration, as Khalil et al. describe it, "has been decreasing for the last two decades until the
present when it has reached near zero," and they say that "it is questionable whether human
activities can cause methane concentrations to increase greatly in the future." In fact, there is reason
to believe the global methane concentration may actually begin to decline ... and soon!

More Evidence
Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change 6/6/2007
(“Separating Scientific Fact from Personal Opinion A critique of the 26 April 2007 testimony of James E. Hansen
made to the Select Committee of Energy Independence and Global Warming of the United States House of
Representatives entitled "Dangerous Human-Made Interference with Climate"”, pg online @
http://co2science.org/education/reports/hansen/hansencritique.php //cndi-nf)
With respect to the data of this figure, and particularly the data from the 1990s, Simpson et al. said they
"caution against viewing each year of high methane growth as an anomaly against a trend of
declining methane growth." Yet that is precisely what the data suggest, i.e., a declining baseline
upon which are superimposed periodic anomalous increases; and in this interpretation, we are not
alone. The first of the large methane spikes depicted in the above figure is widely recognized as
having been caused by the sudden eruption of Mt. Pinatubo in June of 1991 (Bekki et al., 1994;
Dlugokencky et al., 1996; Lowe et al., 1997); while the last and most dramatic of the spikes has been associated
with the strong El Niño of 1997-98 (Dlugokencky et al., 2001). In addition, Dlugokencky et al. (1998), Francey et
al. (1999) and Lassey et al. (2000) have all felt confident in concluding the data suggest that the annual
rate-of-rise of the atmosphere's methane concentration has indeed declined and led to a
cessation of methane concentration growth.
Projecting ahead, if anomalous methane spikes similar to those that occurred in the 1990s continue to
occur at similar intervals in the future, the atmosphere's methane concentration should continue
to rise - but only very slowly - for just a few more years, after which the declining background
methane growth rate, which has already turned negative, will have dropped low enough to
overwhelm any short-term impacts of periodic methane spikes. At that point in time we may
thus be able to see an actual decline in the air's methane concentration, which should gradually
accelerate if subsequent methane spikes fail to penetrate into positive territory. Consequently, if
this scenario proves to be correct, the decreasing trend in atmospheric methane concentration may soon provide a
negative-greenhouse force that could counter a good deal of the positive-greenhouse force created by the ongoing
rise in the air's CO2 content.

72
CO2 and WARMING CNDI 2008
N. FAROOQI

***VARIOUS
IT’S BEEN WARMER
It’s been warmer, interglacials prove.
Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change 6/6/2007
(“Separating Scientific Fact from Personal Opinion A critique of the 26 April 2007 testimony of James E. Hansen
made to the Select Committee of Energy Independence and Global Warming of the United States House of
Representatives entitled "Dangerous Human-Made Interference with Climate"”, pg online @
http://co2science.org/education/reports/hansen/hansencritique.php //cndi-nf)
In an attempt to depict earth's current temperature as being extremely high and, therefore, extremely
dangerous, Hansen focuses almost exclusively on a single point of the earth's surface in the
Western Equatorial Pacific, for which he and others (Hansen et al., 2006) compared modern sea
surface temperatures (SSTs) with paleo-SSTs that were derived by Medina-Elizade and Lea (2005) from
the Mg/Ca ratios of shells of the surface-dwelling planktonic foraminifer Globigerinoides rubber that they
obtained from an ocean sediment core. In doing so, they concluded that "this critical ocean region, and
probably the planet as a whole [our italics], is approximately as warm now as at the Holocene
maximum and within ~1°C of the maximum temperature of the past million years [our italics]." Is
there any compelling reason to believe these claims of Hansen et al. about the entire planet? In a word,
no, because there are a multitude of other single-point measurements that suggest something
vastly different. Even in their own paper, Hansen et al. present data from the Indian Ocean that
indicate, as best we can determine from their graph, that SSTs there were about 0.75°C warmer than
they are currently some 125,000 years ago during the prior interglacial. Likewise, based on data
obtained from the Vostok ice core in Antarctica, another of their graphs suggests that temperatures at
that location some 125,000 years ago were about 1.8°C warmer than they are now; while data
from two sites in the Eastern Equatorial Pacific indicate it was approximately 2.3 to 4.0°C
warmer compared to the present at about that time. In fact, Petit et al.'s (1999) study of the Vostok ice
core demonstrates that large periods of all four of the interglacials that preceded the Holocene
were more than 2°C warmer than the peak warmth of the current interglacial.

73
CO2 and WARMING CNDI 2008
N. FAROOQI
WARMING ALREADY HAPPENED
Warming already happened, past temperatures from around the world prove.
Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change 6/6/2007
(“Separating Scientific Fact from Personal Opinion A critique of the 26 April 2007 testimony of James E. Hansen
made to the Select Committee of Energy Independence and Global Warming of the United States House of
Representatives entitled "Dangerous Human-Made Interference with Climate"”, pg online @
http://co2science.org/education/reports/hansen/hansencritique.php //cndi-nf)
But we don't have to go nearly so far back in time to demonstrate the non-uniqueness of current
temperatures. Of the five SST records that Hansen et al. display, three of them indicate the mid-
Holocene was also warmer than it is today. Indeed, it has been known for many years that the central
portion of the current interglacial was much warmer than its latter stages have been. To cite just a few examples of
pertinent work conducted in the 1970s and 80s - based on temperature reconstructions derived from studies of
latitudinal displacements of terrestrial vegetation (Bernabo and Webb, 1977; Wijmstra, 1978; Davis et al., 1980;
Ritchie et al., 1983; Overpeck, 1985) and vertical displacements of alpine plants (Kearney and Luckman, 1983)
and mountain glaciers (Hope et al., 1976; Porter and Orombelli, 1985) - we note it was concluded by Webb et al.
(1987) and the many COHMAP Members (1988) that mean annual temperatures in the Midwestern
United States were about 2°C greater than those of the past few decades (Bartlein et al., 1984;
Webb, 1985), that summer temperatures in Europe were 2°C warmer (Huntley and Prentice, 1988) - as
they also were in New Guinea (Hope et al., 1976) - and that temperatures in the Alps were as much as 4°C
warmer (Porter and Orombelli, 1985; Huntley and Prentice, 1988). Likewise, temperatures in the Russian
Far East are reported to have been from 2°C (Velitchko and Klimanov, 1990) to as much as 4-6°C (Korotky et
al., 1988) higher than they were in the 1970s and 80s; while the mean annual temperature of the
Kuroshio Current between 22 and 35°N was 6°C warmer (Taira, 1975). Also, the southern boundary of the
Pacific boreal region was positioned some 700 to 800 km north of its present location (Lutaenko, 1993). But we
needn't go back to even the mid-Holocene to encounter warmer-than-present temperatures, as
the Medieval Warm Period, centered on about AD 1100, had lots of them. In fact, every single week
since 1 Feb 2006, we have featured on our website (www.co2science.org) a different peer-reviewed scientific
journal article that testifies to the existence of this several-centuries-long period of notable warmth, in a feature we
call our Medieval Warm Period Record of the Week. Also, whenever it has been possible to make either a
quantitative or qualitative comparison between the peak temperature of the Medieval Warm Period (MWP) and the
peak temperature of the Current Warm Period (CWP), we have included those results in the appropriate
quantitative or qualitative frequency distributions we have posted within this feature; and a quick perusal of these
ever-growing databases (reproduced below as of 23 May 2007) indicates that, in the overwhelming majority of
cases, the peak warmth of the Medieval Warm Period was significantly greater than the peak
warmth of the Current Warm Period. In concluding this portion of our critique of Hansen's testimony, we
note that the mean surface air temperature of the earth is currently nowhere near as high as it was
a million years ago. Neither are current temperatures as high as the peak temperatures of the
prior four interglacials, nor are they as high as they were during the central portion of the
current interglacial. In fact, it's not even as warm now as it was a paltry 900 years ago, when
the atmosphere's CO2 concentration was 100 ppm less than it is today, which sure doesn't say much
for the warming power of CO2 nor for the storyline promoted in Hansen's testimony.

74
CO2 and WARMING CNDI 2008
N. FAROOQI
MORE DEMAND FOR AG IN FUTURE
There will be more demand for agriculture.
Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change 6/6/2007
(“Separating Scientific Fact from Personal Opinion A critique of the 26 April 2007 testimony of James E. Hansen
made to the Select Committee of Energy Independence and Global Warming of the United States House of
Representatives entitled "Dangerous Human-Made Interference with Climate"”, pg online @
http://co2science.org/education/reports/hansen/hansencritique.php //cndi-nf)
What can be done to avoid this horrific situation? In a subsequent analysis, Tilman et al. (2002)
introduced a few more facts before suggesting some solutions. First of all, they noted that by 2050 the human
population of the globe is projected to be 50% larger than it was just prior to the writing of their paper,
and that global grain demand by 2050 could well double, due to expected increases in per capita
real income and dietary shifts toward a higher proportion of meat. Hence, they but stated the obvious
when they concluded that "raising yields on existing farmland is essential for 'saving land for
nature'." So how can this readily-defined but Herculean task be accomplished? Tilman et al. proposed a
strategy that focuses on three essential efforts: (1) increasing crop yield per unit of land area, (2)
increasing crop yield per unit of nutrients applied, and (3) increasing crop yield per unit of
water used. With respect to the first of these efforts - increasing crop yield per unit of land area - the
researchers note that in many parts of the world the historical rate-of-increase in crop yield is
declining, as the genetic ceiling for maximal yield potential is being approached. This
observation, in their estimation, "highlights the need for efforts to steadily increase the yield potential
ceiling." With respect to the second effort - increasing crop yield per unit of nutrients applied - they note that
"without the use of synthetic fertilizers, world food production could not have increased at the
rate [that it did in the past] and more natural ecosystems would have been converted to
agriculture." Hence, they say that the ultimate solution "will require significant increases in nutrient
use efficiency, that is, in cereal production per unit of added nitrogen." Finally, with respect to the
third effort - increasing crop yield per unit of water used - Tilman et al. note that " water is regionally scarce,"
and that "many countries in a band from China through India and Pakistan, and the Middle East to North
Africa either currently or will soon fail to have adequate water to maintain per capita food
production from irrigated land." Increasing crop water use efficiency, therefore, is also a must.

75
CO2 and WARMING CNDI 2008
N. FAROOQI
CO2 DOESN’T STOP CALCIFICATION
CO2 doesn’t stop the process of calcification, it may actually help it.
Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change 6/6/2007
(“Separating Scientific Fact from Personal Opinion A critique of the 26 April 2007 testimony of James E. Hansen
made to the Select Committee of Energy Independence and Global Warming of the United States House of
Representatives entitled "Dangerous Human-Made Interference with Climate"”, pg online @
http://co2science.org/education/reports/hansen/hansencritique.php //cndi-nf)
We begin by noting the 27 scientists contend that (1) in response to the ongoing rise in the air's CO2
content, "aqueous CO2 concentrations will increase and carbonate ion concentrations will
decrease, making it more difficult for marine calcifying organisms to form biogenic calcium
carbonate," and that (2) "substantial experimental evidence indicates that calcification rates will
decrease in low-latitude corals (Millero, 1995; Dickson, 1990; Dickson and Riley, 1979), which form
reefs out of aragonite [a metastable form of calcium carbonate (CaCO3)], and in phytoplankton that form
their tests (shells) out of calcite (Mucci, 1983; Bischoff et al., 1987), the stable form of CaCO3)." In
reviewing the five papers they cite in support of these contentions, however, we find that none of them deal
with living organisms, and, therefore, that none of them deal with the calcification process as it
is conducted in nature by living entities. We have previously written extensively about the importance of
not excluding life from such important considerations, noting that calcification is much more than a
physical-chemical process that can be accurately described by a set of equations. Rather, we have
emphasized, time and again, that coral calcification is a biologically-driven physical-chemical
process that may not yet be amenable to explicit mathematical description . In fact, we reported
several years ago (Idso et al., 2000) - based on proper citations of the scientific literature - that "the
photosynthetic activity of zooxanthellae is the chief source of energy for the energetically-
expensive process of calcification," and that considerable evidence shows that "long-term reef
calcification rates generally rise in direct proportion to increases in rates of reef primary
production," which suggests that if anthropogenic-induced increases in the transfer of CO2 from
the air to the world's oceans were to lead to increases in coral symbiont photosynthesis - as
atmospheric CO2 enrichment generally does for nearly all land plants - it is likely that increases
in coral calcification rates would occur as well.

76
CO2 and WARMING CNDI 2008
N. FAROOQI
WARMING CAN CHECK BAD CO2 CONCENTRATIONS
Warming can check the adverse effects of an increase in aquatic CO2 concentration.
Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change 6/6/2007
(“Separating Scientific Fact from Personal Opinion A critique of the 26 April 2007 testimony of James E. Hansen
made to the Select Committee of Energy Independence and Global Warming of the United States House of
Representatives entitled "Dangerous Human-Made Interference with Climate"”, pg online @
http://co2science.org/education/reports/hansen/hansencritique.php //cndi-nf)
We have also noted that the calcium carbonate saturation state of seawater actually rises with an
increase in temperature, countering the adverse oceanic chemistry consequences of an increase
in aqueous CO2 concentration, which is a matter that is also considered by Orr et al., but which they
dismiss as having a rather small effect, "typically counteracting less than 10% of the decrease
due to the geochemical effect." With this little problem thus handily dispatched - and ignoring
the many ways in which the forces of life might enter the picture - they calculate that "relative
to preindustrial conditions, invasion of anthropogenic CO2 has already reduced modern surface
carbonate ion concentrations by more than 10%," and they further calculate - "in agreement with
previous predictions (Kleypas et al., 1999)" - that a 45% reduction relative to preindustrial levels may
be reached by the end of the century, and that ultimately, "rates of calcification could decline
even further, to zero." We, however, suggest these contentions are grossly in error.

77
CO2 and WARMING CNDI 2008
N. FAROOQI
CO2 GOOD FOR CORALS AND PHYTOPLANKTON
CO2 is good for corals and phytoplankton.
Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change 6/6/2007
(“Separating Scientific Fact from Personal Opinion A critique of the 26 April 2007 testimony of James E. Hansen
made to the Select Committee of Energy Independence and Global Warming of the United States House of
Representatives entitled "Dangerous Human-Made Interference with Climate"”, pg online @
http://co2science.org/education/reports/hansen/hansencritique.php //cndi-nf)
Before concluding our discussion of this important subject, however, we briefly switch our focus from corals to
phytoplankton, beginning with a review of the work of Riebesell (2004), who notes that "doubling present-day
atmospheric CO2 concentrations is predicted to cause a 20-40% reduction in biogenic calcification of the
predominant calcifying organisms, the corals, coccolithophorids, and foraminifera." In a significant challenge to
this climate-alarmist dogma, Riebesell notes that a moderate increase in CO2 actually facilitates
photosynthetic carbon fixation of certain phytoplankton, such as the coccolithophorids, as
represented by Emiliania huxleyi and Gephyrocapsa oceanica. In fact, Riebesell writes that "CO2-
sensitive taxa, such as the calcifying coccolithophorids, should therefore benefit more [our italics]
from the present increase in atmospheric CO2 compared to the non-calcifying diatoms." More
recently, Crabbe et al. (2006) used digital photography, image analysis and measurements in the field to
determine the original growth rates of long-dead Quaternary corals found in exposed onshore limestone
deposits near the margins of Hoga and Kaledupa Islands in the Wakatobi Marine National Park of Indonesia, after
which they compared them to the growth rates of present-day corals of the same genera (Porites and
Favites) living in the same area. This work revealed that the Quaternary corals appeared to have
grown "in a comparable environment to modern reefs at Kaledupa and Hoga," except, of course, for the
air's CO2 concentration, which is currently higher than it has been at any other time throughout the entire
Quaternary, i.e., the past 1.8 million years. In addition, their measurements indicated that the radial growth
rates of the modern corals were 31% greater than those of their more ancient Quaternary cousins
in the case of Porites species, and 34% greater in the case of Favites species. Clearly, therefore, the impact of
the historical increase in the atmosphere's CO2 concentration on the corals in question has not
been as catastrophically negative as Hansen suggests it should have been. In fact, the increase in the
CO2 content of the modern atmosphere appears to have not been negative at all. In fact, it
appears to have been positive.

78
CO2 and WARMING CNDI 2008
N. FAROOQI
CORALS CAN ADAPT TO ENV. CHANGES
Corals can adapt to environmental changes.
Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change 6/7/2007
(“Separating Scientific Fact from Personal Opinion A critique of the 26 April 2007 testimony of James E. Hansen
made to the Select Committee of Energy Independence and Global Warming of the United States House of
Representatives entitled "Dangerous Human-Made Interference with Climate"”, pg online @
http://co2science.org/education/reports/hansen/hansencritique.php //cndi-nf)
Most interesting of all, perhaps, Fine and Tchernov (2007) grew 30 coral fragments from five colonies
of the scleractinian Mediterranean species Oculina patagonica and Madracis pharencis within indoor flow-
through systems under ambient Mediterranean seawater temperatures and photoperiod in water
maintained at pH values of 7.3-7.6 (acidified) and 8.0-8.3 (ambient) for a period of 12 months.
After one month in the acidic conditions, they report there was an elongation of the coral
polyps that was "followed by dissociation of the colony form and complete skeleton
dissolution." However, they observed that "the polyps remained attached to the undissolved hard
rocky substrate." In fact, they found that "the biomass of the solitary polyps under acidic conditions
was three times as high [our italics] as the biomass of the polyps in the control colonies that
continued to calcify." In addition, they say that both "control and treatment fragments maintained
their algal symbionts during the entire experiment, except for six fragments (10%) of O. patagonica that
partially lost their symbionts (bleached) during July but recovered within 2 months." And they report that " after
12 months, when transferred back to ambient pH conditions, the experimental soft-bodied
polyps calcified and reformed colonies [our italics]." Thus, after restating their major finding that "in the
absence of conditions supporting skeleton building, both species maintained basic life functions
as skeleton-less ecophenotypes," Fine and Tchernov concluded that "corals might survive large-scale
environmental change, such as that expected for the following century." And why not? If they've
done it before - as some have theorized (Stanley and Fautin, 2001; Stanley, 2003; Medina et al., 2006), and as Fine
and Tchernov have actually demonstrated can in truth be done - they likely have the capacity do it again ... and
again ... and again.

79
CO2 and WARMING CNDI 2008
N. FAROOQI
URBAN HEATING ALLOWS FOR INVESTIGATION
Urban heating allows for the investigation of warming impacts.
Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change 5/28/2008
(“An Extreme Urban Surrogate of Projected Global Warming” Vol. 11:22, pg online @
http://co2science.org/articles/V11/N22/B1.php //cndi-nf)
Because urban environments are affected by urban heat islands, carbon dioxide domes, and
high-level nitrogen deposition, the authors say that "to some extent they portend the future of the
global ecosystem," and that they "provide a unique 'natural laboratory' to study potential
ecosystem responses to anthropogenic environmental changes." What was done Shen et al. used a
version of the Patch Arid Land Simulator-Functional Types (PALS-FT) process-based ecosystem
model -- originally developed for the Chihuahuan Desert but modified to represent the Larrea tridentata-
dominated ecosystem characteristic of the Sonoran Desert within which Phoenix is located -- to investigate
impacts of previously documented city-to-desert gradients of atmospheric CO2 concentration,
air temperature (TA), and nitrogen deposition (Ndep) on aboveground net primary productivity
(ANPP) and soil organic matter (SOM). What was learned In response to the mean maximum rural-
to-urban increases in CO2 (160 ppm), Ndep (24 kg per ha/year) and TA (4.0°C) characteristic of Phoenix,
mean ANPP changes of +52.5, +42.7 and -7.8 g dry matter (DM) per m2/year were obtained, respectively, from
the 76.3 g DM per m2/year characteristic of desert conditions, when each of the three factors was increased
individually. And when all three parameters were increased together, the net increase in ANPP
was found to be even greater than the sum of the three individual results: 108 vs. 87.4 g DM per
m2/year, which numbers translate to respective percentage increases of 142% vs. 115%. In the case of SOM,
increases of 18.5, 12.3 and 1.2 g C per m2/year were obtained for mean maximum individual increases in CO2,
Ndep and TA, respectively, while the combined increase was 30.9 g C per m2/year. What it means Even in a
desert region as hot as Phoenix, the types of CO2, temperature and nitrogen deposition
increases predicted for the years ahead portend huge increases in indigenous ecosystem
productivity and soil organic matter buildup.
(Reference: Shen, W., Wu,. J., Grimm, N.B. and Hope, D. 2008. Effects of urbanization-induced environmental
changes on ecosystem functioning in the Phoenix metropolitan region, USA. Ecosystems 11: 138-155)

80
CO2 and WARMING CNDI 2008
N. FAROOQI

***AT: GCM’S
CLIMATE MODELS WRONG
Climate Models are wrong, if anything, global warming will DECREASE storms.
Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change 6/25/2008
(“Snow(North America) -- Summary” Volume 11 , pg online @ http://co2science.org/subject/s/summaries/snowna.php
//cndi-nf)
Last of all, Gulev et al. (2001) used sea level pressure taken from NCEP/NCAR reanalysis data for
the period 1958-1999 to develop a Northern Hemispheric winter (January-March) climatology of
cyclones (storms) that reached a sea level pressure of 1000 mb or lower. Linear trend estimates based on
these data revealed a statistically significant (95% level) annual decline of 1.2 cyclones per year,
suggesting that there were 50 fewer winter cyclones at the end of the study period than at its beginning.
Additional analyses suggested that the Northern Hemisphere winter cyclones were intensifying
at quicker rates and reaching greater maximum depths (lower sea level pressure) at the end of the
record than they were at its beginning. However, the wintertime cyclones were also
experiencing shorter life cycles at the end of the 42-year period, dissipating more quickly than
at its beginning. Could these changes be the result of global warming? According to the three scientists, they
are probably connected to large-scale features of atmospheric variability, such as the North Atlantic
Oscillation and the North Pacific Oscillation. As for the large decrease reported in the annual number of Northern
Hemisphere cyclones over the 42-year period, we note that this observation is in direct opposition to
climate-alarmist predictions, which suggest that the frequency of such events will increase as a
result of global warming. Once again, therefore, the results of climate model simulations appear to
be diametrically opposed to the testimony of nature.
(References: Bartlett, M.G., Chapman, D.S. and Harris, R.N. 2005. Snow effect on North American ground
temperatures, 1950-2002)

81
CO2 and WARMING CNDI 2008
N. FAROOQI
CLIMATE MODELS FAIL
Climate models fail, too many variables ensure fautly information.
Idso’s 5/14/2008
(Craig Idso, frmr Dir of Env. Science, member of the American Assoc for Adv of Science, American Geophysical
Union, American Meteorological Society, Arizona-Nevada Academy of Sciences, Assoc of American Geographers, Eco
Society of America, Sherwood Idso, pres\ of Center for the study of CO2 and Global Change, Keith Idso, vice pres of
Center for the study of CO2 with a Phd in botany, “Climate Model Problems: VII. Clouds and Precipitation” Vol
11:20, pg online @ http://co2science.org/articles/V11/N20/EDIT.php //cndi-nf)
In this regard, the authors note that "CRMs still need parameterizations on scales smaller than their
grid resolutions and have many known and unknown deficiencies." To help stimulate progress in these
areas, therefore, the nine scientists compared the cloud and precipitation properties observed from the Clouds and
the Earth's Radiant Energy System (CERES) and Tropical Rainfall Measuring Mission (TRMM) instruments
against simulations obtained from the three-dimensional Goddard Cumulus Ensemble (GCE) model during the
South China Sea Monsoon Experiment (SCSMEX) field campaign of 18 May-18 June 1998. So what did the
researchers learn from these efforts? Zhou et al. report that: (1) "the GCE rainfall spectrum includes a
greater proportion of heavy rains than PR (Precipitation Radar) or TMI (TRMM Microwave
Imager) observations," (2) "the GCE model produces excessive condensed water loading in the
column, especially the amount of graupel as indicated by both TMI and PR observations," (3)
"the model also cannot simulate the bright band and the sharp decrease of radar reflectivity
above the freezing level in stratiform rain as seen from PR," (4) "the model has much higher
domain-averaged OLR (outgoing longwave radiation) due to smaller total cloud fraction," (5) "the
model has a more skewed distribution of OLR and effective cloud top than CERES observations,
indicating that the model's cloud field is insufficient in area extent," (6) "the GCE is ... not very
efficient in stratiform rain conditions because of the large amounts of slowly falling snow and
graupel that are simulated," and finally, in summation, that (7) "large differences between model and
observations exist in the rain spectrum and the vertical hydrometeor profiles that contribute to
the associated cloud field." In light of these several significant findings, it is clear that CRMs still have a
long way to go before they are ready for "prime time" in the complex quest to properly assess the roles of various
types of clouds and forms of precipitation in the future evolution of earth's climate in response to variations in
numerous anthropogenic and background forcings. This evaluation is not meant to denigrate the CRMs in any
way; it is merely done to indicate that the climate modeling enterprise is not yet at the stage where
implicit faith should be placed in what it currently suggests about earth's climatic response to
the ongoing rise in the air's CO2 content.

82
CO2 and WARMING CNDI 2008
N. FAROOQI
GCM’S FAIL
GCM’s fail, completely wrong predictions prove.
Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change 5/14/2008
(“Weather Extremes (Precipitation-Model Inadequacies) – Summary” Vol. 11:20, pg online @
http://co2science.org/subject/p/summaries/precipmodelinadeq.php //cndi-nf)
One of the basic predictions of atmospheric general circulation models (GCMs) is that the planet's
hydrologic cycle will intensify as the world warms, leading to an increase in both the frequency
and intensity of extreme precipitation events. In an early review of the subject, Walsh and Pittock (1998)
reported "there is some evidence from climate model studies that, in a warmer climate, rainfall events will be more
intense," and that "there is considerable evidence that the frequency of extreme rainfall events may increase in the
tropics." Upon further study, however, they were forced to conclude that "because of the insufficient
resolution of climate models and their generally crude representation of sub-grid scale and
convective processes, little confidence can be placed in any definite predictions of such
effects." Two years later, Lebel et al. (2000) compared rainfall simulations produced by a GCM
with real-world observations from West Africa for the period 1960-1990. Their analysis
revealed that the model output was affected by a number of temporal and spatial biases that led
to significant differences between observed and modeled data. The simulated rainfall totals, for
example, were significantly greater than what was typically observed, exceeding real-world
values by 25% during the dry season and 75% during the rainy season. In addition, the seasonal
cycle of precipitation was not well simulated, as the researchers found that the simulated rainy
season began too early and that the increase in precipitation was not rapid enough.
Shortcomings were also evident in the GCM's inability to accurately simulate convective
rainfall events, as it typically predicted far too much precipitation. Furthermore, it was found that
"interannual variability [was] seriously disturbed in the GCM as compared to what it [was] in the observations."
As for why the GCM performed so poorly in these several respects, Lebel et al. gave two main reasons. They said
the parameterization of rainfall processes in the GCM was much too simple and that the spatial resolution was
much too coarse.

83
CO2 and WARMING CNDI 2008
N. FAROOQI
GCM’S FAIL
GCM’s fail, tree rings prove.
Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change 5/14/2008
(“Weather Extremes (Precipitation - Model Inadequacies) – Summary”, pg online @
http://co2science.org/subject/p/summaries/precipmodelinadeq.php //cndi-nf)
Following the passage of an additional three years, Woodhouse (2003) generated a tree-ring-based history
of snow water equivalent (SWE) characteristic of the first day of April for each year of the period 1569-
1999 for the drainage basin of the Gunnison River of western Colorado, USA. Then, because "an
understanding of the long-term characteristics of snowpack variability is useful for guiding
expectations for future variability," as she phrased it, she analyzed the reconstructed SWE data
in such a way as to determine if there was there anything unusual about the SWE record of the
20th century, which hundred-year period is claimed by climate alarmists to have experienced a
warming that was unprecedented over the past two millennia. So did Woodhouse find anything
unusual? Yes, she did. She found that "the twentieth century is notable for several periods that lack
[our italics] extreme years." Specifically, she determined that "the twentieth century is notable for
several periods that contain few or no extreme years, for both low and high SWE extremes,"
and she reports that "the twentieth century also contains the lowest percent of extreme low SWE
years." These results, of course, are in direct contradiction of what state-of-the-art GCMs typically
predict should occur in response to global warming; and their failure in this regard is especially
damning, knowing it occurred during a period of global warming that is said by many have
been the most significant of the past 20 centuries.

84
CO2 and WARMING CNDI 2008
N. FAROOQI

CLIMATE MODELS WRONG


Climate Models are totally off the mark. Their predictions are the OPPOSITE of what is
actually happening.
Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change 6/11/2008
(“Floods (General) – Summary” Vol. 11:24, pg online @ http://co2science.org/subject/f/summaries/floods.php //cndi-
nf)
Over the totality of earth's land area, therefore, there does appear to have been a slight intensification of
the hydrologic cycle throughout the 20th century, which may or may not have been caused by
the concomitant warming of the globe. However, the study of Smith et al. (2006) demonstrates
that over the period 1979 to 2004, when climate alarmists claim the earth experienced a
warming that was unprecedented over the past two millennia, there was no net change in global
precipitation, i.e., the sum of precipitation over the planet's land and water surfaces). In another
effort to evaluate climate model projections of increased floods (and contemporaneous droughts!)
associated with global warming, Svensson et al. (2005) examined 20th-century river flow data for
a group of 21 stations distributed about the globe whose record lengths varied from 44 to 100
years, with an average of 68 years. This effort revealed there were slightly more stations with
significant negative trends (reduced flooding) than significant positive trends (increased flooding), while
nearly all stations showed increasing low-flow trends, approximately half of which were
significant at the 90% level. These results, according to Svensson et al., indicate "there is no general
pattern of increasing or decreasing numbers or magnitudes of floods, but there are significant increases in half of
the low-flow series," which observations are totally inconsistent with model predictions of increased
flooding and drought in response to global warming; and if the "unprecedented" temperature
increase of the 20th century could not produce the model-predicted outcome, there is little
reason to believe that further warming will either.
(Reference: Svensson, C., Kundzewicz, Z.W. and Maurer, T. 2005. Trend detection in river flow series: 2. Flood
and low-flow index series. Hydrological Sciences Journal 50: 811-824)

85
CO2 and WARMING CNDI 2008
N. FAROOQI
CLIMATE MODELS WRONG
Climate Models are Inconclusive.
Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change 6/4/2008
(“Modeling Earth’s Tropical Climate” Volume 11:23, pg online @ http://co2science.org/articles/V11/N23/C2.php
//cndi-nf)
The authors compared 79 coupled ocean-atmosphere climate simulations derived from twelve
different state-of-the-art (as of the IPCC's Third Assessment Report) climate models forced by
six different IPCC emission scenarios with observational data in order to evaluate how well they
reproduce the spatio-temporal characteristics of the El Niño-Southern Oscillation (ENSO) over
the 20th century, after which they compare the various models' 21st-century simulations of ENSO and the
Indian and West African monsoons among themselves. What was learned With respect to the past (20th
century), Paeth et al. report that "all considered climate models draw a reasonable picture of the
key features of ENSO." With respect to the future (21st century), on the other hand, they say that "the
differences between the models are stronger than between the emission scenarios," while "the
atmospheric component of ENSO and the West African monsoon are barely affected." What it means Quoting
the researchers who performed the work, "the overall conclusion is that we still cannot say
much about the future behavior of tropical climate." Hence, they say they consider their study to
be "a benchmark for further investigations with more recent models in order to document a gain
in knowledge or a stagnation over the past five years." We thus must await a similar analysis to
be performed with what Paeth et al. call "the meanwhile available Fourth Assessment Report
model data base," in order to see if the modelers have learned anything at all over the past five
years, as a five-year period of "stagnation" in the gaining of knowledge is implied by them to
be a very real possibility.
(Reference: Paeth, H., Scholten, A., Friederichs, P. and Hense, A. 2008. Uncertainties in climate change prediction:
El Niño-Southern Oscillation and monsoons. Global and Planetary Change 60: 265-288)

86
CO2 and WARMING CNDI 2008
N. FAROOQI
CLIMATE MODELS WRONG
Climate Models Fail, real world impacts are the opposite of their predictions. (No Floods)
Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change 5/28/2008
(“Floods (Asia) – Summary” Vol. 11:22, pg online @ http://co2science.org/subject/f/summaries/floodsasia.php //cndi-
nf)
Based on simulations provided by mathematical models, climate alarmists generally predict more
frequent and more severe floods in response to global warming. We here review real-world data
relative to this claim as it pertains to Asia. In a study that covered the entire continent, Cluis and Laberge
(2001) analyzed the flow records of 78 rivers distributed throughout the entire Asia-Pacific
region to see if there had been any enhancement of earth's hydrologic cycle coupled with an
increase in variability that might have led to more floods between the mean beginning and end
dates of the flow records: 1936 ± 5 years and 1988 ± 1 year, respectively. Over this period, the two
scientists determined that mean river discharges were unchanged in 67% of the cases
investigated; and where there were trends, 69% of them were downward. In addition, maximum
river discharges were unchanged in 77% of the cases investigated; and where there were trends,
72% of them were downward. Consequently, and contrary to climate-alarmist claims of global
warming leading to more frequent and more severe flooding, the two researchers observed no
changes in both of these flood characteristics in the majority of the rivers they studied; and
where there were changes, more of them were of the type that typically leads to less flooding
and less severe floods.

87
CO2 and WARMING CNDI 2008
N. FAROOQI

*******CO2 AG ANSWERS*******

88
CO2 and WARMING CNDI 2008
N. FAROOQI
BUGS
Climate Change will result in huge bug infestations that decimate crops and accelerate
livestock dieases.
Rosenzweig & Hillel '95 (Cynthia, a Research Agronomist at NASA/Goddard Institute for Space Studies in New York
City who recently led an international, interdisciplinary project to study the potential impacts of climate change on
world food supply, trade, and risk of hunger., Daniel, is Professor Emeritus of Plant and Soil Sciences at the
University of Massachusetts in Amherst, who has worked extensively in the field of environmental physics. He has also
served as Science Advisor to the Environment Department of the World Bank, "Consquences Vol. 1, No. 2", 1995
http://gcrio.gcrio.org/CONSEQUENCES/summer95/hillel.html, 7/1/2008)

Conditions are more favorable for the proliferation of insect pests in warmer climates. Longer growing
seasons will enable insects such as grasshoppers to complete a greater number of reproductive cycles during the spring,

summer, and autumn. Warmer winter temperatures may also allow larvae to winter-over in areas
where they are now limited by cold, thus causing greater infestation during the following crop
season. Altered wind patterns may change the spread of both wind-borne pests and of the
bacteria and fungi that are the agents of crop disease. Crop-pest interactions may shift as the timing of
development stages in both hosts and pests is altered. Livestock diseases may be similarly
affected. The possible increases in pest infestations may bring about greater use of chemical pesticides to
control them, a situation that will require the further development and application of integrated
pest management techniques.

Global Warming allows for a massive infestation of insects that will decimate crops .
Rosenzweig & Hillel '95 (Cynthia, a Research Agronomist at NASA/Goddard Institute for Space Studies in New York
City who recently led an international, interdisciplinary project to study the potential impacts of climate change on
world food supply, trade, and risk of hunger., Daniel, is Professor Emeritus of Plant and Soil Sciences at the
University of Massachusetts in Amherst, who has worked extensively in the field of environmental physics. He has also
served as Science Advisor to the Environment Department of the World Bank, "Consquences Vol. 1, No. 2", 1995
http://gcrio.gcrio.org/CONSEQUENCES/summer95/hillel.html, 7/1/2008)
Conditions are more favorable for the proliferation of insect pests in warmer climates. Longer growing
seasons will enable insects such as grasshoppers to complete a greater number of reproductive
cycles during the spring, summer, and autumn. Warmer winter temperatures may also allow larvae to
winter-over in areas where they are now limited by cold, thus causing greater infestation during
the following crop season. Altered wind patterns may change the spread of both wind-borne pests and of the bacteria and fungi that are the agents of crop disease. Crop-pest
interactions may shift as the timing of development stages in both hosts and pests is altered.
Livestock diseases may be similarly affected. The possible increases in pest infestations may
bring about greater use of chemical pesticides to control them, a situation that will require the
further development and application of integrated pest management techniques.

89
CO2 and WARMING CNDI 2008
N. FAROOQI

WARMING DECREASES CROP PRODUCTION

CO2 induced Climate Change will make entire fields arid, and decrease crop production.
Rosenzweig & Hillel '95 (Cynthia, a Research Agronomist at NASA/Goddard Institute for Space Studies in New York
City who recently led an international, interdisciplinary project to study the potential impacts of climate change on
world food supply, trade, and risk of hunger., Daniel, is Professor Emeritus of Plant and Soil Sciences at the
University of Massachusetts in Amherst, who has worked extensively in the field of environmental physics. He has also
served as Science Advisor to the Environment Department of the World Bank, "Consquences Vol. 1, No. 2", 1995
http://gcrio.gcrio.org/CONSEQUENCES/summer95/hillel.html, 7/1/2008)

Higher levels of atmospheric CO2 also induce plants to close the small leaf openings known as stomates through which
CO2 is absorbed and water vapor is released. Thus, under CO2 enrichment crops may use less water
even while they produce more carbohydrates. This dual effect will likely improve water-use efficiency, which is
the ratio between crop biomass and the amount of water consumed. At the same time, associated climatic effects, such as higher temperatures, changes

in rainfall and soil moisture, and increased frequencies of extreme meteorological events, could
either enhance or negate potentially beneficial effects of enhanced atmospheric CO2 on crop
physiology. In middle and higher latitudes, global warming will extend the length of the
potential growing season, allowing earlier planting of crops in the spring, earlier maturation
and harvesting, and the possibility of completing two or more cropping cycles during the same
season. Crop-producing areas may expand poleward in countries such as Canada and Russia,
although yields in higher latitudes will likely be lower due to the less fertile soils that lie there.
Many crops have become adapted to the growing-season daylengths of the middle and lower latitudes and may not
respond well to the much longer days of the high latitude summers. In warmer, lower latitude
regions, increased temperatures may accelerate the rate at which plants release CO2 in the process
of respiration, resulting in less than optimal conditions for net growth. When temperatures
exceed the optimal for biological processes, crops often respond negatively with a steep
drop in net growth and yield. If nighttime temperature minima rise more than do daytime
maxima--as is expected from greenhouse warming projections--heat stress during the day may be less severe than otherwise, but increased nighttime respiration may also reduce potential yields. Another
important effect of high temperature is accelerated physiological development, resulting in hastened maturation
and reduced yield.

90
CO2 and WARMING CNDI 2008
N. FAROOQI

WARMING DECREASES PRECIPITATION

Climate change caused by Co2 alter precipitation patterns and ultimately result in reduced
crop production, and soil aridity.
Rosenzweig & Hillel '95 (Cynthia, a Research Agronomist at NASA/Goddard Institute for Space Studies in New York
City who recently led an international, interdisciplinary project to study the potential impacts of climate change on
world food supply, trade, and risk of hunger., Daniel, is Professor Emeritus of Plant and Soil Sciences at the
University of Massachusetts in Amherst, who has worked extensively in the field of environmental physics. He has also
served as Science Advisor to the Environment Department of the World Bank, "Consquences Vol. 1, No. 2", 1995
http://gcrio.gcrio.org/CONSEQUENCES/summer95/hillel.html, 7/1/2008)

Agriculture of any kind is strongly influenced by the availability of water. Climate change will modify
rainfall, evaporation, runoff, and soil moisture storage. Changes in total seasonal precipitation or in its
pattern of variability are both important. The occurrence of moisture stress during flowering, pollination, and

grain-filling is harmful to most crops and particularly so to corn, soybeans, and wheat.
Increased evaporation from the soil and accelerated transpiration in the plants themselves will cause
moisture stress; as a result there will be a need to develop crop varieties with greater drought
tolerance. The demand for water for irrigation is projected to rise in a warmer climate, bringing
increased competition between agriculture--already the largest consumer of water resources in semiarid regions--and urban as well as
industrial users. Falling water tables and the resulting increase in the energy needed to pump
water will make the practice of irrigation more expensive, particularly when with drier
conditions more water will be required per acre. Some land--such as the region of the U.S.
supplied by the Ogallala aquifer (including parts of Nebraska, Oklahoma, Texas, Colorado, and New Mexico)--may be taken out of irrigation,
following a trend that has already begun, with loss of considerable prior investment. Peak irrigation demands are also predicted to rise due to more severe heat waves. Additional investment for

dams, reservoirs, canals, wells, pumps, and piping may be needed to develop irrigation
networks in new locations. Finally, intensified evaporation will increase the hazard of salt accumulation in the soil.

91
CO2 and WARMING CNDI 2008
N. FAROOQI

WARMING = STORMS, KILLS PLANTS

CO2 induced climate change increases the intensity of storms and decreases crop production
Rosenzweig & Hillel '95 (Cynthia, a Research Agronomist at NASA/Goddard Institute for Space Studies in New York
City who recently led an international, interdisciplinary project to study the potential impacts of climate change on
world food supply, trade, and risk of hunger., Daniel, is Professor Emeritus of Plant and Soil Sciences at the
University of Massachusetts in Amherst, who has worked extensively in the field of environmental physics. He has also
served as Science Advisor to the Environment Department of the World Bank, "Consquences Vol. 1, No. 2", 1995
http://gcrio.gcrio.org/CONSEQUENCES/summer95/hillel.html, 7/1/2008)

Extreme meteorological events, such as spells of high temperature, heavy storms, or droughts,
disrupt crop production. Recent studies have considered possible changes in the variability as
well as in the mean values of climatic variables. Where certain varieties of crops are grown near their limits of maximum temperature tolerance, such as rice in
Southern Asia, heat spells can be particularly detrimental. Similarly, frequent droughts not only reduce water supplies but also increase the amount of water needed for plant transpiration.

92
CO2 and WARMING CNDI 2008
N. FAROOQI

WARMING = SOIL EROSION

Climate Change results in soil erosion, soil degradation, and low nitrogen fixation of crops

Rosenzweig & Hillel '95 (Cynthia, a Research Agronomist at NASA/Goddard Institute for
Space Studies in New York City who recently led an international, interdisciplinary project to
study the potential impacts of climate change on world food supply, trade, and risk of hunger.,
Daniel, is Professor Emeritus of Plant and Soil Sciences at the University of Massachusetts in
Amherst, who has worked extensively in the field of environmental physics. He has also served
as Science Advisor to the Environment Department of the World Bank, "Consquences Vol. 1,
No. 2", 1995 http://gcrio.gcrio.org/CONSEQUENCES/summer95/hillel.html, 7/1/2008)

Higher air temperatures will also be felt in the soil, where warmer conditions are likely to speed the natural decomposition
of organic matter and to increase the rates of other soil processes that affect fertility. Additional
application of fertilizer may be needed to counteract these processes and to take advantage of
the potential for enhanced crop growth that can result from increased atmospheric CO2. This can come at
the cost of environmental risk, for additional use of chemicals may impact water and air quality. The continual cycling of plant nutrients--carbon,

nitrogen, phosphorus, potassium, and sulfur--in the soil-plant-atmosphere system is also likely
to accelerate in warmer conditions, enhancing CO2 and N2O greenhouse gas emissions. Nitrogen is made
available to plants in a biologically usable form through the action of bacteria in the soil. This process of nitrogen fixation, associated with greater root development, is also predicted to increase in warmer conditions and with
higher CO2, if soil moisture is not limiting. Where they occur, drier soil conditions will suppress both root growth and decomposition of organic matter, and will increase vulnerability to wind erosion, especially if winds intensify.
An expected increase in convective rainfall--caused by stronger gradients of temperature and pressure and more atmospheric moisture--may result in heavier rainfall when and where it does occur. Such "extreme precipitation
events" can cause increased soil erosion.

93
CO2 and WARMING CNDI 2008
N. FAROOQI

CO2 = DECREASED NUTRITIONAL VALUE

Though crop varieties exist in case of drastic climate change, these standby crops lead to low
nutritional value, soil degradation, and increased soil salinity
Rosenzweig & Hillel '95 (Cynthia, a Research Agronomist at NASA/Goddard Institute for Space Studies in New York
City who recently led an international, interdisciplinary project to study the potential impacts of climate change on
world food supply, trade, and risk of hunger., Daniel, is Professor Emeritus of Plant and Soil Sciences at the
University of Massachusetts in Amherst, who has worked extensively in the field of environmental physics. He has also
served as Science Advisor to the Environment Department of the World Bank, "Consquences Vol. 1, No. 2", 1995
http://gcrio.gcrio.org/CONSEQUENCES/summer95/hillel.html, 7/1/2008)

While changes in planting schedules or in crop varieties may be readily adopted, modifying the
types of crops grown does not ensure equal levels of either food production or nutritional
quality. Nor can it guarantee equal profits for farmers. Expanded irrigation may lead to groundwater depletion, soil
salinization, and waterlogging. Increased demand for water by competing sectors may limit the
viability of irrigation as an adaptation to climate change. Expansion of irrigation as a response to climate change
will be difficult and costly even under the best circumstances. Mounting societal pressures to reduce environmental
damage from agriculture will likely foster an increase in protective regulatory policies that can further complicate the
process of adaptation.

Increased CO2 levels do increase the crop yield, but they also decrease the nutritional value
because of the lack of nitrogen in the plants.
Wagner & Curtis '02 (Holly, student at Ohio State Univ.; and Peter, prof. of evolution, ecology, and organismal
biology, "INCREASED CO2 LEVELS ARE MIXED BLESSING FOR AGRICULTURE", 10/2/2002
http://researchnews.osu.edu/archive/co2plant.htm, http://researchnews.osu.edu/archive/co2plant.htm, 7/1/2008)

Greater growth and reproduction may


But that boon comes with a price, said Peter Curtis, a professor of evolution, ecology and organismal biology at Ohio State University.

hurt the nutritional value of crops. “If you’re looking for a positive spin on rising CO2 levels,
it’s that agricultural production in some areas is bound to increase,” Curtis said. “Crops have higher
yields when more CO2 is available, even if growing conditions aren’t perfect. “But there’s a
tradeoff between quantity and quality. While crops may be more productive, the resulting produce
will be of lower nutritional quality.” Even though seed size increased, the amount of nitrogen in the
seeds didn’t. Nitrogen levels decreased by an average of 14 percent across all plants except
cultivated legumes, such as peas and soybeans. For example, the total number of seeds in wheat and barley plants increased by 15 percent, but the amount of
nitrogen in the seeds declined by 20 percent. “That’s bad news,” Curtis said. “Nitrogen is important for building protein in

humans and animals. If anything, plant biologists want to boost the levels of nitrogen in crops.
“A growing global population demands more food, but humans would have to eat more of the
food to get the same nutritional benefits.” On the flip side, legumes are able to use a rise in
CO2 to increase the amount of nitrogen they take in. The result is that these plants maintain
their nutritional quality during conditions of high CO2 levels. “Ecologically speaking, changes
in the number of flowers, fruits and seeds and their nutritional quality could have far-reaching
consequences,” Curtis said. “Changes in the amount of nutrients in seeds could affect reproductive
success and seedling survival. Such changes could also have long-term effects on ecosystem functioning.”

94
CO2 and WARMING CNDI 2008
N. FAROOQI

AT: ADAPTATION

Low investment and current US agricultural policies discourage climate adaptive crop
plantings.
Rosenzweig & Hillel '95 (Cynthia, a Research Agronomist at NASA/Goddard Institute for Space Studies in New York
City who recently led an international, interdisciplinary project to study the potential impacts of climate change on
world food supply, trade, and risk of hunger., Daniel, is Professor Emeritus of Plant and Soil Sciences at the
University of Massachusetts in Amherst, who has worked extensively in the field of environmental physics. He has also
served as Science Advisor to the Environment Department of the World Bank, "Consquences Vol. 1, No. 2", 1995
http://gcrio.gcrio.org/CONSEQUENCES/summer95/hillel.html, 7/1/2008)
Present agricultural institutions and policies in the U.S. tend to discourage farm management
adaptation strategies, such as altering the mix of crops that are grown. At the policy level, obstacles to
change are created by supporting prices of crops that are not well suited to a changing climate,
by providing disaster payments when crops fail, and by restricting competition through import
quotas. Programs could be modified to expand the flexibility allowed in crop mixes, to remove
institutional barriers to the development of water markets, and to improve the basis for crop
disaster payments. Adaptation cannot be taken for granted: improvements in agriculture have always
depended upon on the investment that is made in agricultural research and infrastructure. It
would help to identify, through research, the specific ways that farmers now adapt to present variations in
climate. Do farmers attempt to compensate for a less favorable climate by applying more fertilizer, more machinery, or more labor?
Information of this nature is needed to assess potentialities for coping with more drastic climate
change. Success in adapting to possible future climate change will depend on a better definition
of what changes will occur where, and on prudent investments, made in timely fashion, in
adaptation strategies.

Climate adaptation technology is too expensive, and will offset the market balance that
farmers are dependant on.
Rosenzweig & Hillel '95 (Cynthia, a Research Agronomist at NASA/Goddard Institute for Space Studies in New York
City who recently led an international, interdisciplinary project to study the potential impacts of climate change on
world food supply, trade, and risk of hunger., Daniel, is Professor Emeritus of Plant and Soil Sciences at the
University of Massachusetts in Amherst, who has worked extensively in the field of environmental physics. He has also
served as Science Advisor to the Environment Department of the World Bank, "Consquences Vol. 1, No. 2", 1995
http://gcrio.gcrio.org/CONSEQUENCES/summer95/hillel.html, 7/1/2008)
The potential for adaptation should not lead to complacency. Agricultural adaptation to climatic
variation is not now and may never be perfect, and changes in how farmers operate or in what
they produce may cause significant disruption for people in rural regions. Indeed , some adaptive
measures may have detrimental impacts of their own. For example, were major shifts in crops to be made, as
from grain to fruit and vegetable production, farmers may find themselves more exposed to marketing problems
and credit crises brought on by higher capital and operating costs. The considerable social and
economic costs that can result from large- scale climatic extremes was exemplified by the consequences of the Mississippi River flood of 1993.

95
CO2 and WARMING CNDI 2008
N. FAROOQI

CLIMATE CHANGE DISRUPTS AGRICULTURE

Even moderate climate change drastically affects the agriculture of developing nations
Rosenzweig & Hillel '95 (Cynthia, a Research Agronomist at NASA/Goddard Institute for Space Studies in New York
City who recently led an international, interdisciplinary project to study the potential impacts of climate change on
world food supply, trade, and risk of hunger., Daniel, is Professor Emeritus of Plant and Soil Sciences at the
University of Massachusetts in Amherst, who has worked extensively in the field of environmental physics. He has also
served as Science Advisor to the Environment Department of the World Bank, "Consquences Vol. 1, No. 2", 1995
http://gcrio.gcrio.org/CONSEQUENCES/summer95/hillel.html, 7/1/2008)
Modeled studies of the sensitivity of world agriculture to potential climate change have
suggested that the overall effect of moderate climate change on world food production may be
small, as reduced production in some areas is balanced by gains in others. The same studies find, however, that vulnerability to climate change is
systematically greater in developing countries--which in most cases are located in lower, warmer latitudes. In those
regions, cereal grain yields are projected to decline under climate change scenarios, across the full range of
expected warming. Agricultural exporters in middle and high latitudes (such as the U.S., Canada, and
Australia) stand to gain, as their national production is predicted to expand, and particularly if
grain supplies are restricted and prices rise. Thus, countries with the lowest income may be the
hardest hit. Some observers believe that climate change will exert its influence so slowly--a
fraction of a degree per decade--that the effects will be barely noticeable in the midst of other technological and economic changes. Others emphasize the
need to study the potential for what are called "threshold effects"--i.e., the abrupt and
disproportionate shifts in production that may be triggered when critical levels of certain
factors are surpassed. Unexpected consequences or "surprises" may well accompany the buildup of greenhouse gases. Even if climate changes
gradually, it will slowly affect the range of options available for agriculture in any given region.
Under changing climate conditions, farmers' past experience will be a less reliable predictor of
what is to come. These and other uncertainties must be taken into account explicitly in climate change impact studies.

96
CO2 and WARMING CNDI 2008
N. FAROOQI
COMPUTER MODELS
Computer based models provide a viable estimate of what can occur as a result of global
climate change
Rosenzweig & Hillel '95 (Cynthia, a Research Agronomist at NASA/Goddard Institute for Space Studies in New York
City who recently led an international, interdisciplinary project to study the potential impacts of climate change on
world food supply, trade, and risk of hunger., Daniel, is Professor Emeritus of Plant and Soil Sciences at the
University of Massachusetts in Amherst, who has worked extensively in the field of environmental physics. He has also
served as Science Advisor to the Environment Department of the World Bank, "Consquences Vol. 1, No. 2", 1995
http://gcrio.gcrio.org/CONSEQUENCES/summer95/hillel.html, 7/1/2008)
The critical levels of climatic change that affect crop yields can be identified through computer-
based sensitivity tests and crop models. Results of a crop modeling study that estimated the effects of a 2°C and 4°C temperature rise on yields of wheat, rice, corn, and
soybeans are shown in Fig. 3. They were derived by first modeling the simulated effect on crop yields for a wide

range of latitudes and then applying what was found to current production, nation by nation, to
derive a result for the world as a whole. When only temperature effects were considered,
aggregate crop yields showed an ever increasing drop in response to higher temperatures, with
loss in yields approximately doubling from the +2 to +4°C cases. When the direct physiological
effects of CO2 on crop growth and water use were included, the picture changed, but only for
the lower temperature increase: a 2°C temperature rise increased aggregated crop yields on a
global basis, while a 4°C rise led to an overall decrease, as is shown in the figure. The salutary effect of a 2°
increase did not apply throughout the world: in some modeled locations in semi-arid and subtropical regions, even a 2° rise resulted in diminished yield. These

results suggest the existence of a possible temperature threshold affecting global grain yields,
given current crop varieties and crop management techniques.

97
CO2 and WARMING CNDI 2008
N. FAROOQI
CLIMATE CHANGE DISRUPTS WEATHER
Any factor affected by climate change can drastically disrupt natural weather patterns and
result in natural and societal problems
Rosenzweig & Hillel '95 (Cynthia, a Research Agronomist at NASA/Goddard Institute for Space Studies in New York
City who recently led an international, interdisciplinary project to study the potential impacts of climate change on
world food supply, trade, and risk of hunger., Daniel, is Professor Emeritus of Plant and Soil Sciences at the
University of Massachusetts in Amherst, who has worked extensively in the field of environmental physics. He has also
served as Science Advisor to the Environment Department of the World Bank, "Consquences Vol. 1, No. 2", 1995
http://gcrio.gcrio.org/CONSEQUENCES/summer95/hillel.html, 7/1/2008)
An even more challenging task is to estimate the probability of coincidental events that might
happen in conjunction with global warming, spanning the range between low probability
catastrophic events (called "surprises") and higher probability gradual changes in climate and associated
environmental effects. A seemingly small change in one variable--for example, rainfall--may trigger a major
unsuspected change in another; for example, droughts or floods might possibly disrupt the transport of grain on rivers. Moreover, one "surprise"
may then lead to another in a cascade, since biophysical and social systems are interconnected.
Computer-aided studies based on what are called complex systems and chaos theory may
provide conceptual and analytical tools for anticipating and preparing for surprises, in
agriculture as in other systems. Identifying potential surprises and communicating them to the
public and to policy makers may help build the resilience that is needed to anticipate and
mitigate harmful effects in timely fashion. Surprises related to global climate change may be
both environmental and societal. Among the first of these are changes in patterns of
atmospheric circulation and precipitation on the seasonal- to-interannual time scale, such as
might result from varying patterns of El Niñ o events in the eastern equatorial Pacific. Such inter- seasonal
variations (rather than the very gradual change in long- term averages) are likely to be the climatic effects that farmers actually feel in their year-to-year operations. Among the second are increases in the migration of people across
national borders in consequence of famine.

98
CO2 and WARMING CNDI 2008
N. FAROOQI
GCM’S = INDICATORS OF CLIMATE CHANGE
(G)lobal (C)limate (M)odels provide data that allow scientists to make decisions on how best
to adapt to global warming
Rosenzweig & Hillel '95 (Cynthia, a Research Agronomist at NASA/Goddard Institute for Space Studies in New York
City who recently led an international, interdisciplinary project to study the potential impacts of climate change on
world food supply, trade, and risk of hunger., Daniel, is Professor Emeritus of Plant and Soil Sciences at the
University of Massachusetts in Amherst, who has worked extensively in the field of environmental physics. He has also
served as Science Advisor to the Environment Department of the World Bank, "Consquences Vol. 1, No. 2", 1995
http://gcrio.gcrio.org/CONSEQUENCES/summer95/hillel.html, 7/1/2008)
Such events can be better accommodated if their causes and potential effects are anticipated in
advance. Their study can be aided by efforts to integrate across conventional scientific
disciplines, to support a variety of research approaches, and to consider results that lie outside
the range of conventional wisdom and experience. Beyond the theoretical study of
environmental surprise, it seems also worthwhile to increase the flexibility of social structures with a view to reducing vulnerability to abrupt perturbations. Such societal
preparedness might include an intentional diversification of productive and technological
systems (such as provision for reserve rangeland and supplementary irrigation for the eventuality of drought), the establishment of disaster coping and
entitlement systems, and the creation of management systems that are capable of adapting to
and learning from surprises. Adjustments in livestock populations represent one of the first lines
of defense against the surprises that can result from short-term fluctuations in crop production.

99
CO2 and WARMING CNDI 2008
N. FAROOQI
WARMING = AG SHIFT
Global Climate Change will shift areas of agricultural productivity and have negative
inmpacts on the environment
Rosenzweig & Hillel '95 (Cynthia, a Research Agronomist at NASA/Goddard Institute for Space Studies in New York
City who recently led an international, interdisciplinary project to study the potential impacts of climate change on
world food supply, trade, and risk of hunger., Daniel, is Professor Emeritus of Plant and Soil Sciences at the
University of Massachusetts in Amherst, who has worked extensively in the field of environmental physics. He has also
served as Science Advisor to the Environment Department of the World Bank, "Consquences Vol. 1, No. 2", 1995
http://gcrio.gcrio.org/CONSEQUENCES/summer95/hillel.html, 7/1/2008)
Agriculture is not a wholly benign actor on the environment, as it causes accelerated soil
erosion by water and wind, through cultivation, and often introduces nitrates and other
chemicals into water supplies through the application of chemical fertilizers and pesticides. The
concept of "sustainable agriculture" endeavors to reduce chemical inputs and energy use in farming

systems, in order to minimize environmental damage and to ensure longer-term productivity.


Most agricultural assessments of global environmental change made to date have not focused
explicitly on sustainability issues, and have neglected the considerable impacts of shifting
agricultural zones, alterations in commercial fertilizer and pesticide use, and changes in the
demand for water resources.
Climate change can impact agricultural sustainability in two interrelated ways: first, by
diminishing the long-term ability of agroecosystems to provide food and fiber for the world's
population; and second, by inducing shifts in agricultural regions that may encroach upon
natural habitats, at the expense of floral and faunal diversity. Global warming may encourage the
expansion of agricultural activities into regions now occupied by natural ecosystems such as
forests, particularly at mid- and high-latitudes. Forced encroachments of this sort may thwart the processes of natural
selection of climatically-adapted native crops and other species.

100
CO2 and WARMING CNDI 2008
N. FAROOQI
WARMING DESTROYS REGIONAL AG
Though overall affects of Global Warming may be small, regional agricultural difficulties will
increase.
Rosenzweig & Hillel '95 (Cynthia, a Research Agronomist at NASA/Goddard Institute for Space Studies in New York
City who recently led an international, interdisciplinary project to study the potential impacts of climate change on
world food supply, trade, and risk of hunger., Daniel, is Professor Emeritus of Plant and Soil Sciences at the
University of Massachusetts in Amherst, who has worked extensively in the field of environmental physics. He has also
served as Science Advisor to the Environment Department of the World Bank, "Consquences Vol. 1, No. 2", 1995
http://gcrio.gcrio.org/CONSEQUENCES/summer95/hillel.html, 7/1/2008)

While the overall, global impact of climate change on agricultural production may be small,
regional vulnerabilities to food deficits may increase, due to problems of distributing and
marketing food to specific regions and groups of people. For subsistence farmers, and more so for people who now
face a shortage of food, lower yields may result not only in measurable economic losses, but also in

malnutrition and even famine.

101
CO2 and WARMING CNDI 2008
N. FAROOQI

NEG ARGS = GOVT INACTION


Belief that agriculture is a self correcting process combined with an optimistic outlook of
CO2's effects on crop yields lead to government inaction on global warming
Rosenzweig & Hillel '95 (Cynthia, a Research Agronomist at NASA/Goddard Institute for Space Studies in New York
City who recently led an international, interdisciplinary project to study the potential impacts of climate change on
world food supply, trade, and risk of hunger., Daniel, is Professor Emeritus of Plant and Soil Sciences at the
University of Massachusetts in Amherst, who has worked extensively in the field of environmental physics. He has also
served as Science Advisor to the Environment Department of the World Bank, "Consquences Vol. 1, No. 2", 1995
http://gcrio.gcrio.org/CONSEQUENCES/summer95/hillel.html, 7/1/2008)

The second notion, which can be equally misleading, is a blind faith in agriculture as a self-correcting process: that through
forces of the market and self-preservation farmers can and will readily and fully adapt to
climate change as it occurs. They will certainly make every effort to do so, but the efforts of
farmers may well be constrained or even thwarted by factors beyond their control. In the
tropics, inadequate agricultural research, training, and credit now limit the capacity of farmers
to adapt to climate change. In all areas of the world the necessary adjustments (such as substituting crops, introducing or intensifying irrigation, and modifying field operations such as tillage or
pest control) may be too costly for many farmers to implement. Such changes may entail painful social dislocations as well as costly

capital investments. Even for those who can afford such changes, the end result--measured in
terms of production and income--will not necessarily compensate for the direct costs involved;
heat-tolerant and especially drought-tolerant crops or varieties, for example, will likely have
lower yielding potentials. Moreover, natural ecosystems such as forests may be less adaptable than
agricultural systems to rapid change and may therefore prove more vulnerable to climate
change with respect to such factors as species dieback and biodiversity. Either of these potentially misleading notions, along with
the convenient expectation by some plant scientists that the physiological effects of enhanced CO2 will be overwhelmingly

positive, may lull decision makers and the public at large into complacency regarding global
warming and--at the very least--could delay effective action. Global warming is, in our opinion, a real phenomenon that is likely to engender
serious consequences.

102
CO2 and WARMING CNDI 2008
N. FAROOQI

103
CO2 and WARMING CNDI 2008
N. FAROOQI

104