nafex@lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: North American Fruit Explorers mailing list at ibiblio
List archive
Re: [NAFEX] California’s tree crops are screwed, says new report
- From: Richard Harrison <rharrison922@yahoo.com>
- To: North American Fruit Explorers <nafex@lists.ibiblio.org>
- Subject: Re: [NAFEX] California’s tree crops are screwed, says new report
- Date: Fri, 24 Jul 2009 06:28:03 -0700 (PDT)
mIEKAL a ND,
I read the report you cited as well as your article. Personally I wouldn't take too much stock in the conclusions for several reasons:
1. The data and methodology used appears quite flawed. They only used data from 2 years 1950 and 1999. This is statistically VERY unsound. A reliable method to determine average chill hours is calculated on a number of years averaged together---rather than 2 years "taken out of context". Recently, I attended a fruit meeting inwhich the speaker supported the global warming theory, but showed the most recent USDA zone chart---which indicated an INCREASE in the average chill hours received. It is based on a 10 year average. Also, his chill hour chart for Alabama showed an INCREASE in chill hours recorded in the last 10 years over the previous 10.
The other big flaw in this elite report is that the "experts" used several models to predict the chill hours for the next 100 years. Science can't even predict with reasonable accuracy if its going to rain tomorow! So, why put ANY stock into a report predicting the "weathe a hundred years from now?
Also, remember GW is a theory, not a fact. If you care to look at the National Snow and Ice Data Center, you can find plenty of evidence to refute the theory of Global Warming itself.
The methods used by the authors of this report is VERY questionable at the very least.
Richard Harrison, NW FL
IF chill hours WERE decreasing, California(and Florida) has many low-chill varieties of fruit trees that they have developed and are developing more all the time. Changing to them would be a theoretical solution--IF chill were decreasing.
--- On Fri, 7/24/09, mIEKAL aND <qazingulaza@gmail.com> wrote:
|
-
[NAFEX] California’s tree crops are screwed, says new report,
mIEKAL aND, 07/24/2009
-
Re: [NAFEX] California’s tree crops are screwed, says new report,
Richard Harrison, 07/24/2009
-
Re: [NAFEX] California’s tree crops are screwed, says new report,
Stephen Sadler, 07/24/2009
-
Re: [NAFEX] California’s tree crops are screwed, says new report,
Stephen Sadler, 07/24/2009
-
Re: [NAFEX] California’s tree crops are screwed, says new report,
Richard Harrison, 07/25/2009
-
Re: [NAFEX] California’s tree crops are screwed, says new report,
Stephen Sadler, 07/25/2009
-
Re: [NAFEX] California’s tree crops are screwed, says new report,
Richard Harrison, 07/25/2009
- Re: [NAFEX] Californiaâs tree crops are screwed, says new report, Betty Mayfield, 07/26/2009
- Re: [NAFEX] California’s tree crops are screwed, says new report, Stephen Sadler, 07/26/2009
- Re: [NAFEX] quality of reporting studies (was California tree crops), Road's End Farm, 07/26/2009
-
Re: [NAFEX] California’s tree crops are screwed, says new report,
Richard Harrison, 07/25/2009
-
Re: [NAFEX] California’s tree crops are screwed, says new report,
Stephen Sadler, 07/25/2009
-
Re: [NAFEX] California’s tree crops are screwed, says new report,
Richard Harrison, 07/25/2009
-
Re: [NAFEX] California’s tree crops are screwed, says new report,
Stephen Sadler, 07/24/2009
-
Re: [NAFEX] California’s tree crops are screwed, says new report,
Stephen Sadler, 07/24/2009
-
Re: [NAFEX] California’s tree crops are screwed, says new report,
Richard Harrison, 07/24/2009
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.