Metmike, when you get a chance could you read this article and either respond directly to Alan or list here how you would respond. I wanted to but you are so much better on making the counter arguments to Alan's silly way of thinking. If you respond directly it would be very informative if we would be allowed to read the correspondence. Thanks in advance.
Not ignoring you, just tied up and away from my computer most of the time yesterday. I'll give you some great authentic stuff to reply to this guy, who, being in agriculture should know better than to believe model data from a source that has been really wrong for decades about a subject that....with some basic homework and critical, objective thinking, he would see himself.
"Early reviews of the report, compiled by 91 scientists from 40 nations who cited more than 6,000 climate-related studies, suggest more denial, inaction, and delay. The White House openly dismissed it; Congress has no hearings scheduled to review it; and few farm and commodity groups even noted its publication.
Why?
No socio-economic group anywhere has been or will be affected more by climate change than the world’s farmers and ranchers. Climate is as key an element to their prosperity or failure as land and water, and nothing has more impact on either than the weather."
This is the reason that agriculture is dismissing it:
The biggest effect of CO2 on life and agriculture……….by a wide margin is shown below:
The Social Benefit of Carbon: $3.5 Trillion in Agricultural Productivity
Pick a plant from A to Z and see how it responded to enriched CO2 levels………thousands of studies are extremely compelling. We rescued the planet from dangerously low levels of CO2.
Reducing it back to levels of 150 years ago would cause 1 billion people on this planet to starve within 3 years because of a reduction in crop yields and world food production of around 25%.