[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help] 

Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

Consequences of Mild, Moderate & Severe Plagiarism

Plagiarism: 5 Potential Legal Consequences

When Philadelphia’s Foul-Mouthed Cop-Turned-Mayor Invented White Identity Politics

Trump Wanted to Pardon Assange and Snowden. Blocked by RINOs.

What The Pentagon Is Planning Against Trump Will Make Your Blood Run Cold Once Revealed

How Trump won the Amish vote in Pennsylvania

FEC Filings Show Kamala Harris Team Blew Funds On Hollywood Stars, Private Jets

Israel’s Third Lebanon War is underway: What you need to know

LEAK: First Behind-The-Scenes Photos Of Kamala After Getting DESTROYED By Trump | Guzzling Wine!🍷

Scott Ritter Says: Netanyahu's PAINFUL Stumble Pushes Tel Aviv Into Its WORST NIGHTMARE

These Are Trump's X-Men | Dr. Jordan B. Peterson

Houthis (Yemen) Breached THAAD. Israel Given a Dud Defense!!

Yuma County Arizona Doubles Its Outstanding Votes Overnight They're Stealing the Race from Kari Lake

Trump to withdraw U.S. troops from northern Syria

Trump and RFK created websites for the people to voice their opinion on people the government is hiring

Woke Georgia DA Deborah Gonzalez pummeled in re-election bid after refusing Laken Riley murder case

Trump has a choice: Obliterate Palestine or end the war

Rod Blagojevich: Kamala’s Corruption, & the Real Cause of the Democrat Party’s Spiral Into Insanity

Israel's Defense Shattered by Hezbollah's New Iranian Super Missiles | Prof. Mohammad Marandi

Trump Wins Arizona in Clean Sweep of Swing States in US Election

TikTok Harlots Pledge in Droves: No More Pussy For MAGA Fascists!

Colonel Douglas Macgregor:: Honoring Veteran's Day

Low-Wage Nations?

Trump to pull US out of Paris climate agreement NYT

Pixar And Disney Animator Bolhem Bouchiba Sentenced To 25 Years In Prison

Six C-17s, C-130s deploy US military assets to Northeastern Syria

SNL cast members unveil new "hot jacked" Trump character in MAGA-friendly cold open

Here's Why These Geopolitical And Financial Chokepoints Need Your Attention...

Former Army Chief Moshe Ya'alon Calls for Civil Disobedience to Protest Netanyahu Government

The Deep State against Trump


Science/Tech
See other Science/Tech Articles

Title: Cosmic pattern to UK tree growth
Source: BBC
URL Source: http://news.bbc.co.uk/earth/hi/earth_news/newsid_8311000/8311373.stm
Published: Oct 19, 2009
Author: Matt Walker
Post Date: 2009-10-19 15:37:48 by farmfriend
Ping List: *Agriculture-Environment*     Subscribe to *Agriculture-Environment*
Keywords: None
Views: 152
Comments: 9

Cosmic pattern to UK tree growth

By Matt Walker
Editor, Earth News

The growth of British trees appears to follow a cosmic pattern, with trees growing faster when high levels of cosmic radiation arrive from space.

Researchers made the discovery studying how growth rings of spruce trees have varied over the past half a century.

As yet, they cannot explain the pattern, but variation in cosmic rays impacted tree growth more than changes in temperature or precipitation.

The study is published in the scientific journal New Phytologist.

"We were originally interested in a different topic, the climatological factors influencing forest growth," says Ms Sigrid Dengel a postgraduate researcher at the Institute of Atmospheric and Environmental Science at the University of Edinburgh.

To do this, Ms Dengel and University of Edinburgh colleagues Mr Dominik Aeby and Professor John Grace obtained slices of spruce tree trunks.

These had been freshly-felled from the Forest of Ae in Dumfriesshire, Scotland, by Forest Research, the research branch of the UK's Forestry Commission.

The trees had been planted in 1953 and felled in 2006.

The researchers froze the trunk slices, to prevent the wood shrinking, then scanned them on to a computer and used software to count the number and width of the growth rings.

As the trees aged, they showed a usual decline in growth.

However, during a number of years, the trees' growth also particularly slowed. These years correlated with periods when a relatively low level of cosmic rays reached the Earth's surface.

When the intensity of cosmic rays reaching the Earth's surface was higher, the rate of tree growth was faster.

The effect is not large, but it is statistically significant.

The intensity of cosmic rays also correlates better with the changes in tree growth than any other climatological factor, such as varying levels of temperature or precipitation over the years.

"The correlation between growth and cosmic rays was moderately high, but the correlation with the climatological variables was barely visible," Ms Dengel told the BBC.

Here comes the Sun

Cosmic rays are actually energetic particles, mainly protons, as well as electrons and the nuclei of helium atoms, that stream through space before hitting the Earth's atmosphere.

The levels of cosmic rays reaching the Earth go up and down according to the activity of the Sun, which follows an 11-year cycle.

Every 11 years or so, the Sun becomes more active, producing a peak of sunspots. These sunspots carry a magnetic field that blocks and slows the path of energetic particles.

When the researchers looked at their data, they found that tree growth was highest during periods of low sunspot activity, when most cosmic rays reached Earth.

But growth slowed during the four periods of cosmic ray-blocking high sunspot activity, which have occurred between 1965 and 2005.

"We tried to correlate the width of the rings, i.e. the growth rate, to climatological factors like temperature. We also thought it would be interesting to look for patterns related to solar activity, as a few people previously have suggested such a link," explains Ms Dengel.

"We found them. And the relation of the rings to the solar cycle was much stronger than it was to any of the climatological factors we had looked at. We were quite hesitant at first, as solar cycles have been a controversial topic in climatology."

"As for the mechanism, we are puzzled."

Ms Dengel's team proposes two main hypotheses as to how cosmic ray particles could influence the growth of trees.

The first idea is that cosmic rays ionise gases in the atmosphere, creating molecules around which clouds condense, therefore increasing cloud over.

This mechanism is hotly debated among scientists, and evidence for it is weak.

One study published in 2006 suggested it may account for as little as 2% of the variation in cloud cover across the UK.

But if it does occur, then an increase in cloud cover and haze would diffuse the amount of solar radiation reaching the trees.

As diffuse radiation penetrates forest canopies better than direct light, it would increase the amount of radiation that plants capture, and increase photosynthesis by trees, boosting growth.

Explaining the unexplained

"Or there is some direct effect," says Ms Dengel.

What that might be is unknown, but experiments in space have shown that cosmic rays can have some positive impacts on biological materials.

Ms Dengel says that much more work needs to be done to investigate the effect further, and their results have received a mixed reaction from other scientists.

"We sent the paper to 161 international colleagues. We are still harvesting the emails. We've identified four groups who would like to work with us on this.

"Locally, one of our colleagues is a cloud physicist. He was encouraging but sceptical at the same time."

If further research backs up the team's findings, the implications could be significant.

"We want to repeat this work for larger data sets, and understand the mechanism better, before we speculate," says Ms Dengel.

But the influence of cosmic rays could resolve other as yet unexplained cycles in tree growth found in studies in North America.

It also suggests the amount of aerosols that humans emit into the atmosphere could impact tree growth, as high levels of aerosols cause "global dimming", an effect that occurs when the levels of light reaching the Earth's surface fall.

"If it is true that the mechanism is all about rays enhancing diffuse radiation, it would mean that 'global dimming' and 'global brightening' would have a big effect on tree growth and therefore on the absorption of carbon dioxide," warns Ms Dengel. Subscribe to *Agriculture-Environment*

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

#1. To: All, *Agriculture-Environment* (#0)

As yet, they cannot explain the pattern, but variation in cosmic rays impacted tree growth more than changes in temperature or precipitation.

This will effect them using tree rings as proxies for temperature.


"Greenhouse gases do not act as a blanket around the earth and they do not keep the atmosphere warm. ... greenhouse gases emit more radiation than they absorb and this ongoing radiation loss tends to cool the atmosphere at between 1C and 2C per day, a fact known for more than 50 years. And yet we continue to get the simplistic explanation that greenhouse gases warm the atmosphere and so more greenhouse gases will warm the atmosphere more. No wonder the public is taken in!" --William Kininmonth, meteorologist , 1791

farmfriend  posted on  2009-10-19   15:44:16 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#2. To: farmfriend (#1)

Any correlation between the rays and warming or cooling?

Iran Truth Now!

Lod  posted on  2009-10-19   17:09:02 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#3. To: farmfriend (#0)

So what if the level of cosmic rays were to increase a lot more? I hear that it wipes out living beings.

The Truth of 911 Shall Set You Free From The Lie

Horse  posted on  2009-10-19   17:19:04 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#4. To: Lod (#2)

Any correlation between the rays and warming or cooling?

Other than the correlation with sun activity? Yes, it does effect cloud formation which effects cooling, maybe. There was also a study that showed interaction, direct energy transfer, with the suns magnetic field and Earth's.

They really don't know enough about the interactions to say what the over all effects are. They have tried really hard to discount solar influence, which effects how much cosmic rays hit us, in order to support the AGW/CO2 hypothesis. Even this study, I believe, started out as trying to show lack of solar influence and strong CO2 influence. Surprise!

I have to give them credit for looking at the solar influence even if their original assumptions and motivations were wrong. That's how science is supposed to be done.


"Greenhouse gases do not act as a blanket around the earth and they do not keep the atmosphere warm. ... greenhouse gases emit more radiation than they absorb and this ongoing radiation loss tends to cool the atmosphere at between 1C and 2C per day, a fact known for more than 50 years. And yet we continue to get the simplistic explanation that greenhouse gases warm the atmosphere and so more greenhouse gases will warm the atmosphere more. No wonder the public is taken in!" --William Kininmonth, meteorologist , 1791

farmfriend  posted on  2009-10-19   17:24:05 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#5. To: Horse (#3)

So what if the level of cosmic rays were to increase a lot more? I hear that it wipes out living beings.

Well they believe that is the case with close novas. Recent studies have shown that increased cosmic radiation when solar activity is low as being beneficial. Who knows, it may spur genetic mutations. Those can go either way.


"Greenhouse gases do not act as a blanket around the earth and they do not keep the atmosphere warm. ... greenhouse gases emit more radiation than they absorb and this ongoing radiation loss tends to cool the atmosphere at between 1C and 2C per day, a fact known for more than 50 years. And yet we continue to get the simplistic explanation that greenhouse gases warm the atmosphere and so more greenhouse gases will warm the atmosphere more. No wonder the public is taken in!" --William Kininmonth, meteorologist , 1791

farmfriend  posted on  2009-10-19   17:25:56 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#6. To: farmfriend. all (#4)

Even this study, I believe, started out as trying to show lack of solar influence and strong CO2 influence. Surprise!

I have to give them credit for looking at the solar influence even if their original assumptions and motivations were wrong. That's how science is supposed to be done.

Yep.

This CO2 hysteria must be shown the light of day. And the most elementary science behind the plants' need for CO2 - without it, everything green is a goner, and so are we.

Iran Truth Now!

Lod  posted on  2009-10-19   17:33:37 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#7. To: farmfriend (#0)

And the relation of the rings to the solar cycle was much stronger than it was to any of the climatological factors we had looked at.

Oops.

We were quite hesitant at first

I'll bet they ran those numbers 500 different ways, but honesty, or at least novelty, won the day.

If blacks, Hispanics, and immigrants are excluded from the American results, our student performance rises from 12th, to 2nd in reading and 5th in math.

Prefrontal Vortex  posted on  2009-10-19   18:53:56 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#8. To: Lod (#6)

This CO2 hysteria must be shown the light of day.

Exactly and who better to do it than honest scientists who may be on the AGW side but get "surprising" results to their studies.


"Greenhouse gases do not act as a blanket around the earth and they do not keep the atmosphere warm. ... greenhouse gases emit more radiation than they absorb and this ongoing radiation loss tends to cool the atmosphere at between 1C and 2C per day, a fact known for more than 50 years. And yet we continue to get the simplistic explanation that greenhouse gases warm the atmosphere and so more greenhouse gases will warm the atmosphere more. No wonder the public is taken in!" --William Kininmonth, meteorologist , 1791

farmfriend  posted on  2009-10-19   21:02:17 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#9. To: Prefrontal Vortex (#7)

I'll bet they ran those numbers 500 different ways, but honesty, or at least novelty, won the day.

Oh exactly. You can tell by the way the article was written that these are pro AGW people who were just covering their collective behinds by looking at the solar aspect. I have to give them kudos for not only looking at the other side but admitting their findings when it came up contrary to their beliefs. That's how science is supposed to be done.


"Greenhouse gases do not act as a blanket around the earth and they do not keep the atmosphere warm. ... greenhouse gases emit more radiation than they absorb and this ongoing radiation loss tends to cool the atmosphere at between 1C and 2C per day, a fact known for more than 50 years. And yet we continue to get the simplistic explanation that greenhouse gases warm the atmosphere and so more greenhouse gases will warm the atmosphere more. No wonder the public is taken in!" --William Kininmonth, meteorologist , 1791

farmfriend  posted on  2009-10-19   21:05:28 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest


[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help]