UCI Earth System Science: Shoddy Forestry Research
In June 2008 I warned UCI’s Earth System Science department that if they didn’t stop their blind pursuit of global warming scare tactics, they would soon be thoroughly embarassed. Apparently these onward marching pilgrims just can’t help themselves as the cult of global warming continues to survive.
In a new report released this week by UC Irvine researchers and graduate students, UCI ESS claims to have made another revolutionary discovery in the realm (religion) of global warming: they claim that trees across Southern California are ‘migrating’ to cooler climates due to the warming of the planet.
The scientists ruled out air pollution and fire as reasons for the tree deaths and habitat shift. “For one thing, air pollution, specifically ozone, is a big killer of trees in the mountains of Southern California,” [Anne] Kelly said. But, she explained, the leaves and needles of trees attacked by ozone are speckled. That wasn’t the case with these. In addition, she said, the trees at the higher elevation also would also have fallen victim if the culprit were ozone.
Really, Kelly? Because if you and your team had consulted forestry experts instead of college professors whose faulty research helps them steal federal research grants by causing alarmism, you would have discovered that California foresters have known about this “migration phenomenon” since the 1950s which they called the ‘X-disease’ and that it is indeed caused by air pollution, among other logical factors like changes in elevation and climate fluctuations. Not only so, but this 60-year old research was carried out in the same exact region of California where you performed your juvenile, misleading research.
On top of all that, you attempt to contribute to global warming alarmism by claiming that thousands of trees are dying at an ever-increasing rate. While it might be true that many sensitive trees like Jeffrey pines have died at lower elevations in past decades from L.A. air pollution being blown out to desert basins, many other robust species like conifers have taken their place at lower elevations. And obviously the air pollution that sits in valley basins has an upper limit (literally) of how much damage it can do to mountain forests at high elevations – yet you foolishly believe that high elevation trees would be showing the same degree of pollution if indeed air pollution is the main cause of X-disease? What? I never knew that scientific theories were so closed-minded let alone so black and white… please go research air density!
Shall we move on to the below photo you included in your research report? Below we see that small shrub oaks have “taken the place of dead firs and pines” in the Santa Rosa Mountains. Firstly, if this is true, then why didn’t you emphasize the changing balance of forest species in California forests instead of pushing blanket alarmism? Secondly, did you know that sensitive species like firs and pines require a lot of space between them to maximize exposure to sunlight? Have you ever visited Lake Arrowhead and seen the dense conifer forests that have replaced firs and pines at lower elevations? Do you even know the difference between all these trees and their growth patterns?
…you might consider adding the following image to your next report that you submit to the National Academy of Sciences: