Has a Period of Global Cooling Begun?

[Paul Cherubini]

A popular www.accuweather.com meteorologist thinks global temps will be cooling to levels we saw back in the late 1970's:
http://www.accuweather.com/video/731462 ... e-will-(is)-cool(i.asp

[Paul Cherubini]

Here's the correct link:
http://www.accuweather.com/blogs/climat ... cord-1.asp

[blazing star]

The person citing a period of global cooling is a weather forecaster. Weather and climate are too very different things. Do you have any such links from someone who studies climate patterns and not weather?

[Steve Rankin]

The last decade 2000-2009 was the hottest on record. 2010 has tied with 2005 as the warmest year on record. The meteorologist that you link to at AccuWeather is not a climate scientist and has been been thoroughly debunked. He declined to take a modest bet from climate blogger Joe Romm that his (the weather forecasters) forecast for sea ice recovery is dead wrong. The anti-science crowd would also have us believe that Monsanto has had absolutely nothing to do with declining Monarch Butterfly breeding habitat.

[blazing star]

Hi Steve,

You can review various threads here to see of the accuracy of your statement concerning your Monsanto correlation regarding this poster that rejects science. But I'm guessing you already did this.

Welcome to the board.

[Paul Cherubini]

The anti-science crowd would also have us believe that Monsanto has had absolutely nothing to do with declining Monarch Butterfly breeding habitat.

I agree the global warming debate has remarkable similarities to the Monsanto debate. Here’s how:

With regard to the Monsanto debate, some claim the monarch migration is threatened by Monsanto because Roundup herbicide has caused a decline in Monarch Butterfly breeding habitat. But the folks at Monsanto could point out that monarchs continue to be spectacularly abundant in the farming areas where Roundup herbicide is used most extensively:
Bird Island, Minnesota on Aug. 28, 2010:
Video still photo: http://i959.photobucket.com/albums/ae78/18R-C/bia.jpg
Actual video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j4e3S2sm13g
hence the monarch is not being seriously affected by Monsanto products.

Same situation with regard to the global warming debate; some claim serious catastrophic environmental impacts from the warming whereas the other side has pointed out many reasons why humans, plants and animals will have time to adapt to the warming, assuming there is continued warming, (no one knows for sure, just like no one knows for sure why the world cooled between 1940-1975 even though carbon dioxide levels were increasing during that period). Plus the fact that the world will run out of fossil fuels to burn sometime within the next 100 years so carbon dioxide emissions will be automatically reduced.

[blazing star]

Monsanto and Round up do not help Monarchs in any way.

Concerning the climate, you posted a link to a weather person. If you have any viable information from another legitimate source, please post.

[crazymilkweedman]

Ice core samples show that Major climate changes occur as long term trends towards hot or cold with frequent interuptions of opposite to trend periods within the overall trend. For example the trend may be a warming trend overall with cool periods measured in years within that warming trend. Daily and singular year events aren't considered a trend.
As an example we currently are experiencing a warming trend, validated by higher average temps and also verified by loss of ice cap and glacial mass. Does this mean we cant have a cold year or two? No.Is this caused by man? Well alot of things influence the temperature of the earth, such as solar flare activity, phase and strength of the earths magnetic feild, volcanic activity etc etc.Since It has occured many times over in the earths climate history prior to man, it's doubtful that its completely caused by man but probable that we have enhanced the rate of change. However if you compare the current temperatures to say the Jurassic period then we are much cooler on average compared to then!

[Paul Cherubini]

This graph shows how global warming ended about 10 years ago and substantiates the belief of some meteorologists like Joe Bastardi that world temperatures will continue to cool slightly for the next 20-30 years:

[crazymilkweedman]

I'm not going to argue with you about the weather..like I said, trends within overall trends, not measured in days or even years..I'm just telling you what the ice core samples tell us.peace

[blazing star]

That graph does not show that warming ended 10 years ago. It doesn't even contain any data for the past 11 years. By absence of such data, you are deducing that the warming trend ceased? Also in what context was that graph depicted. How about a link to the website so that we have the whole context in which the graph was created?

Oh wait, I found it. Here you go Paul. The data, and information you posted, is completely out of context. Here is a link to the website from where you obtained the graph and below is a snippet of summary of the data. http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/global/

"The combined global land and ocean surface temperature during March–May 2011 was 14.23°C (57.65°F) and ranked as the 10th warmest such period on record."

[Paul Cherubini]

That graph does not show that warming ended 10 years ago. [/i]

Look again. The graph shows no warming between 1998-2010. That is what some climate people expected: http://wattsupwiththat.com/
"The climate system is clearly characterized by a 60-year cycle. We have seen statistically compatible periods of cooling during 1880-1910, 1940-1970, 2000-(2030 ?) and warming during 1850-1880, 1910-1940, 1970-2000."

[Mona Miller]

You are posting stuff again that you want us to believe. Sorry, all the stuff you post is unbelievable.

[blazing star]

I think anyone can easily dismiss anyone other personwho forms his opinion based on a blog instead of looking at the scientific evidence regarding an event or issue. I now understand why he sells pesticides and then states they are safe for monarchs. He is probably looking at a blog that tells him so and not the actual toxic chemical data sheet. Dig deeper, Paul

[Paul Cherubini]

I now understand why he sells pesticides and then states they are safe for monarchs. He is probably looking at a blog that tells him so and not the actual toxic chemical data sheet. Dig deeper, Paul

I see monarch caterpillars and numerous other insects and frogs in abundance on plants that grow right next to the GMO (herbicide treated) corn and soybean fields:

[Mona Miller]

You see. That is the problem. Who else is taking pictures, video, and proclaiming the wonderful attributes of GMO crops.

No one.

On 8/3/2011 4:42 PM, Chip Taylor wrote (cross posted from Dplex-L email list:
Some of you may find this to be of interest given the concern about pesticides and wildlife. These developments are quite positive from the point of view of organic farmers and others but you can bet that this story isn't over. There will be a strong challenge to these rulings by Monsanto. Hundreds of millions of dollars are at stake and it will be to industry's advantage to delay final resolution of cases as long as possible.

http://home.ezezine.com/1636/1636-2011. ... chive.html
CATCH THE BUZZ - Keep Your Poisons and GMOs Off Our Land
Pesticides and GMOs now the trespassers.

[Paul Cherubini]

You see. That is the problem. Who else is taking pictures, video, and proclaiming the wonderful attributes of GMO crops. No one.

What specifically is the "problem" with taking pictures and video of the abundant monarchs, milkweeds, frogs, etc., on the GMO crop farmland?

[Mona Miller]

The problem is you. Your information is not trustworthy. This is what happens when you, how did Ba Rea put it:

Ba Rea wrote this about Paul Cherubini:

"Paul is brilliant, with an incredible wealth of information about monarchs, which I deeply respect. [But, for several years his data is not trustworthy.] But he loves controversy, accusation and setting up interesting red herrings even more. He regularly blurs lines of truth (usually by omission of important information so that he can stand back and let us do the damage) in order to attack scientists, support his theses or defend HIS work as an insect exterminator." [I think she hit it straight on the nail head.]

http://basrelief.org/Pages/ba.html
This is Ba.

[blazing star]

Anyone reading this thread should be advised that Paul asserts his position that pesticides and GM Farmland are great and healthy for monarch butterflies though he has yet to post anything except pictures of some insects near his toxins and near the GM crops.

Just because someone has a picture of an insect near toxins and near GM Crops does not mean they survived to live the onslaught of toxins and it does not mean GM Farmland is suitable habitat. There is contrary, scientific evidence that proves otherwise to these two positions that he holds.

[Paul Cherubini]

The problem is you. Your information is not trustworthy.

My videos and video still photos speak for themselves. My frog picture above, for example, is simply a video still photo of this video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D1JHJKMEsVs which shows how amazingly abundant frogs are even when they are surrounded by herbicide treated GMO soybean and corn monocultures.

[Mona Miller]

[Paul Cherubini]

Just because someone has a picture of an insect near toxins and near GM Crops does not mean they survived to live the onslaught of toxins and it does not mean GM Farmland is suitable habitat.

If you don't believe that great numbers of monarchs successfully breed on the abundant milkweed that grows along the GMO field margins then do you believe that field margin milkweed is worth preserving in the first place? In other words, if GMO corn and soybean farmers decided to eliminate these field margin milkweeds http://www.learner.org/cgi-bin/jnorth/j ... 1312932565 would you be OK with that decision?

[blazing star]

You are putting words in my mouth. I never said that monarchs do not lay eggs and successfully breed on the edge of GM Farmland. I take position that you state, with conviction, that they do.

I continue to point out that you have no evidence of that GM Cropland serves as suitable monarch habitat and that a couple pictures do not indicate you are right. concerning your opinion. Even if you had 100 pictures, it wouldn't prove your position as we would need to know the duration of time that these pics took place (1 year or 100 years) how many GM crop margins you visited compared to how many exist, how many eggs you saw compared to how many hatched compared to how many matured to mature butterflies. You know, the scientific kind of information that is compiled to come to a conclusion; not just a private opinion.

[Paul Cherubini]

I continue to point out that you have no evidence of that GM Cropland serves as suitable monarch habitat and that a couple pictures do not indicate you are right. concerning your opinion. Even if you had 100 pictures, it wouldn't prove your position as we would need to know the duration of time that these pics took place (1 year or 100 years) how many GM crop margins you visited compared to how many exist, how many eggs you saw compared to how many hatched compared to how many matured to mature butterflies.

I do not understand what you are saying. I've posted video of caterpillars feeding on milkweeds growing in the GM crop margins: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CjE68sYoimo
I've posted video of newly emerged adult monarchs in the GM crop margins that can barely fly because they are only a few hours old : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lXkrf7eZw5k

Given that direct observational evidence, can anyone reasonably claim: "you have no evidence that GM Cropland / Margins serves as suitable monarch habitat"?

Analogy: I have also posted video of caterpillars feeding on roadside milkweeds:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KakQIPaxIzo
And video of those same caterpillars successfully developing into chrysalids and adults:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uwz9TBX3RwY

Given that direct observational evidence, can anyone reasonably say: "you have no evidence that roadsides serve as suitable monarch habitat"?

[blazing star]

You state that "monarchs are abundant at GM Cropland". Again, a few pictures and videos are not evidence that "monarchs are abundant at GM Cropland".

[Paul Cherubini]

You state that "monarchs are abundant at GM Cropland". Again, a few pictures and videos are not evidence that "monarchs are abundant at GM Cropland".

I posted descriptions of what I saw with each video. Example:
http://www.learner.org/cgi-bin/jnorth/j ... 1312932565
"one of six male and two female monarchs I observed patrolling and laying eggs on milkweeds that were growing inbetween a herbicide tolerant corn field and a gravel farm road called 610th Ave." And in the actual video I said I saw these 8 butterflies within 20 minutes. That = abundant.

Likewise in this video I said I saw 3 or 4 males and 2 females within 20 minutes:
http://www.learner.org/cgi-bin/jnorth/j ... 1312920555

And in this video I photographed two males following one another:
http://www.learner.org/cgi-bin/jnorth/j ... 1312870206

In just 2 weeks from now these GMO farmtowns in Minnesota will have clusters of 100's or low 1000's of monarchs like there were last year:
http://www.learner.org/cgi-bin/jnorth/j ... 1284750130
http://www.learner.org/cgi-bin/jnorth/j ... 1284750241
http://www.learner.org/cgi-bin/jnorth/j ... 1284750303
http://www.learner.org/cgi-bin/jnorth/j ... 1284750334

[blazing star]

Your point is?

[Paul Cherubini]

Your point is?

My point is that monarchs are abundant on GMO farmlands and in 2 weeks will be spectacularly abundant. I'll be returning to these GMO farmlands in 2-3 weeks to capture the spectacle on video. No where else in the country will it be possible to take videos of so many monarchs in late Aug/early Sept.

[blazing star]

In your "opinion".

[blazing star]

Ha ha ha. I just read your post. Lol

[Mona Miller]

Paul is returning to take pictures of the migration and he's been taking pictures of the premigration.

Blazing Star and I keep pointing out your faulty data, but you keep posting more and more of it. I don't think you care. Why would an insect exterminator care about killing a few more insects?

[Paul Cherubini]

Paul he's been taking pictures of the premigration.

I didn't post any pictures of migrating butterflies. I posted pictures of resident, reproductive butterflies; i.e all my Aug. 2 & 3 videos showed males patrolling milkweeds in the GMO crop margins and females laying eggs:
http://www.learner.org/cgi-bin/jnorth/j ... 1312763481
http://www.learner.org/cgi-bin/jnorth/j ... 1312766867
http://www.learner.org/cgi-bin/jnorth/j ... 1312920555
http://www.learner.org/cgi-bin/jnorth/j ... 1312947297
http://www.learner.org/cgi-bin/jnorth/j ... 1312749859
http://www.learner.org/cgi-bin/jnorth/j ... 1312870206
http://www.learner.org/cgi-bin/jnorth/j ... 1312921665
http://www.learner.org/cgi-bin/jnorth/j ... 1312932565

I also posted video of older caterpillars in the GMO crop margins
http://www.learner.org/cgi-bin/jnorth/j ... 1312825564 which means the patrolling males and egg laying females were there weeks earlier as well.

We also have these NABA report of many monarchs in the GMO crop growing areas of Minnesota, South Dakota and Nebraska back in early July. So the butterflies have been there all along and didn't recently migrate into the area.

[Mona Miller]

We have no idea where your photos came from. Too bad you are polluting the data collected by Journey North. You often manipulate data to prove your theses that using pesticides/herbicides do no harm and your job as an insect exterminator. But, pesticides/herbicides are doing harm. They are killing a huge amount of insects--many of them beneficial.

BTW, this is a conservation forum for the discussion of Monarchs and their migration, not a pest extermination or pesticide/herbicide forum.

[blazing star]

Paul he's been taking pictures of the premigration.

I didn't post any pictures of migrating butterflies. I posted pictures of resident, reproductive butterflies; i.e all my Aug. 2 & 3 videos showed males patrolling milkweeds in the GMO crop margins and females laying eggs:

So what? Again, we monarch watchers are not stupid. We know that monarchs will go anywhere that milkweed grows. It doesn't meant that the eggs laid made it through to maturity.

Paul's data isn't necessarily faulty. He post pictures and video of monarchs near GM Farmland so he may see some monarchs there. My point is that his pretty pics and videos don't prove that monarchs "are abundant at GM Farmland". His info doesn't prove that they can even survive being near these fields. Evidently, from the last thread I started, we better hope they aren't abundant there as it's now known that GM pollen kills monarchs as they munch that toxin pollen.

[Paul Cherubini]

We have no idea where your photos came from. Too bad you are polluting the data collected by Journey North.

In all my Journey North videos I disclosed the names of the streets where the videos were taken so that anyone can look up the locations on Mapquest, etc. Example: In this video I even photographed the street signs of Plum Ave and 145th Street http://www.learner.org/cgi-bin/jnorth/j ... 1312920555 Then if you look up the intersection of Plum Ave and 145th Street in Hutchinson, Minnesota on Mapquest, etc. you will see this satellite map:
which shows how the monarchs were patrolling, laying eggs and nectaring on a crop margin that is surrounded by GMO crops.

[blazing star]

So what? Again, we monarch watchers are not stupid. We know that monarchs will go anywhere that milkweed grows. It doesn't meant that the eggs laid made it through to maturity.

Paul's data isn't necessarily faulty. He post pictures and video of monarchs near GM Farmland so he may see some monarchs there. My point is that his pretty pics and videos don't prove that monarchs "are abundant at GM Farmland". His info doesn't prove that they can even survive being near these fields. Evidently, from the last thread I started, we better hope they aren't abundant there as it's now known that GM pollen kills monarchs as they munch that toxin pollen.

[Paul Cherubini]

Evidently, from the last thread I started, we better hope they aren't abundant there as it's now known that GM pollen kills monarchs as they munch that toxin pollen.

http://www.pnas.org/content/98/21/11937.abstract
"This 2-year study suggests that the impact of Bt corn pollen
from current commercial hybrids on monarch butterfly populations
is negligible."

[blazing star]

Thank you for confirming that GM Crop BT Pollen kills monarch larvae.