Comments on: Yamal Aerial Photo

By: LearDog

LearDog — Tue, 08 May 2012 03:17:10 +0000

I thought that the Ingoing assumption was the the only rate-limiting factor growth was temperature. These photos seem to suggest a sensitivity to water availability. As to the question of man-made variations in local conditions that might affect tree growth patterns, see

http://www.geobotany.org/library/talks/GubarkovAA2010_yamal_tal100408.pdf

By: Keith W.

Keith W. — Tue, 04 May 2010 05:18:36 +0000

White-tailed deer have a history of actually feeding off the lower branches of spruce trees during winter, going as far as to strip small branches. It is certainly possible that reindeer might do something similar, resulting in strip bark type wounds on some trees. This could lead to anomalous growth patterns.

By: Dave Dardinger

Dave Dardinger — Mon, 03 May 2010 23:48:23 +0000

Re: Keith W. (May 3 17:10), Look at RY.0232-19. Another possible confounding factor: reindeer! I know reindeer are noted for eating mosses, but might they also eat Larch seedlings or young trees? If so, after they grow above the browse line, there could be a sudden spurt in growth.

By: Keith W.

Keith W. — Mon, 03 May 2010 22:10:05 +0000

For some additional pictures of Larch in the Yamal area, check http://www.arcticphoto.co.uk/results.asp?W=4&F=0001&Step=1

By: Arne Bingy

Arne Bingy — Mon, 03 May 2010 21:36:07 +0000

Max Beran,
perhaps downstream of an hydro-dam would be a good place to look for tree-ring thikness vs water flow?

The pictures shown here certainly warrant a closer look at this (obvious) influence on the tree-ring data.

By: Max Beran

Max Beran — Mon, 03 May 2010 13:17:12 +0000

I little project that would be right up Steve’s street would be to try to get hold of some river flow data (say summer seasonal runoff) from a river in the region and actually do some correlations with contemporary tree ring and temperature data. I make it sound easy but the biggest problem might be getting hold of the hydrological data.

By: Jirka

Jirka — Sun, 02 May 2010 21:15:56 +0000

Well, every schoolchild should know that it is the river channel that moves. Oxbows are remnants of old abandoned “paleochannels” and as such do not move anywhere.

By: gimply

gimply — Sun, 02 May 2010 14:11:19 +0000

OK, reword. What major research supporting AGW is credible? No sarcasm, no editorializing, just a question…

By: gimply

gimply — Sat, 01 May 2010 17:43:39 +0000

This would seem to seal the deal, as far as the credibility of several dendro proxy hypotheses is concerned.

snip – overeditorializing

By: Tom Gray

Tom Gray — Sat, 01 May 2010 16:16:38 +0000

With each post the complexity of the area increases, to show how naive is the blind assumption that tree rings reflect temperature in a simple way.

As a naive question, wouldn’t this be a responsibility of the workers who first collected teh samples? If the posters here are correct the the lack of supporting dats makes cores useless for any future use. Why would such work be accepted for publication?