CO2 and Plant Pests

[oomblikkies]

What is the big deal here? Of course will plant pests increase, but what the researchers should have done is to increase the duration of the experiment. In nature it does take a while for the natural predators to sense the increase in food supply and hence produce larger (numbers) offspring.

[konynunez]

Let's eat the insects, maybe that is the solution.

[w4csc]

Oh, how proud they must be to find something negative against all the rich CO2 plant growth research. How do they control CO2 to the plants OUTSIDE, with those tiny pipes?? I smell an environazi rat!

Stop by the house and help me devour some of my cantelope-sized tomatos grown at 5000 ppm in the plant-stuffed greenhouse. The earth will be fine, once the communists and socialists leave Cancun so the place can thaw!

[maslabud]

i'm sure the scientist at the university know more about how they conducted the experiment then what most of us interpreted watching this  2 minute video.

[zobcity01]

what if your "implied" forcasted co2 levels do Not go up?

The "global warming" record SNOW STORMS we just had in the USA in winter 2010 didn't support you Ideology hypothasys whatsoever.

What about ALL the core samples showing co2 appears years-decades After any temp swings?

Just be honest , just once pls!!

[zoticus1]

WHAT A LIE!

laws of adaptation shoot this nonsense down

[mekubic3]

The problem with interpreting this sort of result is that they have an island of CO2-enriched plants in a sea of "normal" plants. If insects from all over the field que in on something they like about the CO2-enriched plants, they will migrate there. This really doesn't say much about how insects will respond to an entire landscape of CO2-enriched plants.

[thinkpolicy]

You hit the nail on the head. They ignored the dozens of studies proving that doubling CO2 increases soy bean growth rates, soy bean vitamin content.

Those things are all good for humans and bugs. If i were a bug, I'd go to the better growing plants, too, if there were a difference between one plot and another.

What it really shows is that CO2 enriched plants are preferable to CO2 starved plants.

.

[jenn1ifer]

exactly. they should have 2 fields in the same city, so its the same climate the city has. one ENTIRE filed with c02 enrichment. then compare the the field on the other side of the city with the c02 that naturally occurs in the air. then compaer before and after pest populations between the two. Also they need to take in to account the area, and state, i bet for example beetles are not a problem in calfironia vs. ohio for example.

[sammierox88]

I have an idea why dont we just introduce a biological control for japanese beetles and just hope that it doesn't become a pest and want everything else but what its suppose to be controlling. hahaha

[maddcatone]

Or... if you were a real scientist, you would try to reproduce the claims with another type of crop. The higher CO2 levels may negatively affect the defense of soy beans, but what about other plants. Don't go around sooth saying that you found another scare scenario, just beacuse you had one result on one type of crop. There are many plants that in fact hype up their defenses in the ample CO2 as well. Not saying their wrong, just can't jump to extreme conclusions.

[mikegallegos7]

Very few sci experiments are on video; they don't have to be unless part of the posit and located outside the lab. Your posit that I failed basic logic is logically flawed: you don't if I passed, either. At 62, I know the difference between this video's proof of lack of lab integrity, you, and a falling sky ... God help us if the three ever meet ...

[mikegallegos7]

Your experimental lab is flawed which is key to scientific standards of authenticity and laboratory integrity: you don't have basics in place. Your thesis statement, not evident, yet you boast discovery. I conclude your video and the science you practice is self serving, not scientific. Fine, just don't posit it for what it is not. All you have to do is enclose your lab; isolate it from a billion+ influences and you'll at least have lab integrity. Can't help you with the falling sky syndrome.

[maddcatone]

agreed, too many influencing stimulii, bring it into a lab, then introduce insects on one environment with increased CO2 levels and in one without, then you can "claim discovery", sky falling syndrome? Was that needed man?

[mikegallegos7]

Meaningless; zilch lab control integrety; witchful thinking; not scientific; jus' regular everyday liberal BS etc ... Here's a hint knucklehead: the sky is not falling.

[Phibins]

cool, thanks for the upload!

[dustynbones]

Actually, it suggest that Global Warming is totally false, because calculating the measurements means that it would take over a billion years at the current man made rate to ever make the impact that they're propagating.

[nickfalzone]

You have no idea what you're talking about.

[humanist7117]

Wrong!