<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.3.3" -->
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: USDA Hardiness Zones Shifting North</title>
	<link>http://anthropik.com/2007/01/usda-hardiness-zones-shifting-north/</link>
	<description>se wo were fi na wosan kofa a yenki</description>
	<pubDate>Fri, 21 Nov 2008 11:13:59 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.3.3</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Jason Godesky</title>
		<link>http://anthropik.com/2007/01/usda-hardiness-zones-shifting-north/#comment-178973</link>
		<dc:creator>Jason Godesky</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 02 Mar 2008 21:22:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://anthropik.com/2007/01/usda-hardiness-zones-shifting-north/#comment-178973</guid>
		<description>I'd say Anonymous must have misread the map.  Those alternating bands don't represent alternating cooling, warming and no change, it represents where the bands of the hardiness zones have shifted.  &lt;em&gt;All&lt;/em&gt; the zones have moved roughly half a zone northward.  In other words, everything has gotten, generally, warmer.  It offers very clear and compelling evidence of warming.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;d say Anonymous must have misread the map.  Those alternating bands don&#8217;t represent alternating cooling, warming and no change, it represents where the bands of the hardiness zones have shifted.  <em>All</em> the zones have moved roughly half a zone northward.  In other words, everything has gotten, generally, warmer.  It offers very clear and compelling evidence of warming.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: jhereg</title>
		<link>http://anthropik.com/2007/01/usda-hardiness-zones-shifting-north/#comment-178847</link>
		<dc:creator>jhereg</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 28 Feb 2008 13:55:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://anthropik.com/2007/01/usda-hardiness-zones-shifting-north/#comment-178847</guid>
		<description>I guess I'm confused. I find the differences map the most compelling arguement. If global warming is a reality, shouldn't the hardiness zones creep towards the poles? The differences map shows exactly that: the hardiness zones in North America have moved &lt;i&gt;roughly&lt;/i&gt; half a zone northward. Parts of zone 6 are now zone 7, parts of zone 5 are now zone 6, etc.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I guess I&#8217;m confused. I find the differences map the most compelling arguement. If global warming is a reality, shouldn&#8217;t the hardiness zones creep towards the poles? The differences map shows exactly that: the hardiness zones in North America have moved <i>roughly</i> half a zone northward. Parts of zone 6 are now zone 7, parts of zone 5 are now zone 6, etc.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Anonymous</title>
		<link>http://anthropik.com/2007/01/usda-hardiness-zones-shifting-north/#comment-178826</link>
		<dc:creator>Anonymous</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 27 Feb 2008 22:30:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://anthropik.com/2007/01/usda-hardiness-zones-shifting-north/#comment-178826</guid>
		<description>this is an interesting map, but the net net is that the shifts in hardiness zones are meaningless. if you look at the "differences" map, the up/down shifts are pretty much distributed in equal bands across the continent. so how does this "prove" global warming?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>this is an interesting map, but the net net is that the shifts in hardiness zones are meaningless. if you look at the &#8220;differences&#8221; map, the up/down shifts are pretty much distributed in equal bands across the continent. so how does this &#8220;prove&#8221; global warming?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: jhereg</title>
		<link>http://anthropik.com/2007/01/usda-hardiness-zones-shifting-north/#comment-172569</link>
		<dc:creator>jhereg</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 04 Sep 2007 12:49:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://anthropik.com/2007/01/usda-hardiness-zones-shifting-north/#comment-172569</guid>
		<description>Yeah, southern &#38; southeastern OH seem be best represented by zone 6, tho' it used to be mostly zone 5. OH has had to deal with warmer temps across the board (incl. winter) and, in some areas, mild drought. A second look at the hardiness map seems in order.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yeah, southern &amp; southeastern OH seem be best represented by zone 6, tho&#8217; it used to be mostly zone 5. OH has had to deal with warmer temps across the board (incl. winter) and, in some areas, mild drought. A second look at the hardiness map seems in order.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jason Godesky</title>
		<link>http://anthropik.com/2007/01/usda-hardiness-zones-shifting-north/#comment-172522</link>
		<dc:creator>Jason Godesky</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 03 Sep 2007 14:58:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://anthropik.com/2007/01/usda-hardiness-zones-shifting-north/#comment-172522</guid>
		<description>This isn't official because it's not from the USDA, so I think you're overreacting somewhat.  The ADF has much more limited resources.  But the underlying idea is sound: the hardiness zones haven't been updated since 1990.  In that time, we've had some of the hottest years ever recorded and unmistakable signs of global climate change.  The hardiness zones &lt;em&gt;have&lt;/em&gt; changed.

Lots of people make the mistake of thinking that global warming should be consistent, with the irregular surface of the earth somehow all warming at the same time and at the same rate.  I'm sure you don't have to think about that for more than a few minutes to realize how foolish that is.  Try heating just your dinner on the stove consistently, and try to think how unlikely it would be for a system as complex as the earth.  Global warming doesn't just mean things get hotter.  In some places, it will even makes things colder.  But mostly, it makes things more erratic.

I used to live in a 5a; now, we're in a 6a.  That certainly seems consistent with the changes I've observed.  Like you, the chill was our usual concern, but now we're seeing problems on the other end, of things getting too hot for some of our plants.  So no, it doesn't make sense to rate hardiness zones solely from the coldest they get, because the other extreme will impact your garden, too.  Not only have the hardiness zones marched north, they've also gotten wider.

Is the ADF's update a complete one?  Of course not, they're a private organization, not the USDA.  But it puts the pressure on the USDA to do a full update, and that's a very good thing.  Personally, we've been planting as a zone 6, and I'm glad we have, because otherwise our whole garden would have been wiped out.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This isn&#8217;t official because it&#8217;s not from the USDA, so I think you&#8217;re overreacting somewhat.  The ADF has much more limited resources.  But the underlying idea is sound: the hardiness zones haven&#8217;t been updated since 1990.  In that time, we&#8217;ve had some of the hottest years ever recorded and unmistakable signs of global climate change.  The hardiness zones <em>have</em> changed.</p>
<p>Lots of people make the mistake of thinking that global warming should be consistent, with the irregular surface of the earth somehow all warming at the same time and at the same rate.  I&#8217;m sure you don&#8217;t have to think about that for more than a few minutes to realize how foolish that is.  Try heating just your dinner on the stove consistently, and try to think how unlikely it would be for a system as complex as the earth.  Global warming doesn&#8217;t just mean things get hotter.  In some places, it will even makes things colder.  But mostly, it makes things more erratic.</p>
<p>I used to live in a 5a; now, we&#8217;re in a 6a.  That certainly seems consistent with the changes I&#8217;ve observed.  Like you, the chill was our usual concern, but now we&#8217;re seeing problems on the other end, of things getting too hot for some of our plants.  So no, it doesn&#8217;t make sense to rate hardiness zones solely from the coldest they get, because the other extreme will impact your garden, too.  Not only have the hardiness zones marched north, they&#8217;ve also gotten wider.</p>
<p>Is the ADF&#8217;s update a complete one?  Of course not, they&#8217;re a private organization, not the USDA.  But it puts the pressure on the USDA to do a full update, and that&#8217;s a very good thing.  Personally, we&#8217;ve been planting as a zone 6, and I&#8217;m glad we have, because otherwise our whole garden would have been wiped out.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: gary tourtillott</title>
		<link>http://anthropik.com/2007/01/usda-hardiness-zones-shifting-north/#comment-172494</link>
		<dc:creator>gary tourtillott</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 02 Sep 2007 18:26:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://anthropik.com/2007/01/usda-hardiness-zones-shifting-north/#comment-172494</guid>
		<description>What a missed mark. How can the ADF deceide its time to re-number the Hardiness Zones for plants? I believe they have a political agenda of their own, and one that is in no way related to the green industry.

According to the Arbor day hardiness zone I am located in zone 6 or 7 (I guess they don't know which), when I am actually in zone 5b. This past spring we had a late freeze in April (coldest on record) and killed plants that were even predictated to be hardy to zone 5. If I went by Arbor Day map I would have lost my entire garden!!

My point is that even if global warming is a given; the reclassifaction of USDA hardiness maps needs to be done in relation to the 'low' end of temps and surely on a scale that enables the entire green industry to be in sync.

Please get real ADF.  gt</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>What a missed mark. How can the ADF deceide its time to re-number the Hardiness Zones for plants? I believe they have a political agenda of their own, and one that is in no way related to the green industry.</p>
<p>According to the Arbor day hardiness zone I am located in zone 6 or 7 (I guess they don&#8217;t know which), when I am actually in zone 5b. This past spring we had a late freeze in April (coldest on record) and killed plants that were even predictated to be hardy to zone 5. If I went by Arbor Day map I would have lost my entire garden!!</p>
<p>My point is that even if global warming is a given; the reclassifaction of USDA hardiness maps needs to be done in relation to the &#8216;low&#8217; end of temps and surely on a scale that enables the entire green industry to be in sync.</p>
<p>Please get real ADF.  gt</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: gspud01@earthlink.ne</title>
		<link>http://anthropik.com/2007/01/usda-hardiness-zones-shifting-north/#comment-55761</link>
		<dc:creator>gspud01@earthlink.ne</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 04 Mar 2007 21:30:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://anthropik.com/2007/01/usda-hardiness-zones-shifting-north/#comment-55761</guid>
		<description>1. How do I get a larger copy of map showing updated hardiness zone changes.
2. Is it possible to get a state map that has these update  showing the highways and towns.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>1. How do I get a larger copy of map showing updated hardiness zone changes.<br />
2. Is it possible to get a state map that has these update  showing the highways and towns.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: _Gi</title>
		<link>http://anthropik.com/2007/01/usda-hardiness-zones-shifting-north/#comment-45174</link>
		<dc:creator>_Gi</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 16 Jan 2007 23:14:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://anthropik.com/2007/01/usda-hardiness-zones-shifting-north/#comment-45174</guid>
		<description>The climate change might well disrupt Gulfstream, and Europe might become uncomfortably cold. The global warming is a chaotic process, and chaotic processes given more energy will generate bigger fluctuations.
So, we'll keep getting some crazy weather</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The climate change might well disrupt Gulfstream, and Europe might become uncomfortably cold. The global warming is a chaotic process, and chaotic processes given more energy will generate bigger fluctuations.<br />
So, we&#8217;ll keep getting some crazy weather</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Scot Galego</title>
		<link>http://anthropik.com/2007/01/usda-hardiness-zones-shifting-north/#comment-45169</link>
		<dc:creator>Scot Galego</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 16 Jan 2007 22:23:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://anthropik.com/2007/01/usda-hardiness-zones-shifting-north/#comment-45169</guid>
		<description>Well you know-"just because you're paranoid, doesn't mean they're not after you!"
But yeah, I think that would be a good subject for an article.

I still think we're on the isle of Barra, you going 6 miles that way and me 8 miles in that direction.
When peak oil kicks in(ie "they " turn off the tap-leave it man,let it slide!) and global warming fucks the climate up so much that the gulf stream stops and we enter a new ice age(resist man, be strong!!)-we'll both be at the same point and the more we are prepared the better.
Actually I'm boring of conspiracy a bit , although I like to keep tabs on it-it's like I know it was "them" and anything associated with them is then obviously highly suspect(like peak-global stuff)(let it go man, I know you can!!!)
Maybe this has something to do with it all :-

http://www.awakeninthedream.com/html/

That's maybe more up/down your street and if so why I thought you mind find the treeincarnation stuff interesting.

But really I want to talk about disconnecting-leaving your job(ie. civilisation) and doing it for real-starting the tribe and going "wild in the country" "where snakes in the grass, are absolutely free!"

Later man</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well you know-&#8221;just because you&#8217;re paranoid, doesn&#8217;t mean they&#8217;re not after you!&#8221;<br />
But yeah, I think that would be a good subject for an article.</p>
<p>I still think we&#8217;re on the isle of Barra, you going 6 miles that way and me 8 miles in that direction.<br />
When peak oil kicks in(ie &#8220;they &#8221; turn off the tap-leave it man,let it slide!) and global warming fucks the climate up so much that the gulf stream stops and we enter a new ice age(resist man, be strong!!)-we&#8217;ll both be at the same point and the more we are prepared the better.<br />
Actually I&#8217;m boring of conspiracy a bit , although I like to keep tabs on it-it&#8217;s like I know it was &#8220;them&#8221; and anything associated with them is then obviously highly suspect(like peak-global stuff)(let it go man, I know you can!!!)<br />
Maybe this has something to do with it all :-</p>
<p><a href="http://www.awakeninthedream.com/html/" rel="nofollow">http://www.awakeninthedream.com/html/</a></p>
<p>That&#8217;s maybe more up/down your street and if so why I thought you mind find the treeincarnation stuff interesting.</p>
<p>But really I want to talk about disconnecting-leaving your job(ie. civilisation) and doing it for real-starting the tribe and going &#8220;wild in the country&#8221; &#8220;where snakes in the grass, are absolutely free!&#8221;</p>
<p>Later man</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jason Godesky</title>
		<link>http://anthropik.com/2007/01/usda-hardiness-zones-shifting-north/#comment-45165</link>
		<dc:creator>Jason Godesky</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 16 Jan 2007 21:33:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://anthropik.com/2007/01/usda-hardiness-zones-shifting-north/#comment-45165</guid>
		<description>There are plenty of real conspiracies out there.  As the self-styled "9/11 Truth Movement" is fond of pointing out, "9/11 was a conspiracy--the only question is whose."  The question is one of evidence.  In that case, the overwhelming evidence that it was al-Qa'ida's conspiracy, rather than the government's.  The government has done plenty of evil things behind our back, and there's no shortage of false flag operations that deserve our open scorn, but there's no need to weight the scales with those crimes they very obviously did &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; commit, when they have so many that are genuinely their own.

The evidence for global warming and peak oil are both overwhelming&#8212;so overwhelming that those who continue to try to deny them are simply being willfully ignorant.  Your sources are &lt;em&gt;bona fide&lt;/em&gt; crackpots, Scot, and I've decided that the issues we face are far too serious to waste time on such insanity.  To even compose a full rebuttal provides them with far more dignity than they deserve; it suggests that they've made a logical or valid point to be refuted, when they haven't done anything like that at all.

If I'm going to comment further on this at all, I may write an article on why conspiracy theories are given such weight by primitivists, why so many primitivists are so paranoid, and what role it is that such stories fulfill that makes us so willing to believe them in spite of all the evidence to the contrary.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>There are plenty of real conspiracies out there.  As the self-styled &#8220;9/11 Truth Movement&#8221; is fond of pointing out, &#8220;9/11 was a conspiracy&#8211;the only question is whose.&#8221;  The question is one of evidence.  In that case, the overwhelming evidence that it was al-Qa&#8217;ida&#8217;s conspiracy, rather than the government&#8217;s.  The government has done plenty of evil things behind our back, and there&#8217;s no shortage of false flag operations that deserve our open scorn, but there&#8217;s no need to weight the scales with those crimes they very obviously did <em>not</em> commit, when they have so many that are genuinely their own.</p>
<p>The evidence for global warming and peak oil are both overwhelming&mdash;so overwhelming that those who continue to try to deny them are simply being willfully ignorant.  Your sources are <em>bona fide</em> crackpots, Scot, and I&#8217;ve decided that the issues we face are far too serious to waste time on such insanity.  To even compose a full rebuttal provides them with far more dignity than they deserve; it suggests that they&#8217;ve made a logical or valid point to be refuted, when they haven&#8217;t done anything like that at all.</p>
<p>If I&#8217;m going to comment further on this at all, I may write an article on why conspiracy theories are given such weight by primitivists, why so many primitivists are so paranoid, and what role it is that such stories fulfill that makes us so willing to believe them in spite of all the evidence to the contrary.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
