Global Warming and Walnut Trees: a Case Study in Deception

Guest post by Dr. David Deming

The science of global warming is allegedly “settled.” The American Physical Society has declared that “global warming is occurring” and that the “evidence is incontrovertible.” According to environmentalists and advocacy organizations, unchecked global warming will lead to an environmental disaster of unprecedented proportions. Polar icecaps will melt and rising seas will inundate coastal cities. Species will become extinct. Green pastures and sylvan glades will be transformed into deserts of scorched and desiccated sand.

But the science of global warming is not settled. And there is scarcely any unambiguous scientific evidence that significant future harm will occur to either human beings or the natural environment. People have been systematically deceived by a coalition of environmentalists, governments and institutions that feed off a stream of funding for climate research. This essay documents in specific detail one example of how this deception has been promulgated.

On November 28, 2011, Purdue University issued a press release titled “Walnut trees may not be able to withstand climate change.” Subsequently, the material in the press release was recycled by various media outlets under headlines such as “Walnuts are super-sensitive to climate,” and “walnut industry may crack under climate pressure.” One writer asserted that the genus Juglans could be “pushed to the verge of extinction within a few decades,” explaining “this is the conclusion of a recent study issued by Purdue University.” Walnut trees were vulnerable because “they can’t handle low or high temperatures.”

By now, we’re all used to seeing everything imaginable either linked to, or blamed upon, global warming. The list is long and ludicrous. But I was taken aback by the claim that walnut trees were somehow especially sensitive to climate change. From personal experience, I knew walnut trees to be hardy, not fragile.

I have about half a dozen Black Walnut (Juglans nigra) trees on my property in central Oklahoma (see photo).

Oklahoma has a harsh climate. Record temperature extremes range from a low of -31 degrees F to a high of 120 degrees F. Droughts, heat waves, ice storms, hail, and high winds are common.

According to the Oklahoma State University agricultural extension, “severe weather is a fact of life in Oklahoma” with “storm-related damage a major impediment to maintaining healthy trees.” But my walnut trees thrive under these conditions. And in 2011, my Black Walnut trees survived one of the hottest and driest summers in recorded history.

During the summer of 2011, the southcentral US experienced severe heat and drought. Average statewide rainfall in Oklahoma from October 1, 2010, through July 30, 2011, was 16.7 inches, 14 inches below average. The Oklahoma Climatological Survey described this as an “one of the worst short-term droughts in state history,” the “driest on record.”

The heat in Oklahoma over the summer of 2011 was exceptional. The average temperature for Oklahoma in July of 2011 was 89.1 degrees F, “more than 7 degrees [F] above normal.” It was the hottest July on record for Oklahoma, exceeding the Dust Bowl days of the 1930s. It was also the hottest month ever recorded for any state in the conterminous US.

August of 2011 was also exceptionally hot in Oklahoma. The statewide average temperature for that month was 87.7 degrees F, 7.3 degrees above average, and the hottest August on record for the state of Oklahoma.

Altogether, the months of June, July, and August 2011 were the hottest summer Oklahoma has experienced in recorded history. My walnut trees endured months of drought and extreme heat. The thermometer on my back porch commonly registered temperatures above 105 degrees F and sometimes exceeded 110 degrees F.

Two of my walnut trees compensated for environmental stress by dropping branches. Abscission in walnut is a common response to drought. But the trees survived. And they did more than just survive. They produced a large number of walnuts (see photo).

Photo taken December 2011 by Dr. David Deming

As a scientist, I understand the difference between anecdotal data and systematic empirical investigations. It is possible that my six trees may not be typical of Juglans nigra specimens in general. According to the US Department of Agriculture’s  Silvics of North America, “Black Walnut contains great genetic variation for growth and survival.” Of course, the very existence of genetic variation in Black Walnut implies that it is not a fragile plant, but a hardy tree capable of enduring and surviving environmental stress.

Contrary to what the press release from Purdue asserted, my experience in Oklahoma over the summer of 2011 suggested that walnut trees were hardy, not fragile. So I decided to do what people rarely do: I read the scientific research article upon which the press release was based. What I found was shocking. The press release issued by Purdue University was not just tendentious and misrepresentative. It was plainly deceptive.

The Purdue press release alleged that walnut trees are especially susceptible to damage from climate change. It stated that “warmer, drier summers and…climate changes would be especially troublesome–possibly fatal–for walnut trees.”

But the research paper read (page 1270) “there is considerable uncertainty regarding the magnitude of potential effects of climate change on walnut. Some studies tend to indicate walnut could be negatively impacted by climate change, while others do not.” Remarkably enough, the research paper also stated climate change could be beneficial for walnut trees. Buried in the text (page 1286) is the statement that there is “evidence suggesting walnut growth and distribution may remain stable or increase in the twenty-first century.”

The Purdue press release claimed that walnut “has an extremely narrow range.” But it doesn’t. The genus Juglansis found worldwide. The range of the species Juglans nigra alone extends over most of the eastern US. According to Silvics of North America, the natural range of the Black Walnut extends from Florida north to Massachusetts, Michigan, and Minnesota. Juglans nigra is found on the east coast of the US westward to the states of Kansas, Oklahoma, and Texas.

A genus or species with a wide geographic range must have an inherent ability to withstand the climatic variations found within its range. The wider the range, the hardier the tree. If a person wanted to portray a tree as fragile or especially susceptible to climate change, they would necessarily have to describe its range as limited.

The text of the press release asserted that “almost all climate change models predict that climates will become drier.” But the text of the research paper stated (page 1285) that “in North America and northern Europe, mean annual temperature and precipitation are expected to increase.”

The Purdue press release described walnuts as being “sensitive to cold.” This is partly correct. Like many other trees, walnuts can be damaged by late spring frosts. But spring frosts are a symptom of global cooling, not global warming. And Juglans nigra is remarkably resistant to winter cold. It can withstand winter temperatures as low as -45 degrees F. It survived the Pleistocene Ice Ages. The very fact that the genus Juglans is not extinct is evidence that these trees have survived all the climatic variations and extremes that have occurred on the planet Earth since their evolutionary origin about 60 million years ago.

Purdue’s press release stated that “walnuts would have difficulty tolerating droughts.” My experience over the summer of 2011 was anecdotal, but demonstrated that at least some Black Walnut trees could shrug off droughts, even extreme ones. One reason that Juglans nigra is resistant to drought is foundSilvics of North America. The root system of Juglans nigra is described as “deep and wide spreading, with a definite taproot…[and the tree is] able to rely on the deeper soil layers for survival during times of drought.”

Critical information was omitted from the press release. The text of the research paper stated that carbon dioxide and global warming may actually prove to be beneficial for the walnut tree. But these statements were completely absent from the press release.

Carbon dioxide fertilizes trees. Trees grow faster and larger when the concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere increases. The research paper reported (p. 1280) that “a five-fold increase in CO2…generated growth increases of 70%.” The authors concluded (p. 1286) that “productivity gains associated with increased atmospheric CO2 in walnut appear to be greater than average.”

The research paper also stated (p. 1286) that global warming could benefit walnut trees by extending their range. “Milder winters may actually increase walnut establishment,” and “areas that are currently considered cold for walnut growth may see increased establishment and growth.” But the press release stated that climate change could be “fatal” for walnut trees, not beneficial.

The press release from Purdue repeatedly emphasized the economic value of walnut trees. Purdue was right. Walnuts and walnut wood are valuable. If you want people to give you money to conduct research on walnuts you have to convince them that there is a crisis at hand, and that you’re going to save them from it. You can hardly state that climate change is likely to benefit the walnut. You have to convince the public that there is some tangible benefit to be derived from the money they are giving you. So the propaganda you want politicians and the public to read is placed in a press release while the truth is buried in the scientific literature. After all, hardly anyone reads the scientific literature other than a handful of specialists.

It is not difficult to understand why people and institutions exaggerate the potential dangers of global warming and omit any mention of the probable benefits. There are billions of dollars available for climate change research. Obama’s 2011 budget allocated $2.6 billion for the “global change research program.” This stream of cash has created a monstrous industry that produces junk science that feeds demands for even more money. It is a scam.

In summary, this is a sad example of how money and ideology have corrupted contemporary science. Everything has to be tendentiously linked with climate change in order to obtain money. The public is being swindled, and the respect people have for science and scientists is being eroded. I feel especially sorry for the gullible activists who have a sincere concern for environmental quality. They’re being played for fools.

###

David Deming is associate professor of arts and sciences at the University of Oklahoma. His book, Black & White: Politically Incorrect Essays on Politics, Culture, Science, Religion, Energy and Environment, is available for purchase on Amazon.com.

=============================================================

I add this to Dr. Demings essay. The black walnut is common throughout California, even perrenially dry southern California. The Wikipedia entry on the tree says:

Juglans californica, the California black walnut, also called the California walnut, or the Southern California black walnut, is a large shrub or small tree (up to 30 feet tall) of the Juglandaceae (walnut) family endemic to California.

J. californica is generally found in the southern California Coast Ranges, Transverse Ranges, and Peninsular Ranges, and the Central Valley. It grows as part of mixed woodlands, and also on slopes and in valleys wherever conditions are favorable. It is threatened by development and overgrazing. Some native stands remain in urban Los Angeles in the Santa Monica Mountains and Hollywood Hills. J. californica grows in riparian woodlands, either in single species stands or mixed with California’s oaks (Quercus spp.) and cottonwoods (Populus fremontii).

It seems development is a bigger threat than drought/heat.

English Walnuts are also widely cultivated where I live, and they routinely experience 110F + temperatures in the hot summer of the Sacramento Valley.

The climate data they don't want you to find — free, to your inbox.
Join readers who get 5–8 new articles daily — no algorithms, no shadow bans.
0 0 votes
Article Rating
196 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
December 19, 2011 9:27 am

A physicist says:
December 19, 2011 at 8:59 am
Thus, the relevance of your anecdotal post to the long-term viability of wild populations of eastern black walnut trees is (AFAICT) near-zero.
I guess you missed the below which is not anecodal but a quote from Silvics. Please read what is written not what you want to read.
Dr. Deming wrote:
According to Silvics of North America, the natural range of the Black Walnut extends from Florida north to Massachusetts, Michigan, and Minnesota. Juglans nigra is found on the east coast of the US westward to the states of Kansas, Oklahoma, and Texas.
A genus or species with a wide geographic range must have an inherent ability to withstand the climatic variations found within its range. The wider the range, the hardier the tree. If a person wanted to portray a tree as fragile or especially susceptible to climate change, they would necessarily have to describe its range as limited.

December 19, 2011 9:28 am

A physicist says:
December 19, 2011 at 8:59 am
Dr. Deming, your post did not distinguish between wild eastern black walnut trees and cultivated (often hybridized) walnut trees; the mowed lawn in your photo tells me that yours are the latter.
………………………………………….
Thus, the relevance of your anecdotal post to the long-term viability of wild populations of eastern black walnut trees is (AFAICT) near-zero.
============================================================
Do they not teach context to physicists? Consider this backdrop which Dr. Deming included in his post…….walnut industry may crack under climate pressure.” One writer asserted that the genus Juglans could be “pushed to the verge of extinction within a few decades,” explaining “this is the conclusion of a recent study issued by Purdue University.” Walnut trees were vulnerable because “they can’t handle low or high temperatures.”

Interstellar Bill
December 19, 2011 9:31 am

The key to all propaganda is incessant repetition,
with no acknowledgement whatsoever of the truth,
no concession to reality, just doubling down of the lies.

December 19, 2011 9:32 am

David,
Are you this David Deming?

If so would you care to state on record who the ‘major researcher in the area of climate change’ was who emailed you to state ‘We must get rid of the Medieval Warm Period!’. Do you still have a copy of the email? If so could you post it here on this thread with email addresses redacted etc.
Regards
KevinUK

gnomish
December 19, 2011 9:33 am

phake physicist is specious, disingenous and misleading:
“American chestnut (Castanea dentata (Marsh.) Borkh.) once dominated the eastern deciduous forests of the USA before nearly all trees throughout the range were annihilated by the introduced pathogen Cryphonectria parasitica (Murr.)”

Paul
December 19, 2011 9:33 am

Dr. David Deming we know what you are up to and the true believers in the cause will refuse to be swayed by confusing facts and messy reality. Mike McMillan, your wrong, my Grandmother not only managed to crack those tough nuts will into her eighties but made a very delicious candy out of them as well, just seeing black walnut stains on someones hands is enough to trigger a Pavlovian response in me.

Rhys Jaggar
December 19, 2011 9:37 am

This kind of thing is pretty common, I’m afraid. When I applied for PhDs I worked on a virus which many respected publications said was ‘an economic problem in cattle’. I was roundly humiliated when a practicing vet, also a PhD student flatly contradicted me on this at a PhD seminar.
Mantras grow in academia like anywhere else. And if you challenge them you’d better damn well be right or your employment prospects go downhill fast.
Everyone talks about ‘trusted sources’. My experience is you shouldn’t trust any source, anywhere, until experience tells you that it is mostly sound, most of the time.

etudiant
December 19, 2011 9:51 am

For ‘A physicist’
American Chestnuts succumbed to the Chestnut Blight, an introduced disease, not climate change.
( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chestnut_blight )
So I’m not sure what your point is.
Black walnut is grown primarily for timber and has not had much attention from the plant engineers. Also, afaik, no walnut cultivar has been bred for temperature insensitivity, as the species is very hardy, so hybrid or all natural should not differ greatly in their temperature response.

DesertYote
December 19, 2011 9:58 am

I know this is anecdotal and not completely relevant, but I had a huge pecan tree in my yard in Mesa AZ. It was ancient. During the late 80s there were a few very hot years, some days busting 120F. The nut yield from my tree those years was incredible. BTW, English walnuts do ok in the Phoenix area.

December 19, 2011 10:01 am

“As a scientist, I understand the difference between anecdotal data and systematic empirical investigations. It is possible that my six trees may not be typical of Juglans nigra specimens in general”.
—————————
He is way ahead of the warmunists who claim a few hand-picked trees on Yamal Peninsula stand as climate proxies for global conditions.

December 19, 2011 10:05 am

Here in Churchville, Maryland, we also had a hot summer (record number of weeks over ninety), and our black walnut trees produced tons of nuts. More than in previous years. The squirrels could not even make a dent in them. But we also had a colder than usual winter, and the spring was likewise cold – summer was kinda late getting here. So anecdotally, the big production increase was due to what – cold winter, cold, late spring or hot summer? Take your pick. Now I’m just an accountant, not a “climate scientist”, but my direct observations are the trees are doing well, the squirrels are happy, and I still have one heck of a mess to clean up around the yard.

John T
December 19, 2011 10:11 am

Gee, after reading that it sounds like the walnut tree is going the way of the polar bear!

thingadonta
December 19, 2011 10:13 am

The usual paper and press release:
could be sensitive to change, often isn’t, might be able to withstand warmer, or colder, the data suggests, but some data doesn’t, but more research required to make yet more inane conclusions.

crosspatch
December 19, 2011 10:23 am

This is absolute nonsense. Those people need to look at this:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/1b/65_Myr_Climate_Change.png
That is the change in climate over the past 60 million years. Black Walnut have experienced temperatures much warmer over the period of their existence and have experienced CO2 levels over 10x today’s levels, too, during the PETM.
This article is absolutely nuts.

David
December 19, 2011 10:27 am

A physicist: You may be a physicist but you are not much of a biologist or you wouldn’t have posted. I don’t even know where to begin and I struggle to keep my response short. Well, first ….. because a tree is in someones yard it is cultivated (or hybridized)??? You can determine this from a fuzzy photo? Second, American chestnut has largely been wiped out in the east …. it’s natural range ….. by an introduced disease. You may have a human planted survivor due to your location on the west coast or it could be a chinese elm or possibly even a hybrid American/Chinese elm. In any case, your facts are empty and your “cultivated” comparison is nonsense. Please, post no more on biological systems.

David
December 19, 2011 10:31 am

Regarding my previous post in response to “A physicist”: As I pondered the trees of the United States in my previous post …. thinking about American Ash, American Elm, and American Chestnut being wiped out by foreign diseases and pests …… I inadvertently wrote “elm” instead of “chestnut” in my response. I’m getting too old.

A physicist
December 19, 2011 10:32 am

It seems to me that Dr. Deming’s conclusions could fairly be summarized as follows:

“There is considerable uncertainty regarding the magnitude of potential effects of climate change on walnut. Some studies tend to indicate walnut could be negatively impacted by climate change, while others do not. Walnut may be at a disadvantage due to its susceptibility to drought and frost injury in current growing regions given the projected increases in temperature and extreme climatic events. Other regions that are currently considered cold for walnut growth may see increased establishment and growth depending upon the rate of temperature increase and the frequency and severity of extreme climatic events.”

Oh wait … that’s the conclusion of the article that Dr. Deming is criticizing.
Whoops … it appears that the outrage being expressed here on WUWT has zero factual basis in the scientific literature.
There *is* quite a bit of literature on ecosystem change associated to climate change … NASA foresees that these shifts will be dramatic.
Which is hardly surprising, and completely consistent with Dr. Deming’s conclusions.

John F. Hultquist
December 19, 2011 10:34 am

I have both sorts of walnut trees living here on the eastern outliers of Washington’s Cascade Mountains. Precipitation is about 9 inches annually (so I water them) at our elevation of 2,240 feet.
My trees were well leafed-out by late March of 2010 but in early April we had 2 nights of freezing temperature. Most all plants were effected – Arrowleaf Balsamroot – in bloom – were laid low. That one is native. The leaves of the walnuts turned black and fell – every branch was bare. Apples and cherries lost all their fruit but not their leaves. Conclusion: My walnut trees are more sensitive to spring frosts than my apple and cherry trees.
Five weeks after the loss of their leaves my trees grew a new covering and, in fact, managed to produce a handful of nuts. This year (2011) did not present serious problems, except it was a bit cool – according to the tomatoes. However, September and October saved the season. Some tomatoes even ripened on the vine. The walnut crop was excellent. I shelled and froze many pounds of Carpathians and gave most of the black walnuts to others.
To: A physicist says:
December 19, 2011 at 8:59 am
“ . . . there grows a vibrantly healthy American chestnut tree

There are many such trees around the country – far removed from others and the source of blight. I grew up in western Pennsylvania where the dead Chestnuts still stood and some still suckered some nut producing shoots. Hickory trees were common and Butternut less so. University researchers and others are still trying to develop a replacement.

John West
December 19, 2011 10:37 am

KevinUK says:
I can’t attack the facts or the logic, so I must ad hom!

December 19, 2011 10:42 am

From the “physicist’s” link:

Researchers from NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory and the California Institute of Technology in Pasadena, Calif., investigated how Earth’s plant life is likely to react over the next three centuries as Earth’s climate changes in response to rising levels of human-produced greenhouse gases. Study results are published in the journal Climatic Change.

NASA can see three centuries into the future?? Anyone who believes that is a credulous fool. James Hansen tried to see three decades into the future and was 100% wrong.
NASA is simply engaging in climate alarmism to protect its budget. No one on this planet can see changes in the biosphere three hundred years into the future. Get real. And remember that the “Team” has taken over the agenda in the journal Climatic Change, among others. It’s all in the Climategate 1.0 emails, if a clueless physicist cares to look.

crosspatch
December 19, 2011 10:46 am

Most people have no idea of the scale of drought that California has seen in just the past 2000 years:
http://www.sierranaturenotes.com/naturenotes/paleodrought1.htm
There have been times when Lake Tahoe was below its outlet for CENTURIES at a time. Today’s period has been an unusually wet one for the Holocene in California. That said, he is concerned that Black Walnut will not survive global warming in California and that is probably because the trees are not native here. They probably wouldn’t survive without irrigation in the state anyway.
This article shows the native range of the Juglans nigra. It is not native to California. It wouldn’t survive TODAY’s climate without artificial irrigation because we have a period from May to October (and sometimes longer) with no rain whatsoever.
The article does not put Purdue in a good light. It makes the institution look silly.

crosspatch
December 19, 2011 10:47 am
December 19, 2011 10:49 am

The biggest threat to walnut trees – is man’s love of the wood! It is one of the most beautiful. And that fact alone means it has to be hardy to have outlasted the colonial furniture industry! 😉
That being said, Dr. Deming is going to be getting a lot of hate mail for using the studies actual facts to debunk the hysteria of the press release.

Luther Wu
December 19, 2011 10:53 am

The known cultivars of American Black Walnut are legion and their very diversity indicates that the species incorporates an incredible survival response to growing conditions in it’s genetic makeup.
Oklahoma not only has an exceedingly temperate climate, but is known to have the most diverse topographies and subsequently diverse ecosystems in the United States with everything from cypress swamps, mixed hardwood and evergreen forests, tall grass and mixed grass prairies, several mountain ranges and high Rocky Mt. plateau. Only within the highest and driest areas Are Black Walnuts not wonderfully abundant, and the walnut cultivars found within those regions are equally diverse.
A physicist‘s implication that the discussion should focus only on native wild Eastern Black Walnut is wholly without merit, as is the Purdue study which A physicist attempts to defend.

Latitude
December 19, 2011 10:53 am

damn….first the coral reefs are all gone
…and now the walnuts