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 20, 2011 8:40 am

Edmond,
You know what you can do with that Pseudo-Skeptical Pseudo-Science horse manure. It is an indisputable fact that hurricane ACE has been declining. There is a good reason that “Skeptical Science” blog is listed on the right sidebar as “unreliable”. John Cook is on Fenton’s payroll, and his blog is propaganda, not science.
Get reliable information here at WUWT if you want to learn the science. Or get your bogus climate propaganda spoon-fed to you by PSPS if you prefer. It’s up to you.

old engineer
December 20, 2011 8:42 am

“A physicist”-
Are you a paid troll? Because no one can be so dense as not to see Dr. Deming’s point: The Purdue press release inaccurately described the paper. Media outlets then took the press release and added sensationalism with headlines such as “Walnut industry may crack under climate pressure.” see:
http://news.discovery.com/earth/walnut-trees-may-crack-under-climate-pressure-111201.html
AusieDan December 19, 2011 at 8:03pm said it best. You have misjudged your audience. A number of commenters have read (1) the paper, (2)read the press release, and (3) read the media outlets. All agree with Dr. Deming.
That said, a note to Dr. Deming. Since many folks here DO check the quotes to see that are real, it would be helpful to reference all quotes. For instance it was easy to find the “Walnut industry may crack under climate pressure.” in a google search, but I couldn’t find “pushed the verge of extinction in the next few decades” in a google search. It just gives fodder to trolls such as “A physicist” not to be able to easily identify the source of the quote.

December 20, 2011 8:42 am

Edmond says:
“Unfortunately, trees cannot uproot themselves and move with the climate at which the speed of change is possibly or could be occurring.”
You’re kidding us, right? You really can’t be that stupid.

Doug
December 20, 2011 8:49 am

Just for information sake, I teach arborist a shade tree short course at our state college’s and universities. The fact that your Juglans nigra (Black Walnut Tree) produced so many fruit after the extreme weather conditions of 2011 is quite common. Most North American trees are programmed during a high stress growing season to produce a much greater amount of seed to propagate them selves in case of catostrophic loss. The seed is much more resiliant to withstand periods of unforgivable weather conditions, to propagate once condition improve to a sustainable condition, which could be several years. I have read a study that Black Walnut Seed can withstand up to 12 – 15 years of being dormant. The majority of tree geno’s will out last all of us during all climate changes we can dream up.

Luther Wu
December 20, 2011 9:03 am

Edmond,
Trees ‘move’ at the speed of the rate of dispersal of their seed.
Since information has been given here that in just the state of Oklahoma, walnut trees are perfectly capable of coping with huge hail stones, tornadoes, massive ice storms, temperature ranges from – 30F to plus 120F and miserable drought which lasts for years, how is it that walnut trees are threatened?

December 20, 2011 9:14 am

Edmond says:
December 20, 2011 at 8:30 am
“skepticalscience.com”
I hold here in my grubby little hands a link to infowars that proves you wrong!

A physicist
December 20, 2011 9:19 am

old engineer says: That said, a note to Dr. Deming. Since many folks here DO check the quotes to see that are real, it would be helpful to reference all quotes. For instance it was easy to find the “Walnut industry may crack under climate pressure.” in a google search, but I couldn’t find “pushed the verge of extinction in the next few decades” in a google search.

Second the motion! Although it must be admitted that cherry-picking and then criticizing quotes-of-quotes-of-press-releases is (perhaps) not the strongest form of skepticism.
It was gratifying to learn too from WUWT arborists that the branches dropping from Dr. Deming’s tree were not normal dry-weather abscission (in which leaves drop, but not branches), and that Dr. Deming’s large walnut crop was a last-ditch attempt by his walnut trees to propagate seeds that would survive through a drought, even if the trees themselves did not survive.
Perhaps you ought to water your walnut trees in 2012, Dr. Deming, especially if Oklahoma experiences another dry hot summer! It would be a shame if a few months of drought and heat were to kill beautiful trees that otherwise could live 250 years and more — long enough to that these trees will experience more fully the effects of the climate change that we humans are visiting upon our planet.
And finally, Dr. Deming’s post did stimulate me to verify for myself that America’s professional associations of arborists, foresters, and horticulturalists are unanimous in their opinion — consistent with the Purdue research and press release — that climate change is affecting, and sometimes substantially harming, plant life both in America and around the world.
For which new understanding, thank you Dr. Deming!

Henry Galt
December 20, 2011 9:45 am

Edmond may have fallen into A Physicist’s latrine.
And that planetsave.com
just wow. eg the “article” on 2011 having $10billion flooding costs due to …. wait for it (you already guessed didn’t you)
wow (even allowing for the Joe Enron link) – makes me want to sandpaper my eyeballs and turn back time.

A physicist
December 20, 2011 10:56 am

For folks living in Oklahoma and Texas, the Haskell County Extension Educator has put together a fact sheet titled “Summer Heat Stress Affecting Local Trees“:

Very little rain, 100 degree temperatures, intense sunlight and high winds. Sounds like a typical Oklahoma summer to most, and yet the trees seem to be taking this recent string of scorching weather worse than usual.
Recently I have received many calls on trees that are prematurely losing their leaves. It seems to be more apparent on oaks, but is occurring on all species. So why are these trees dying? Well, the majority of them are actually not dead! They have entered a state of dormancy, the same process that happens to deciduous trees every fall.
How can we tell if a tree is in dormancy (still alive) or dead? We need to conduct the snap-scratch test. Start by selecting the tip of a twig the size of a pencil. Grasp the twig and bend it sharply back on itself. A living limb will bend easily and eventually the stem will split showing moist wood within. A dead limb will snap cleanly with very little pressure and appear dry within.

Dr. Deming, it seems that the symptom you report that your walnut trees are “dropping branches” may be a very serious sign that their twigs are becoming dry and brittle … it might be a good idea to seek your county extension agent’s advice as to whether your walnut trees are at-risk, not of dormancy, but of death outright. Especially if Oklahoma and Texas experience in 2012 yet another year of extreme heat and drought.

December 20, 2011 11:15 am

Edmond says:
December 20, 2011 at 8:34 am
In the magical world of fantasy, this is called wishful thinking. Unfortunately, trees cannot uproot themselves and move with the climate at which the speed of change is possibly or could be occurring.
Shirley you jest?

Bill52
December 20, 2011 11:38 am

Not a nut on my walnut trees this year, 100lbs usually, global warming? Naw, late frost, no cherries, no plumbs, no sloes, no apples. Pity the poor furry creatures this winter.

Robin Edwards
December 20, 2011 12:24 pm

I really enjoyed your post, Robert Brown. Congratulations on an informative, well argued script, and I hope to read more from you from time to time.
Surely the APS will come to its senses in due course. They seem to have forgotten how science progresses, and has progressed for a couple of hundred years. Their current attitude is truly infantile.
Robin

A physicist
December 20, 2011 1:01 pm

Robin Edwards says: Surely the APS will come to its senses in due course.

I have good news for you, Robin. It took only twenty-nine months for the APS to “come to its senses”, between the November 18, 2007 APS statement:

“The evidence is incontrovertible: Global warming is occurring.”

and the updated April 18, 2010 APS statement

“Given the significant risks associated with global climate change, prudent steps should be taken to reduce greenhouse gas emissions now while continuing to improve the observational data and the model predictions.”

As always, it’s helpful to review the facts for yourself.
It’s good to see skepticism helping the science become stronger; that’s the right dynamic.

Frank
December 20, 2011 1:43 pm

The function of university press releases is to provide important information to the public from university research that will otherwise only be found in specialist journals. Mis-representing the content of a scientific paper in a press release is certainly a form of academic misconduct that tarnishes the reputation of the university that issues the press release. Dr. Deming could share his concerns with Purdue University. Such practices will surely continue until someone does.

Steve P
December 20, 2011 2:06 pm

A physicist says:
December 20, 2011 at 9:19 am

Although it must be admitted that cherry-picking and then criticizing quotes-of-quotes-of-press-releases is (perhaps) not the strongest form of skepticism.

Branch-picking is OK, however, and misunderstanding – or misstating – what you’ve quoted is even better, I take it.

Dr. Deming, it seems that the symptom you report that your walnut trees are “dropping branches” may be a very serious sign that their twigs are becoming dry and brittle.

Or not.
Trees lose branches for a variety of reasons, including ice and wind, but they have a very simply and effective mechanism for branch loss: they grow new ones.

Steve P
December 20, 2011 2:07 pm

s/b “for dealing with branch loss”

rw
December 20, 2011 2:33 pm

Dear Physicist,
How’s that job at 7-11 going?
I know, I know … you’re in between consulting gigs.
But look at it this way, once in a while it’s good to do an honest day’s work.
All the best,
rw

A. Scott
December 20, 2011 3:52 pm

A physicist says:
December 20, 2011 at 2:08 am
Please let me commend to WUWT folks especially the Task Force Report Section 3: Climate-Forest Interactions. It was mighty interesting (for me) to find that the Purdue science and press release, that has aroused so much passion here on WUWT, is in very reasonable accord with the national and global trends that the SAF Task Force document summarizes as follows (omitting the extensive references that the SAF provides):

Climate–Forest Interactions
Climate change will bring disturbances that affect tree mortality and forest regeneration. Drought and species range shifts are mentioned as critical processes associated with climate change, but in western North America two processes dominate the discussion: wildfire and bark beetle outbreaks: … Researchers predict at least a doubling of the area burned annually for western forests under moderate climate change scenarios. … Massive and ongoing mountain pine beetle outbreaks have dramatically increased in the past 10 years as a result of climate change. … These effects are not limited to western North America: climate change–related mortality driven by water stress affects forests globally
.

Judging by the SAF Task Force Report, it sure seems to me that what the Purdue scientists are saying, about walnut trees specifically, pretty accurately reflects the consensus opinion of America’s professional foresters, regarding climate change and forests in general.
By the way, the SAF Task Force includes plenty of industry-employed scientists. Given that the consensus opinion of these hard-working, experienced, expert forestry folks is that climate change is a mighty serious issue for America’s forests … hmmm … maybe WUWT’s rational skeptics ought to be … well … convinced of it, eh?

Really? Seems to me if you read the “Results” from the Purdue report, paired with real world knowledge, they say say nothing of the sort:

“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.”

How you can reach ANY kind of conclusion from that wishy-washy statement is astounding.
Are your legs getting tired yet? That’s a lotta fancy dancing around the issue to try a twist facts to support your conclusion 😉

A physicist
December 20, 2011 3:53 pm

Steve P says: Trees lose branches for a variety of reasons, including ice and wind, but they have a very simple and effective mechanism for branch loss: they grow new ones.

Hmmm…. as you say, Steve, “or not”:

COLLEGE STATION, Texas (AP) The Texas Forest Service said in a statement Monday that its foresters estimated that 100 million to 500 million trees died in the 2011 drought.

So the science is clear: Dr. Deming has sound reason to be concerned for the health of his trees. Of course, most likely, this massive tree die-off is not the beginning of the desertification of Texas/Oklahoma.
Unless, it is.

Luther Wu
December 20, 2011 4:08 pm

A physicist says:
December 20, 2011 at 3:53 pm
“Of course, most likely, this massive tree die-off is not the beginning of the desertification of Texas/Oklahoma.
Unless, it is.”

_________________________________
So, are you attributing last year’s drought to AGW? Is that what you are saying?
Could La Nina have any effect, (as most agree is the root cause of the drought)?
Desertification of Texas and Oklahoma? That is a stretch. Much of Texas and parts of OK are already considered arid/desert. This most recent drought is nothing new.
All you are doing is trying to confuse the original thrust of this thread.
You aren’t convincing anyone of anything.

sky
December 20, 2011 4:14 pm

A physicist says:
December 20, 2011 at 9:19 am
“Dr. Deming’s post did stimulate me to verify for myself that America’s professional associations of arborists, foresters, and horticulturalists are unanimous in their opinion — consistent with the Purdue research and press release — that climate change is affecting, and sometimes substantially harming, plant life both in America and around the world. ”
This conclusion invites the question whether the “professional associations” can point to any period in Earth’s history during which climate change was NOT affecting and sometimes substantially harming plant life. In other words, what’s new now?

A physicist
December 20, 2011 4:27 pm

More sobering climate-related news. Texas water managers have begun preparing for one more year of severe heat and drought, an eventuality that would wreak unprecedented disaster upon Texas:

With conditions on their way to potentially being worse than during the drought of the 1940s and 1950s, the state [of Texas] has given the LCRA [Lower Colorado River Authority] permission to deviate from the Water Management Plan to take extra drought relief measures if dry conditions persist next year.

Basically the state of Texas is throwing away the LCRA playbook, because what’s happening in Texas just plain isn’t in the playbook.
It’s plainly evident that if a dryer and hotter climate ever becomes the norm, then both Texas and Oklahoma will be mighty different places than they are now.

December 20, 2011 5:24 pm

a physicist says:
“It’s plainly evident that if a dryer and hotter climate ever becomes the norm…”
It is plainly evident that there is nothing like an educated fool. Texas is in the Southwestern U.S. – it is a regional climate. There is no drought to the east, or to the north, or to the west. California went through a drought in the 1980’s, but now the state has ample water. Regional climates change; they always have and they always will.
Fot the umpteenth time, there is nothing unusual happening globally. Weather patterns shift and regional climates change, but the globe has been extremely static in its temperature, only varying by about 0.7°C in over more than a century. That is very unusual during the Holoccene, and it is extremely unusual over the past several hundred millennia.
‘a physicist’ is just a Chicken Little [UK: Chicken Licken], scared of his own shadow. If people took that kind of wild-eyed raving seriously, we would soon be back to paying witch doctors to cure diseases.

A. Scott
December 20, 2011 5:40 pm

A physicist says:
December 20, 2011 at 5:19 am
David, there is no way a 400-word press release can cover all the material in a 12,000 word scientific review. Both the Purdue article and the Purdue press release are in reasonable accord with the often-stated consensus opinion of America’s foresters and gardeners (a consensus that has been thoroughly documented in my posts): climate change is already exerting major and often harmful effects upon America’s plant life.
In light of that sobering reality, which is plainly evident to every serious forester and gardener, aren’t WUWT’s quibbles about press releases a pretty weak form of skepticism?

Since you keep repeating the same inaccurate comment, I must again comment, this time in my most incredulous Jimmy J. Walker voice: Say what!!?
You simply refuse to acknowledge the words directly from the paper that sum up the “Results” of the paper :

“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.”

Compare with the overall tone and the specific comments from the press release. The press release was clear – AGW, or “climate change” was likely to cause significant impact to the black walnut – including being potential fatal to the trees:

“Walnut trees may not be able to withstand climate change”
“Warmer, drier summers and extreme weather events considered possible as the climate changes would be especially troublesome – possibly fatal – for walnut trees, according to research at Purdue University.”
“They found that the trees are especially sensitive to particular climates.”
“Walnut is really restricted to sites not too wet or dry. It has an extremely narrow range,” said Jacobs, whose findings were published in the December issue of Annals of Forest Science. “We suspect and predict that climate change is going to have a real impact on walnuts. We may see some type of decline of the species.”
“That, on top of the increase in temperatures, would be a problem for walnut,”

The more accurate version of these comments, if they were based on the “results” from the paper, should be:

There is considerable uncertainty of the effect of climate change on Walnut trees
There is considerable uncertainty that warmer, drier summers and extreme weather events considered possible as the climate changes would have any effect – let alone possibly fatal – on walnut trees, according to a paper from Purdue University.
[The paper] found that the trees are somewhat sensitive to cold events and drought conditions, however their research also clearly shows that warmer temperatures and increased levels of CO2 associated with global warming are significantly beneficial to these trees, providing enhanced growth and an expanded growing range.
Walnut trees survive in many zones with widely varying climatic conditions. They grow in a large range, across much of the US. We found considerable uncertainty that climate change is likely to have a real impact on walnuts. We found walnut trees to be one of the biggest beneficiaries of increased CO2 and warming temperatures of all the temperate hardwoods. We found little concrete evidence of climate related decline of the species.
We found an increase in temperatures would not likely be a significant problem for walnut, to the contrary they would see increased establishment and growth, and an expansion of their growing range.

A physicist
December 20, 2011 5:44 pm

A physicist says: “Dr. Deming’s post did stimulate me to verify for myself that America’s professional associations of arborists, foresters, and horticulturalists are unanimous in their opinion — consistent with the Purdue research and press release — that climate change is affecting, and sometimes substantially harming, plant life both in America and around the world. ”

sky says: This conclusion invites the question whether the “professional associations” can point to any period in Earth’s history during which climate change was NOT affecting and sometimes substantially harming plant life.

The present drought appears to be the most severe in US history. So if there’s even hotter and/or drier drought conditions to come — as some climate-change science predicts — then we had best avert these disasters if we can, and prepare for them if we cannot.
This is a good reason to strengthen climate-change science as rapidly as feasible. Because passive waiting and deliberate ignorance have never been America’s way.