Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Yes, but compared to the rest of the CONUS, the Southeast is most like a tropical rainforest, and thus would be the region that most approximates it's features, biodiversity included. I am compiling the studies, but you must know that the South, as a region, isn't very well studied, in terms of the natural wilderness of the region, as many wilderness areas are privately owned/ not at pristine state. Meanwhile, the West, with its huge amount of public wilderness, presented easier opportunity for naturalists to observe all the animals/plants in their regions; thus, the Western environments and biodiversity is more published than the South's.
Washington state is more like a tropical rain-forest than Alaska too...
Well that's you OPINION but like with most of your absurd claims you have nothing to back that up with
Quote:
Biodiversity ∝ warmth and wetness, and in that regard, Southeast > everywhere else in the CONUS. Familiarize yourself with this relationship quickly.
Familiarize yourself with reality and facts first:
Washington state is more like a tropical rain-forest than Alaska too...
Well that's you OPINION but like with most of your absurd claims you have nothing to back that up with
Please, nowhere in the CONUS has the intense combination of heat, humidity, and heavy precipitation like the Southeastern US does. Ergo, the Southeast, compared to the rest of the CONUS, is most like a tropical rainforest.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sav858
Familiarize yourself with reality and facts first:
Biodiversity ∝ warmth and wetness. What part of this relationship don't you understand? Is the ∝ symbol confusing you?
Those studies mask the intense amounts of biodiversity the South has. For one, they exclude quite a bit of animal groups, and said groups happen to be the kinds that would be present more in the South than in the West (i.e marine fishes, many types of arthropods, fungi, etc). Furthermore, you then have the compounding factors I described earlier, leading what you see of the South's biodiversity on those reports.
Please, nowhere in the CONUS has the intense combination of heat, humidity, and heavy precipitation like the Southeastern US does. Ergo, the Southeast, compared to the rest of the CONUS, is most like a tropical rainforest.
Sure but that doesn't mean it's anything close a tropical rainforest though. The Southeastern US gets A LOT COLDER than any tropical rainforest.
Quote:
Biodiversity ∝ warmth and wetness. What part of this relationship don't you understand? Is the ∝ symbol confusing you?
Those studies mask the intense amounts of biodiversity the South has. For one, they exclude quite a bit of animal groups, and said groups happen to be the kinds that would be present more in the South than in the West (i.e marine fishes, many types of arthropods, fungi, etc). Furthermore, you then have the compounding factors I described earlier, leading what you see of the South's biodiversity on those reports.
I understand it but there are other factors as well. If what you say was true then you think you would be able to provide something, or anything, showing the Southeastern US being the most overall bio-diverse region in the US but you have yet to do that. I don't care about your bizarre reasoning and what you consider "logic", WHERE IS THE EVIDENCE and SOURCES to back up your claim?
Sure but that doesn't mean it's anything close a tropical rainforest though. The Southeastern US gets A LOT COLDER than any tropical rainforest.
Those things are true, captain obvious, but it still stands that out of everywhere else in the CONUS, the Southeast has the greatest of combination of heat, humidity, and heavy precipitation, and thus is most like a tropical rainforests.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sav858
I understand it but there are other factors as well. If what you say was true then you think you would be able to provide something, or anything, showing the Southeastern US being the most overall bio-diverse region in the US but you have yet to do that. I don't care about your bizarre reasoning and what you consider "logic", WHERE IS THE EVIDENCE and SOURCES to back up your claim?
A surprising number of life forms are more diverse in the United States than anywhere else on Earth. The nation is particularly rich in aquatic life, such as fishes, turtles, salamanders, and mussels. For example, more fish species are found in a single river, the Tennessee, than in all of Europe.
Check out how the US South absolutely slaughters the West in many of these maps (reptile, amphibian, bird, and tree diversity): Mapping the World's Biodiversity
And just one last question to truly test your understanding: what the ∝ symbol stands for? Answer it, or else you truly don't have understanding.
Those things are true, captain obvious, but it still stands that out of everywhere else in the CONUS, the Southeast has the greatest of combination of heat, humidity, and heavy precipitation, and thus is most like a tropical rainforests.
It's also a little snippet that doesn't say much about the region as whole.
Quote:
Check out how the US South absolutely slaughters the West in many of these maps (reptile, amphibian, bird, and tree diversity): Mapping the World's Biodiversity.
Not for birds or mammals it doesn't, but finally you found something. I think this is the first time you actually finally provided some sort of proof lol.
Quote:
And just one last question to truly test your understanding: what the ∝ symbol stands for? Answer it, or else you truly don't have understanding.
^That pic can literally pass for the Amazon, right? Forests like that are found all along the Southeastern US, from the South Atlantic coast west to Texas.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sav858
It's also a little snippet that doesn't say much about the region as whole.
That was just a warm up.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sav858
Not for birds or mammals it doesn't, but finally you found something. I think this is the first time you actually finally provided some sort of proof lol.
I provided proof many times before.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sav858
Proportionality?
Very good (unless you google searched the answer). Now translate this statement to a proper English sentence; Biodiversity ∝ warmth and wetness.
^That pic can literally pass for the Amazon, right? Forests like that are found all along the Southeastern US, from the South Atlantic coast west to Texas.
Well lets see a pic like that from Tennessee, where you find all those diverse fish specifies...
Quote:
I provided proof many times before.
Very good (unless you google searched the answer). Now translate this statement to a proper English sentence; Biodiversity ∝ warmth and wetness.
I'm still waiting for the proof that the South in not explored very well and the West is better explored.
Look at the winter temps of most of the Southern US and tell me that's warm. Mobile, AL's average low in Jan is 40 lol.
South Florida and the extreme portions of South Texas does, the rest does not. It gets very cold in most of the South and can snow.
Look at the winter temps of most of the Southern US and tell me that's warm. Mobile, AL's average low in Jan is 40 lol.
It snows like one day out of the year in the south. LMAO
As of December 16, 2015; It's currently 70 degrees in Birmingham compared to 54 in San Francisco. And btw the average temps for Mobile in Jan is 60; It only gets in the 40s during the am, but it doesn't last long, during the it warms up drastically.
To be fair, the environments and ecosystems of the Southeast aren't really well explored/known/studied, so it is indeed possible that the vast wealth of biodiversity the region holds just isn't cataloged. The West, including California, represented a stark change in environment to the natural observers, who were used to the environment of the east; thus, the naturalists were more eager to catalog/record all the species that lived out West more readily compared to the East.
But, once again, the warmer and wetter a place is, the more biodiversity it will have; tropical rainforests are the center of biodiversity on the planet, not PNW temperate rainforests, not deserts, not prairies. The Southeastern US from East Texas to Florida, up to Virginia is closer to exhibiting tropical rainforest conditions than any other region in the CONUS.
There is this phoney belief out there that the South is green in winter. BS. A tiny sliver along the coastline from say Charleston down around to S. Texas along a sliver of the coastline say 20 miles wide is green, but not entirely.
The interior Southeast is just a dead grass brown leafless landscape just like the NE USA. Proof is right here:
Here is a streetview of Long Island NY in Jan 2013:
Here are some more streetviews from Long Island in Jan 2013
And here is one from the same exact month in Columbus, GA. Now if the Southeast were some remotely subtropical climate like say in Western Europe or Australia it wouldn't look brown and dead like this. But the US Southeast is subject to incredible bitter cold temps given the latitude. Columbus, GA is far closer to the equator than Nice, France or Naples, Italy yet it looks no different than Philadelphia or Long Island, NY in winter.
The interior Southeast US looks nothing like a subtropical region, and looks the same as a cold continental climate no different than Maryland or PA or New Jersey. Subtropical my ar.....
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.