Feurdean et al. (2012) state that species distribution models run at either finer scales (Trivedi et al., 2008; Randin et al., 2009) or including representations of plant demography (Hickler et al., 2009) and more accurate dispersal capability (Engler and Guisan, 2009) appear to predict a much smaller habitat and species loss in response to climate model predictions than do more coarse-scale models (Thomas et al., 2004; Thuiller et al., 2005; Araujo et al., 2008),” and these observations prompted the German and Romanian researchers to conduct their own real-world empirical study of the subject.
In the words of the authors, “seven fossil pollen sequences from Romania situated at different elevations were analyzed to examine the effects of climate change on community composition and biodiversity between 15,000 and 10,500 cal. yr BP in this biogeographically sensitive region of Europe,” because this period, as they describe it, “was characterized by large-amplitude global climate fluctuations occurring on decadal to millennial time scales (Johnsen et al., 1992; Jouzel et al., 2007),” which enabled them to explore “how repeated temperature changes have affected patterns of community composition and diversity” and to analyze “recovery processes following major disruptions of community structure.” Results indicated that (1) “community composition at a given time was not only the product of existing environmental conditions, but also the consequence of previous cumulative episodes of extirpation and recolonization,” that (2) “many circumpolar woody plants were able to survive when environmental conditions became unfavorable,” and that (3) “these populations acted as sources when the climate became more favorable again,” which behavior, in their words, “is in agreement with modeling results at the local scale, predicting the persistence of suitable habitats and species survival within large-grid cells in which they were predicted to disappear by coarse-scale models.”
The findings of Feurdean et al. add to those of the growing number of studies that demonstrate the shortcomings of climate-alarmist-approved “climate envelope” models of both vegetation and animal responses to rising temperatures, which models are used by climate alarmists to predict massive species extinctions as a result of the “unprecedented” CO2-induced global warming predicted by equally deficient climate models. Clearly, these two “wrongs” do not make a “right.”