Isn't that in contrast to https://www.nasa.gov/technology/carbon-dioxide-fertilization... ?
> It’s largely a red herring, as climate scientists have patiently explained for years. Rising CO2 does benefit plants, at least up to a point, but it’s just one factor. Plants are also affected by many other symptoms of climate change, including rising temperatures, changing weather patterns, shifts in water availability and so on.
I think the question is the following: the NASA article seems to indicate that the Earth is getting greener. The headline in the posted article says no greening has occurred. Which is correct?
Which NASA article are you referencing?
The NASA article claims our planet became greener from 1982-2015.
The new study agrees the earth became significantly greener in the 80s and 90s, but the trend started reversing in the 2000s.
I think they do not necessarily contradict each another.
In this case: it's interesting that CO2 has a negative feedback loop where less CO2 means fewer plants, increasing CO2, and more CO2 means more plants, decreasing CO2; have climate models taken this into account (enough)?
https://www.nasa.gov/centers-and-facilities/ames/human-activ...
5% increase in leaf area over the period (from CO2 and land-use changes) https://www.nature.com/articles/s41893-019-0220-7
The paper for this thread https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.aax1396 also addresses data generally ending in 2015, and says "all four LAI [Leaf Area Index] datasets exhibited a transition from increasing trends before the late 1990s to decreasing trends afterward (fig. S5)"
Those claims appear to be in direct contradiction, and I don't see any immediate way to reconcile them.
A large increase between 1985 and 2000, followed by a slow decrease between 2000 and now would perfectly fit both assertions.