California Has Always Had Fires, Environmental Alarmism Makes Them Worse Than

Grajonca said:
I have been posting scientific papers for over a decade on here! Watch this space, there is plenty more to come. I also do not consider myself to be on the right, more a centrist.
Click to expand...

Didn't know that. It would mean you post apolitical mainstream science as compared to "science" favored by the Right for whom nothing is apolitical.
 
“California was a very smoky place historically,” says Malcolm North of the US Forest Survey.“Even though we’re seeing area burned that is off-the-charts, it’s still probably less than what used to be burned before Europeans arrived.”
Click to expand...

This guy is in the wrong job. The flammable areas of the entire North American continent were massively more extensive before Europeans turned up. How could he make such a dumbass comparison ?
 
moon said:
This guy is in the wrong job. The flammable areas of the entire North American continent were massively more extensive before Europeans turned up. How could he make such a dumbass comparison ?
Click to expand...

Whitey ruins everything, huh?

These massively more extensive areas would burn periodically, naturally.
 
Darth Omar said:
Utter projection lol.

Off the charts projection.
Click to expand...

I guess that canned response means that papers published by the science academies around the world are political tracts, in your opinion, and those put out by the denier community are the real deal.

You guys all sound the same.
 
Darth Omar said:
Lefties have a way of using ‘science’ as if it were some sort of monolithic thing.

The reality is, there are very few areas in science where there’s an absence of diversity of opinion. And of course, climate science is no exception.

Trying to tie CA fires to burning fossils fuels requires a small flotilla of assumptions—literally a fools errand. The more assumptions any theory has the shakier it is, because if even one assumption is amiss the whole thing comes crashing down.
Click to expand...

Yes very well put, sadly climate science has been hijacked by charlatans with a political agenda.
 
BartenderElite said:
Is that the question we need to be asking?

When have humans lost access to so much clean water & air? When have we lost so much habitat? When has the oceanic food supply been on such a brink? When have we been close to having as much plastic in the ocean as fish?

And that's just a couple hundred years into the industrial revolution.

The real question: when are we going to wake up?
Click to expand...
There is a difference to a clean environment and climate change. Perhaps we could start by cleaning the forests of dead trees killed by spruce beetles.
 
Grajonca said:
I have been posting scientific papers for over a decade on here! Watch this space, there is plenty more to come. I also do not consider myself to be on the right, more a centrist.
Click to expand...

Judging by their accuracy you wrote most of them yourself, Comrade maggot.
 
Grajonca said:
Yes very well put, sadly climate science has been hijacked by charlatans with a political agenda.
Click to expand...

Seems backwards. Being not a scientist and trying to be open minded, I look at this way: it is credible that a small minority of children and teenagers who discovered an attraction to science and then devoted themselves to years of study and sacrifice to finally become scientists themselves have gone off the rails and sold out to a political agenda. It is not credible that a majority have. Nor is it credible that a majority have been innocently deluded into adapting their work to a political agenda.
 
martin said:
Seems backwards. Being not a scientist and trying to be open minded, I look at this way: it is credible that a small minority of children and teenagers who discovered an attraction to science and then devoted themselves to years of study and sacrifice to finally become scientists themselves have gone off the rails and sold out to a political agenda. It is not credible that a majority have. Nor is it credible that a majority have been innocently deluded into adapting their work to a political agenda.
Click to expand...

So you say. Grant funding. Follow the money.
 
ExpressLane said:
Humans encroach on fire prone area and whine when they get burned out.
Click to expand...

That's their problem. There are things they can do to protect their property, some of which the state of California makes difficult or impossible to do because of idiot laws by government.
 
Damocles said:
An article by somebody who believes that mankind contributes to global warming...

https://www.forbes.com/sites/michae...armism-makes-forest-fires-worse/#6a74e8b63712

California Has Always Had Fires, Environmental Alarmism Makes Them Worse Than Necessary

I woke up an hour later than normal yesterday morning because smoke from northern California’s forest fires had blotted out the sun. My bedroom windows glowed orange. It looked like a scene out of the 1983 made-for-TV movie, “The Day After,” about nuclear war.

I wasn’t the only one creeped out by the apocalyptic hue. “'A Nuclear Winter' Over Bay Area, as Wildfires Blot Out the Sun,” read a New York Times NYT. “Without the smoke, it would be a clear day,” noted a scientist. “This is all generated from the fires.”

The same mechanism that caused the orange sky is what could destroy agriculture in the wake of a thermonuclear war: particulate matter from burned wood blocking parts of the light spectrum from reaching the ground.

-------

And while the 2 million acres that have burned in California so far in 2020 is 10 times more area than burned in 2019, it’s still 2 million acres less than the lowest estimate for acres burned within modern state borders annually before Europeans settled in America. (underline is mine)

“California was a very smoky place historically,” says Malcolm North of the US Forest Survey.“Even though we’re seeing area burned that is off-the-charts, it’s still probably less than what used to be burned before Europeans arrived.”

Many reporters note that more area has burned this year in California than at any other point in “the modern period,” but that period began in 1950. For the last half of the 20th Century, the annual area burned in California was just 250,000 acres a year, whereas the best-available science suggests 4.4 and 12 million acres burned in California annually before the arrival of Europeans.

More at link...
Click to expand...

Yes, California has always had seasonal wildfires. Was listening to "LA Woman" the other day. "I see your hair is burning / Hills are filled with fire." (1971)

Population sprawl -- and climate change -- are making them worse.
 
ThatOwlWoman said:
Yes, California has always had seasonal wildfires. Was listening to "LA Woman" the other day. "I see your hair is burning / Hills are filled with fire." (1971)

Population sprawl -- and climate change -- are making them worse.
Click to expand...

You didn't bother to read the article... That makes me sad. You can't have a conversation about something when folks ignore facts they don't like and just repeat bumper sticker nonsense ad infinitum.
 
Damocles said:
You didn't bother to read the article... That makes me sad. You can't have a conversation about something when folks ignore facts they don't like and just repeat bumper sticker nonsense ad infinitum.
Click to expand...

Baolp2z.jpg
 
martin said:
I guess that canned response means that papers published by the science academies around the world are political tracts, in your opinion, and those put out by the denier community are the real deal.

You guys all sound the same.
Click to expand...

I don't have much time for people that use emotive terms like denier for sceptics. Scepticism should be the default setting for anybody seriously adhering to the scientific method. Using CMIP5 models to support a theory is just completely arse about face and not true science. Of course now alarmists have rolled out a new generation of models labelled CMIP6 and they run even hotter.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top