Climate change - the POLITICAL debate. (Vol 5)

[LongQ]

Wayoftheflower said:

mko9 said:

Pretty sure those burns were managed for hundreds of thousands, if not millions of years without forestry departments. Shockingly, the whole world wasn't burnt to ashes.

Fires were managed around private property and infrastructure for millions of years? I think we have ourselves a Scientologist. What's Xenu's take on all this?

Simple solution if you are mainly concerned about people and property.

Don't let people build properties in high risk natural fire areas.

Better still - no people means a lower chance of idiots deliberately or accidentally setting fires.

Moreover the needs to run electricity supply cables through woods and forests that people will not like to have maintained in a way that makes the cables safer to deploy, would be reduced.

How?

Well either the lack of people eliminates the need for supply lines or the lack of people means there is no one on the ground to object to the management of the 'management' of the forests.

One notes, for example, that much of the flora of Australia expected and in some cases relies upon extensive forest burns in order to survive successfully over millennia. That 'gumtrees' provide highly combustible materials at certain points in their annual livecycle is part of "nature's plan".

That the blue mountains are "blue" because they are covered with gumtrees suggests they are likely to be subject to some forms of nature driven wildfire destruction on a fairly regular basis with no assistance from humanity required.

They are also rather attractive places for humans to live - but for the potential risk to life, limb and property when they do burn.

Once again - remove the people and the problem, as perceived by humans, disappears.

Humans (other then the Aboriginal peoples perhaps) cannot accept that solution so they find a different 'problem' and claim they can fix it.

Well, it should be interesting so let's see how it goes.

Edited by LongQ on Wednesday 14th August 03:39

[mko9]

Wayoftheflower said:

mko9 said:

Pretty sure those burns were managed for hundreds of thousands, if not millions of years without forestry departments. Shockingly, the whole world wasn't burnt to ashes.

Fires were managed around private property and infrastructure for millions of years? I think we have ourselves a Scientologist. What's Xenu's take on all this?

How long do you think mankind has been building houses? How long do you think forests have existed? How old is the forestry department?

[turbobloke]

mko9 said:

Wayoftheflower said:

mko9 said:

Pretty sure those burns were managed for hundreds of thousands, if not millions of years without forestry departments. Shockingly, the whole world wasn't burnt to ashes.

Fires were managed around private property and infrastructure for millions of years? I think we have ourselves a Scientologist. What's Xenu's take on all this?

How long do you think mankind has been building houses? How long do you think forests have existed? How old is the forestry department?

You surely spotted the ad hom aimed at you there.

It's a sign of desperation so welcome in that sense.

As to your very reasonable reply, that won't compute! We clearly need Big Government full of Big Spenders using Big Taxes to solve Big Problems that have been Bigged Up for the purpose - when in fact it's nothing new.

[Wayoftheflower]

mko9 said:

Wayoftheflower said:

mko9 said:

Pretty sure those burns were managed for hundreds of thousands, if not millions of years without forestry departments. Shockingly, the whole world wasn't burnt to ashes.

Fires were managed around private property and infrastructure for millions of years? I think we have ourselves a Scientologist. What's Xenu's take on all this?

How long do you think mankind has been building houses? How long do you think forests have existed? How old is the forestry department?

If you're trying to make a point maybe you should try being a bit clearer about what that point is?

[turbobloke]

July 2019 was not the hottest on record.

http://www.drroyspencer.com/2019/08/july-2019-was-...

'questionable techniques used by NASA GISS to get temperature estimates where no data exists'

'UAH LTT had July 2019 as the third warmest. behind 1998'

It's all subject to considerable uncertainty, but the science is settled and we must all expel intestinal gases into a jar.

[V10leptoquark]

Time and time again the politics shows that MMGW is nothing but a farce.

The problem is always going to be on the pro-MMGW camp that as time continues onwards, the fabrication of 'evidence' is going to have to become more extreme.
At some point not even the staunchest of believers is going to be able to keep a straight face.

[Biker 1]

St Greta about to cross the Atlantic by boat: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/science-environment-...
I must say, that boat looks very hi-tech & is no doubt made out of all sorts of plastics & other non-green nasties etc. I wonder how it's carbon footprint per person compares to a modern passenger aircraft?

[Wayoftheflower]

V10leptoquark said:

Time and time again the politics shows that MMGW is nothing but a farce.

The problem is always going to be on the pro-MMGW camp that as time continues onwards, the fabrication of 'evidence' is going to have to become more extreme.
At some point not even the staunchest of believers is going to be able to keep a straight face.

Yeah someday they'll require backing from shady American billionaires and hide their findings in the back waters of the internet to avoid public disgrace.

I've reserved the PH username Burbotoke for when that day finally comes.

[s2kjock]

Biker 1 said:

St Greta about to cross the Atlantic by boat: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/science-environment-...
I must say, that boat looks very hi-tech & is no doubt made out of all sorts of plastics & other non-green nasties etc. I wonder how it's carbon footprint per person compares to a modern passenger aircraft?

I laughed when I first read about this. Very expensive hi-tech racing yacht I would imagine to be extremely environmentally "nasty" (not to mention the lack of a holding tank for the poop )

Plenty of traditional wooden boat options for crossing the pond she could have picked.

[LongQ]

The BBC, about St. Greta's trip, wrote:

"Greta ,16, has stopped flying due to environmental reasons, but is due to attend a crucial climate change conference in New York."

What could possibly be so 'crucial ' about the conference that she has to attend it?

However, since she has set an example to her fellow activists by avoiding flying anywhere perhaps she could persuade all of them to make the same decision. Obviously to do so would benefit everyone living on the planet.

[bodhi]

LongQ said:

The BBC, about St. Greta's trip, wrote:

"Greta ,16, has stopped flying due to environmental reasons, but is due to attend a crucial climate change conference in New York."

What could possibly be so 'crucial ' about the conference that she has to attend it?

However, since she has set an example to her fellow activists by avoiding flying anywhere perhaps she could persuade all of them to make the same decision. Obviously to do so would benefit everyone living on the planet.

Well if it's crucial she speaks, and she wants to minimise CO2, I can suggest https://hangouts.google.com/

[V10leptoquark]

On the case of the climate activists - the recent ones that blockaded London and the like - I wonder how much additional of their feared CO2 gas was emitted by vehicles in them either having to wait in traffic jams or having to travel extra distance around their tantrums?

[turbobloke]

V10leptoquark said:

On the case of the climate activists - the recent ones that blockaded London and the like - I wonder how much additional of their feared CO2 gas was emitted by vehicles in them either having to wait in traffic jams or having to travel extra distance around their tantrums?

It's all a clever ruse, the protesters hide the unicycles and pogo sticks from view which they use diligently to offset the increased emissions their activities cause.

Chinese Scientist Dr Wu said:

Driving forces include the sun, the atmosphere, and its interaction with the ocean. We have detected no evidence of human influence.

The research describes a previously unknown mechanism which suggests the impact of the sun on the Earth’s climate is greater than previously thought. This is on top of the Bucha and Svensmark mechanisms ignored by alarmists to make room for tax gas non-effects.

[steveT350C]

‘Danish climate body wrongly reported Greenland heat record’

https://www.thelocal.dk/20190808/danish-climate-bo...

[turbobloke]

steveT350C said:

‘Danish climate body wrongly reported Greenland heat record’

https://www.thelocal.dk/20190808/danish-climate-bo...

Good find - but it's par for the course, sadly.

They took a closer look and noted that monitoring equipment had been giving erroneous results. A close look isn't s.o.p. then, slapdash will do nicely especially when it fits the de rigeur alarmist narrative.

When a data error affecting not high but low temperatures - the data for low temperatures were being deleted by naughty equipment undoubtedly acting on its own initiative - happened in Oz, it wasn't sorted for quite some time. It was covered on PH at the time. There were headlines such as:

Australian Bureau of Meteorology Caught Erasing Cold Temperatures
Australian BoM Deletes Inconvenient Record Cold Temperatures
BoM Faces Storm Over Weather Data Inaccuracies
In Australia Faulty BoM Temperature Sensors Contribute to “Hottest Year Ever”
Temperatures Plunge After BoM Orders Fix

Six weeks of obfuscation were 'needed' for the final admission and fix.

However the BoM was first notified of potential problems in December 2012. Yet it took until July 2017 for the Australian Bureau of Meteorology to acknowledge that it had put in place limits on the lowest temperature that an individual weather station could record. Still the gullible believe and the culpable obfuscate or worse.

[mko9]

Wayoftheflower said:

mko9 said:

Wayoftheflower said:

mko9 said:

Pretty sure those burns were managed for hundreds of thousands, if not millions of years without forestry departments. Shockingly, the whole world wasn't burnt to ashes.

Fires were managed around private property and infrastructure for millions of years? I think we have ourselves a Scientologist. What's Xenu's take on all this?

How long do you think mankind has been building houses? How long do you think forests have existed? How old is the forestry department?

If you're trying to make a point maybe you should try being a bit clearer about what that point is?

Perhaps you could refer to the sentence I bolded in post that you have edited out of this quote stream. Here you go:

mko9 said:

Wayoftheflower said:

Kawasicki said:

So Denier (Turbobloke) posts link to paper where scientists report a decreasing trend in global wildfires.

Then Believer (Wayoftheflower) posts the last paragraph with the aim of showing that the scientists involved are believers too, and that Turbobloke is sort of misrepresenting their work.

This is such fun.

Small correction, I don't believe tb posted a link to the paper.

Wildfires and their severity are also subject to research simply for risk management regardless of climate change. Many forest ecosystems cannot live without regular burning which has to be managed by forestry depts. However "catastrophic" fires result from a combination of environmental factors and forest management. tb trying to turn a very complex issue into a soundbite is typical of him.

"global area burned has seen an overall slight decline over past decades" Doerr & Santin 2016. Could imply that we're getting better at controlling forest fires with practice, or simply due to increasing liability more resource is put towards controlling them.

Of note is tb's failure to respond to his completely fabricated "Vegetarian Diets 'Worse For Climate Change', More Harmful to the Environment" quasi-quote.

Pretty sure those burns were managed for hundreds of thousands, if not millions of years without forestry departments. Shockingly, the whole world wasn't burnt to ashes.

[Wayoftheflower]

mko9 said:

Wayoftheflower said:

mko9 said:

Wayoftheflower said:

mko9 said:

Pretty sure those burns were managed for hundreds of thousands, if not millions of years without forestry departments. Shockingly, the whole world wasn't burnt to ashes.

Fires were managed around private property and infrastructure for millions of years? I think we have ourselves a Scientologist. What's Xenu's take on all this?

How long do you think mankind has been building houses? How long do you think forests have existed? How old is the forestry department?

If you're trying to make a point maybe you should try being a bit clearer about what that point is?

Perhaps you could refer to the sentence I bolded in post that you have edited out of this quote stream. Here you go:

mko9 said:

Wayoftheflower said:

Kawasicki said:

So Denier (Turbobloke) posts link to paper where scientists report a decreasing trend in global wildfires.

Then Believer (Wayoftheflower) posts the last paragraph with the aim of showing that the scientists involved are believers too, and that Turbobloke is sort of misrepresenting their work.

This is such fun.

Small correction, I don't believe tb posted a link to the paper.

Wildfires and their severity are also subject to research simply for risk management regardless of climate change. Many forest ecosystems cannot live without regular burning which has to be managed by forestry depts. However "catastrophic" fires result from a combination of environmental factors and forest management. tb trying to turn a very complex issue into a soundbite is typical of him.

"global area burned has seen an overall slight decline over past decades" Doerr & Santin 2016. Could imply that we're getting better at controlling forest fires with practice, or simply due to increasing liability more resource is put towards controlling them.

Of note is tb's failure to respond to his completely fabricated "Vegetarian Diets 'Worse For Climate Change', More Harmful to the Environment" quasi-quote.

Pretty sure those burns were managed for hundreds of thousands, if not millions of years without forestry departments. Shockingly, the whole world wasn't burnt to ashes.

You do need to be clearer, wild fires have been occurring since there have been plants to burn. They are necessary to maintain the current ecosystems that have evolved to survive/thrive with burning. These burns are now managed to avoid loss of people and property. What is you point?

[turbobloke]

Tax rebates needed. Porcine aviation will need to arrive first though given our wise and selfless politicians.

[wc98]

Wayoftheflower said:

Yeah someday they'll require backing from shady American billionaires and hide their findings in the back waters of the internet to avoid public disgrace.

I've reserved the PH username Burbotoke for when that day finally comes.

are you talking about the sierra club, real climate , the climate reality project etc, etc ?

[wc98]

steveT350C said:

‘Danish climate body wrongly reported Greenland heat record’

https://www.thelocal.dk/20190808/danish-climate-bo...

i love this part "Ruth Mottram, a climate scientist at the institute, told The Local that the revised temperature figure did not affect the institute's estimate that the ice cap lost a record 12.5bn tons of ice in just 24 hours last week, which triggered headlines across the world.

"This does not alter our ice melt figures at all," she said in an email to The Local, pointing out that while the temperature measurement was taken at about 2m above the ice, her group was "largely interested in the surface temperature".

The ice melt estimates also did not use the temperature measurements at all, she explained, but was instead based on a "surface energy balance model" which takes into account "all of the sources of incoming and outgoing energy".

melts indeed