So the Maui fires were global warming ..

But then we are finally told this:

Once again the fires were man made, but not because of a one degree temperature change supposedly caused by burning fossil fuels. But because of incredible negligence.

We heard the same narrative after the Australian wild fires, which turned out to be in part, fires started by a rogue firefighter. 

You can bet your bottom dollar that some of the Canadian wild fires were also started by human negligence. And the more our population expands over the face of the earth, the more of these events will occur.

With today’s surveillance technology and firefighting resources we should be doing a much better job, starting with simple things like firebreaks. They may not totally stop fires from spreading, but installed systematically they should slow these rampant fires.  

Same patronizing rubbish….I could have predicted the whole thing the moment he said he follows ‘the science’. As if there is just one answer to every question. But this is also ‘the science’ ….from the BBC:

How many fires are started deliberately?

Two of the most recent studies say there are between 52,000 and 54,000 bushfires in Australia every year.

Dr Paul Read, co-director of Australia's National Centre for Research in Bushfire and Arson, puts the figure higher, at "62,000 and increasing".

Of those, 13% are started deliberately, and 37% are suspicious. That means 31,000 Australian bushfires are either arson, or suspected arson, every year.

That figure does not include recklessness or accidents. So a bushfire caused by a barbecue, or a spark from a chainsaw, would be classed as "accidental".

In short, up to 85 bushfires begin every day because someone leaves their house and decides to start one.’

The SCIENCE. Do people really still think science is beyond manipulation to please the highest bidder? That authority and narratives are beyond being bought and manipulated? That the scientific community is this incorruptible, all knowing bastion that can't be shaken? Wehe.

Pakie

You hit a major point there.   Global Warming is used as a scare tactic to get people to subordinate themselves to control of all facets of their life from birth to death by ruthless people - who by such means control the daily lives of people.   Just look at the billionaires in the WEF who have that as a major program.   They are funding the research and they get back in return what will support their approach. 

Since they own the media as well they effectively use it to brainwash gullible people to believe all the BS they wish them to believe and that includes global warming.     These people include Gates and Schwab who want to reduce the world population to between 500 million and 1 billion and they openly spoke about it.    

Their basic war is not the present Ukraine war - they want that to escalate into a major one - it is against COWS - which according to fanatics cause global warming by farting.   They undermine farming in many other ways  to ensure reduction in agricultural outputs as well.    That is a major example of how they want to ensure starvation of people in future and starvation causes civil unrest and wars - even civil wars.   What is amazing on site is that those idiots who  support global warming  are the greatest warmongers when it comes to  the present Ukraine War -  an example being the support of the Greens in Germany of escalating the Ukraine War and wars against any country not falling for their crap.    

Being 81 years old I have never experienced a colder and longer winter than in this year.   Low winter temperatures started in March and is just starting to increase over the last week.   I often watch tennis played all over Europe and this year - while Stav and others advocated the highest temperature ever in Europe -  the spectators attending tennis matches played throughout Europe were wearing warm winter-style clothing often enough and more tennis tournaments have been disrupted by rain than I have ever seen before happening.    

People often refer to CONSPIRACY THEORIES whenever they have no counter-arguments to factual issues - but is global warming not a conspiracy theory put into practice by ruthless people wo wants to control people.

Stacv

Your story about BUSHFIRES in Australia is total BS.   Bushfires stem from neglect of afforested areas where growth of undergrowth is not controlled and reduced.    That is a real scientific fact proven over many decades.    Undergrowth fires provide the high heat necessary for trees to start burning - a real fact found particularly in Australia and in California.   Your quoted Professor obviously does not know anything about forestry and plant life - so get real please.     

Example - South Africa has got areas covered by forests and you rarely found bushfires in those areas despite higher temperatures than often encountered in Australia.   Why have virtually all such fires in SA being caused naturally or by arsonists.   There are n SA large areas covered by species of plants that only fertilize seeds through natural fires - eg  Proteas and other fynbos species.   That is why its so difficult to grow such plants in gardens - Although I must have bought more than a dozen such plants for my garden - only 3 plants survived.   So the natural environment requires some fires to allow for natural growth and in many cases the fires are started by lightning and other natural means. 

Uncle Joe is just a puppet used by the ultra-rich to  implement the programs they want him to implement - in the meantime is occupied by full-time looting  of the US G government.    One cannot blame him for anything - he is too stupid to understand anything bar what his mafia instincts tell him to do.

.    

In the summer of 1974-1975 (southern hemisphere), Australia suffered its worst recorded bushfire, when 15% of Australia's land mass suffered "extensive fire damage". Fires that summer burnt an estimated 117 million hectares (290 million acres; 1,170,000 square kilometres; 450,000 square miles)

So there you have the 2019/2020 Australian  fire season and below it the 1974/1975 fire seasons. As you can see the the 1974 season dwarfs the 2019 season…. 1170,000 square kilometers vs 243000 square kilometers.

That, even though the 2019 season was amplified by arson.

Now I’m sure there are all the usual excuses….Weathermen will come up with reasons why 2019 was worse. But that’s the raw, unvarnished data showing the worse fire occurred well before the supposed warming spike.

So all these areas in the world, Greece, South Africa, Australia, California have very dry summers occasionally. That a one degree temperature change could change the very nature of these well established patterns really stretches the imagination and requires the usual’ amplification’ factors.

Any individual event that supports the MMGW idea is evidence...and any event that does not is anecdotal.

I mean, these scientists are so scientific.

Well put.

Odd Moz just skipped over the part where his quoted scientist contradicts him. Wonder why?

So there you have the 2019/2020 Australian  fire season and below it the 1974/1975 fire seasons. As you can see the the 1974 season dwarfs the 2019 season…. 1170,000 square kilometers vs 243000 square kilometers.

And? Do you even understand the argument climate scientists and firefighters are making? Of course you do that's why your making silly strawman arguements.

That, even though the 2019 season was amplified by arson.

Evidence?

So all these areas in the world, Greece, South Africa, Australia, California have very dry summers occasionally. That a one degree temperature change could change the very nature of these well established patterns really stretches the imagination and requires the usual’ amplification’ factors.

Weathermen are not climate scientists and they do don't have to come up with a reason why 2019 was worse. The argument is climate change will make the frequency and severity of wildfires worse globally. Not that climate change will make every wildfire a record breaker.

Any claim that contradicts the MMGW idea is to be accepted at face value...and any evidence to the contrary is part of a conspiracy.

I mean, these skeptic's are so skeptical.

Trying to spare your blushes Anger, it’s embarrassing how often these weathermen get it wrong. The quoted ‘scientist’ isn’t contradicting me, he’s contradicting himself.

As for your claim that the 5 times land extent burned fire vs the 2019 picture poster fire for warmers is not relevant is fine. Just as long as the melting ice is also not relevant. In fact the whole thing is irrelevant, the degree of temperature change, the various supposed effects it’s having and the laughable efforts to supposedly fix the problem.

 I’m not concerned about climate change, half of recoverable oil has been used and the earth is just fine. But I am concerned that we have used half of this precious resource that has enabled the world’s population to grow from one billion to 8 billion. How will we cope, how will we feed the billions….with windmills?

Trying to spare your blushes Anger, it’s embarrassing how often these weathermen get it wrong.

Not as often as you.

The quoted ‘scientist’ isn’t contradicting me, he’s contradicting himself.

Except he didn't. The existence of arsonists doesn't preclude man made climate change. Of course you know this but you continue to strawman.

As for your claim that the 5 times land extent burned fire vs the 2019 picture poster fire for warmers is not relevant is fine. Just as long as the melting ice is also not relevant. 

Its not that one event is relevant and another event isn't. It's when all these events are looked and what long term trend. I.E More wildfires of increased intensity and accelerating ice melt when looked at on a global level.

In fact the whole thing is irrelevant, the degree of temperature change, the various supposed effects it’s having and the laughable efforts to supposedly fix the problem.

Not my fault if your political ideology or your pride doesn't permit you to admit your wrong.

 I’m not concerned about climate change, half of recoverable oil has been used and the earth is just fine. 

You're right the earth is fine. It's the humans on it that are in trouble.

But I am concerned that we have used half of this precious resource that has enabled the world’s population to grow from one billion to 8 billion. How will we cope, how will we feed the billions….with windmills?

Hopefully new technologies will be found to offset that, but  it's not going be made any easier by displacing 100 of millions if not billions of people due to climate change and making agriculture and food production far more difficult due to the environment is it?

Better displaced than dead from starvation

And when too many people are crammed into an area that can't provide food for them?

but tell me even if we assume we have seen half the effects of climate change (ignoring diminishing returns which characterizes most inputs) how many people have been displaced so far?

Ignoring your logic that the effects of climate change scale linearly, I wouldn't know the exact number. Oxfam gave a number of 20 million per year in 2019 and that had been occurring for at least a decade at the point, so probably well over 300 million at this point.

As for the man who contradicted himself think about it this way, when 50% of bushfires are suspected to be the result of arson, it leaves only 50% that were directly caused by other factors, including climate change. 

Again missing the point that climate change is setting environmental conditions that make wildfires more severe, regardless of cause.

Those environmental conditions have always existed….they vary from year to year. Every time we get a dry summer it’s blamed on Climate Change.

Hopelessly wrong on refugees ….even the UN Climate Motivated committee only comes up with. 143 million by 2050:

Each year, natural disasters force an average of 21.5 million people from their homes around the world, according to the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees. And scientists predict migration will grow as the planet gets hotter. Over the next 30 years, 143 million people are likely to be uprooted by rising seas, drought, searing temperatures and other climate catastrophes, according to the U.N.’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report published this year.

…….

So here’s the logic. Every natural disaster is now caused by Climate Change and any refugee is moving because of climate change.

….

Pablum for fools to believe.

Regarding the amount of land burnt between 74/75 and 19/20 have you taken into account the amount of rainfall and wind into account over those seasons?

Also technology advances in equipment, number of trained fire fighters and volunteers along with the ability to detect fires quicker.

It's perfectly feasible that if they used 40 year old technology in 19/20 vastly more areas could have been affected.

Take your blinkers off and try to look at the whole picture  not just what you want to believe.

I am sure there are other factors that could be taken I to account but I will leave that to the people that know what they are talking about.

Perfectly feasible.. .it’s also perfectly feasible if the population spread that exists today, existed in 74/75 more fires would have started. But it’s not feasible to believe either of these factors could have caused a fire five times as large.

If you want to leave everything to people who  ‘know what they are talking about’ ..  I’d suggest you simply avoid the topic.

I beg to differ especially  with the wind, my boy was a fire fighter with the army for over 10 years and fought a lot of scrub fires on the Canterbury plains and the big one on the port hills. 

He stated it is frightening how fast a fire will spread when the nor'wester is blowing and how hard it is to contain.

Those environmental conditions have always existed….

Climate change is making those environmental conditions worse.

they vary from year to year.

Yes but the overall long term trend is they are getting worse.

 Every time we get a dry summer it’s blamed on Climate Change.

While layman advocates for climate change can do that just as layman climate skeptics point  to individual and regional cold weather events and claim that is evidence against climate change, actual climate scientists don't, they point out and predict the trends based off research and evidence.

Hopelessly wrong on refugees ….even the UN Climate Motivated committee only comes up with. 143 million by 2050:

Each year, natural disasters force an average of 21.5 million people from their homes around the world, according to the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees. And scientists predict migration will grow as the planet gets hotter. Over the next 30 years, 143 million people are likely to be uprooted by rising seas, drought, searing temperatures and other climate catastrophes, according to the U.N.’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report published this year.

Hopelessly wrong? I quoted Oxfam's number of 20 million displaced by climate change per year that they gave in 2019. The UN's number from this year is 21.5 million per year? That's your definition of hopelessly wrong?

The 300 million number I gave is for already displaced. Just going by Oxfam who have said 20 million was the number for the last 10 years up till 2019.

Your number you cited  is for climate refeg ues for the next 30 years. Which wasn't the question you asked me.

Aside from which other sources give much higher numbers.

The institute for economics and peace (IEP) think tank have made an estimate of 1.2 billion climate refugees by 2050

So here’s the logic. Every natural disaster is now caused by Climate Change and any refugee is moving because of climate change.

More strawmaning.

So as the Planet gets hotter(supposedly) in the next 30 years 143 million will be uprooted. But up till now with a 0.7 degree increase ascribable to global warming (but not proved) 300 million have already been uprooted?

Waaaaaahahaha.

Good news that suggests climate change is moderating rapidly. Or perhaps your numbers were just a fantasy.

‘ Most climate migrants move within the borders of their homelands, usually from rural areas to cities after losing their home or livelihood because of drought, rising seas or another weather calamity.’

….

Of course everybody who moves from the country to the city is a Climate migrant.

Pigeon Chess.