Politics Climate Change Paradox (cont in part 2)

[HairyO]

Won't we all be dead??

People who pollute but are climate activists on Twitter will be okay.

People who lead low pollution lives but mock climate activists on Twitter will all be dead.

My energy bill is around $300 a quarter for 3 people. And I drive a small, fuel efficient car. But Im the enemy.

I guess I need a vegie patch to make it better. Wait, I have one of those.

 

[JackOutback]

Won't we all be dead??

Eventually, yes.

 

[Frank Bunn]

Eventually, yes.

Isn't population reduction a good thing? To save the planet?

 

[its free real estate]

The Guardian absolutely shits the bed as per usual.

This apocalyptic Australian summer is our Sandy Hook moment – if we don't take climate action now we never will | Brigid Delaney

These bushfires are without precedent. After rock bottom, there is a choice: stasis and misery or growth and transformation

www.theguardian.com

They do as much damage for acceptance of the science as the Murdoch press.

 

[This Is Anfield]

Eventually, yes.

 

[Blue1980]

People have deliberately started fires = climate change is fake.

People are really clutching here.

Most of the major fires raging were not deliberately lit.

In saying that, we need to have harsher punishments for arson.

 

[Blue1980]

The Guardian absolutely shits the bed as per usual.

This apocalyptic Australian summer is our Sandy Hook moment – if we don't take climate action now we never will | Brigid Delaney

These bushfires are without precedent. After rock bottom, there is a choice: stasis and misery or growth and transformation

www.theguardian.com

They do as much damage for acceptance of the science as the Murdoch press.

How is that article wrong? I mean a bit OTT in some places, but we should be a proper leader in the area of climate change.

 

[Andrew Birch]

People have deliberately started fires = climate change is fake.

People are really clutching here.

Most of the major fires raging were not deliberately lit.

In saying that, we need to have harsher punishments for arson.

Wrong.

 

[Clems Knee]

Wrong.

Is it though? I don’t have figures for this season - it’s hard because it’s across 6 states.
But the figure for 1997-2009 was 40% deliberately lit, 17% Lightning and 43% accidentally lit.

I think accidentally lit would be careless use of angle grinders, barbecues, spent cigarettes, power pole fires etc

Deliberately lit fires would include backburning gone wrong as well as arson (malicious damage).

 

[romeohwho]

Because more people are out lighting fires than ever before.

Nearly 200 people have been charged. And there will be hundreds more being investigated.

That has nothing to do with climate.

The fuel load levels are about the same as they were in 2009. The weather conditions are less dangerous than they were in 1968.

Saying it has nothing to do with climate is just not correct and fobbing it off as all due to arsonists is just head in the sand stuff. And to use your argument, we’ve always has arsonists, yet these fires are different-they are changing in frequency, intensity, behaviour and the ongoing nature of them. If you are going to disregard scientists, then why don’t you listen to what the firefighters are saying? Can you honestly just not do a bit of research?

 

[HairyO]

Saying it has nothing to do with climate is just not correct and fobbing it off as all due to arsonists is just head in the sand stuff. And to use your argument, we’ve always has arsonists, yet these fires are different-they are changing in frequency, intensity, behaviour and the ongoing nature of them. If you are going to disregard scientists, then why don’t you listen to what the firefighters are saying? Can you honestly just not do a bit of research?

Okay, it was an exaggeration. Obvious its to do with the climate. I should have said limited man's influence on the climate. We have massive fires every 10 or 15 years.

This time around it really isnt that different to the massive fires of the past. Other than the number of arsonists roaming the countryside setting fires.

We had a royal commission in 2010. It found the biggest issue was fuel loads. The fuel loads in 2019 are where they were in 2009. But we disregard that? There are heaps of firefighters talking about that.

Do you disregard them?

 

[Bazzar]

How is that article wrong? I mean a bit OTT in some places, but we should be a proper leader in the area of climate change.

Absolut dispicable gutter journalism comparing the massacre of innocent children and adults to the current bushfire crisis.
FUEL LOADS not climate change are irresponsible.

 

[Chief]

Okay, it was an exaggeration. Obvious its to do with the climate. I should have said limited man's influence on the climate. We have massive fires every 10 or 15 years.

This time around it really isnt that different to the massive fires of the past. Other than the number of arsonists roaming the countryside setting fires.

We had a royal commission in 2010. It found the biggest issue was fuel loads. The fuel loads in 2019 are where they were in 2009. But we disregard that? There are heaps of firefighters talking about that.

Do you disregard them?

... and the issue they all cite is not enough of a window to do safe burn-offs, and not enough resources. Due to changing climate and funding.

 

[faible]

and funding

Seems oft forgotten in the sensationalist reporting. People talk about climate change as though the government doing anything is going to suddenly stop or remove the risk of bushfires.

Better is that we actually allocate funding to manage fuel loads properly instead of going "oh dear the whole country is on fire, we'll send the volunteers!"

 

[Corpuscles]

... and the issue they all cite is not enough of a window to do safe burn-offs, and not enough resources. Due to changing climate and funding.

They ( Andrew and Scomo etc) have made it clear the reduction "burn off strategy" has been focused on the "protection of assets" That is burning around houses and buildings and infrastructure.
Naturally that will reduce the available days, where as in the distant past, it has happened in forests bushland too.

You might call in that freerealestate guy (he seems like a whiz with the algebra) but if 200 more arsonists this season are charged with lighting bushfires, THEN if that didn't happen , how many less out of control bushfires would there have been?

Approximately!????? (a rough back of the envelope calculation will do!)

 

[Chief]

They ( Andrew and Scomo etc) have made it clear the reduction "burn off strategy" has been focused on the "protection of assets" That is burning around houses and buildings and infrastructure.
Naturally that will reduce the available days, where as in the distant past, it has happened in forests bushland too.

The people on the ground seem to be saying its physical number of days in the window.

You might call in that freerealestate guy (he seems like a whiz with the algebra) but if 200 more arsonists this season are charged with lighting bushfires,

You'd need to study it to work out what that number actually means.

How many are there usually?

As I suggested earlier, if any individual arsonist is more successful than in any other year, are more coming out of the woodwork?

Are the police just getting better at catching them, given mobile devices are much more trackable and prevalent these days?

 

[HairyO]

... and the issue they all cite is not enough of a window to do safe burn-offs, and not enough resources. Due to changing climate and funding.

And that ABC thing where it talked about protesters blocking the Gippsland burn off.

You did check that FB post which the ABC deleted?

Here is what concerns me: these firefighters are talking about climate change. They know the fuel loads are bigger. Why arent they changing the rules around when they can do burn offs? Clearly the risk of major fires is now far higher because of climate change, so the obvious logical solution is relax the rules on burn offs so that more can be done - even if it creates more smoke or the occasional runaway fire which takes effort to contain.

Because clearly the far nastier bushfire seasons where thousands of houses burn down and dozens of people die needs to be taken more seriously.

Right?

So why arent they changing the burn off rules? Why arent they doing even more burn offs over the winter months? Its almost like the climate isnt the real reason behind the more dangerous fire seasons.

Maybe the 2010 Royal Commission was right.

 

[HairyO]

The people on the ground seem to be saying its physical number of days in the window.



You'd need to study it to work out what that number actually means.

How many are there usually?

As I suggested earlier, if any individual arsonist is more successful than in any other year, are more coming out of the woodwork?

Are the police just getting better at catching them, given mobile devices are much more trackable and prevalent these days?

One volunteer firefighter has been charged with setting 7 separate fires.

Here is the thing about arsonists. They are sick people. Often they get caught because they like to hang around and watch the fires burn.

The media coverage is very much a part of it. The constant talking about catastrophic conditions is pretty much sticking the matches in their hands, daring them to light fires.

 

[Corpuscles]

The people on the ground seem to be saying its physical number of days in the window.



You'd need to study it to work out what that number actually means.

How many are there usually?

As I suggested earlier, if any individual arsonist is more successful than in any other year, are more coming out of the woodwork?

Are the police just getting better at catching them, given mobile devices are much more trackable and prevalent these days?

You are the techo propeller head!. Couldn't they track mobile phones last year?
Has ASIO and Fed Police set up a brand new satellite bushfire arsonist watch system?

Were there even aggregate 200 bad bushfires last year?

I know that a lot more school kids have gone on strike, and been whipped into a hysterical frenzy about not enough being done about climate change.

However , regardless of whether AGW ( aka CC) is real, there is nothing Australia can do to change global or local climate next year, or even in the next decade. Absolutely nothing!

Maybe if army reserve can be called in after the problem, it can be mobilised year round to keep the fuel loads down.
Maybe train all appropriate aged 'work for the dolers' too !?

 

[Chief]

And that ABC thing where it talked about protesters blocking the Gippsland burn off.

You did check that FB post which the ABC deleted?

How can I check a deleted post?

Did other news orgs run that story? If they did I could read it.

 

[Chief]

You are the techo propeller head!. Couldn't they track mobile phones last year?
Has ASIO and Fed Police set up a brand new satellite bushfire arsonist watch system?

Were there even aggregate 200 bad bushfires last year?

I don't know. You're the one talking about the figure.

 

[This Is Anfield]

There is always a silver lining.
The Earth may well be ****ed with climate change, global warming, global cooling, terrorism, racism, tribalism, religious fundamentalism, sexism, over population, Coalition Government, Trump and Boris... but at least it's not Everton!!!

 

[brahj]

And unlike clowns of past generations, the internet and twitter means these idiots have put their bullshit in writing. They will be roundly mocked for their stupidity in years to come.

I really hope this is the tipping point for global accountability on the internet.

 

[Clems Knee]

You are the techo propeller head!. Couldn't they track mobile phones last year?
Has ASIO and Fed Police set up a brand new satellite bushfire arsonist watch system?

Were there even aggregate 200 bad bushfires last year?

I know that a lot more school kids have gone on strike, and been whipped into a hysterical frenzy about not enough being done about climate change.

However , regardless of whether AGW ( aka CC) is real, there is nothing Australia can do to change global or local climate next year, or even in the next decade. Absolutely nothing!

Maybe if army reserve can be called in after the problem, it can be mobilised year round to keep the fuel loads down.
Maybe train all appropriate aged 'work for the dolers' too !?

So you don’t believe climate change is real.
You mock young people for trying to have a voice about what they believe in
But even if climate change were real, Australia can’t do anything.
Then you make a case for conscription (cut their hair at the same time?) because that would help.

You’re not doing it right. You’re not suppose to conflate all the Rupert Murdoch talking points into one post. You’re meant to spread them out into separate posts, otherwise people will realise that you are just an insincere shill with no original thoughts of your own. Too late, I guess.

 

[Corpuscles]

So you don’t believe climate change is real.
You mock young people for trying to have a voice about what they believe in
But even if climate change were real, Australia can’t do anything.
Then you make a case for conscription (cut their hair at the same time?) because that would help.

You’re not doing it right. You’re not suppose to conflate all the Rupert Murdoch talking points into one post. You’re meant to spread them out into separate posts, otherwise people will realise that you are just an insincere shill with no original thoughts of your own. Too late, I guess.

I am glad you enjoyed it.

But I am a believer! Just probably don't belong to the same denomination of the CC religion as you (are you one of those who rant in tongues?)
Also , no haircuts required. If the fire helmut doesn't cover all, it will be singed off anyway.

It is not just too late. Even if Australia was already down to 1950's emission levels, it wouldn't change global climate one little teensy weeny bit!