Politics Climate Change Paradox (cont in part 2)

[Clems Knee]

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!

I think it probably is too late. I think this bushfire season is just a small sign of what is to come in the next decade.

But I think that any changes enacted by the Australian government can have a global effect, in terms of leadership, and by keeping coal in the ground, could have a significant effect on total emissions. My only cause for optimism is that corporations are ignoring their governments and Rupert Murdoch and doing something about emissions, by introducing new technologies and practices.

I think the individual Australian with the most blame in this is John Howard. He had the opportunity to influence a malleable president. Instead he stood with Bush in not ratifying the Kyoto protocol even though China, Russia and India were prepared to sign on. That was the opportunity to make a difference and Howard betrayed us.
All of the damage that Australia has suffered due to climate change is on him.

 

[Deliverance]

Learn some history *******! Before ever commenting on a species the lasts for several days!

Even more amazing isn't it. A species with a lifespan of a couple of days that has never migrated before, can suddenly recognise climate change and migrate 100s of KMs away permanently. If only people like you had the same awareness of the environment. No offence, but you don't belong in this conversation, with your purely opinion based drivel. So I shan't be wasting any more time with you. Unless you happen to bring some evidence to the discussion.

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?

We don't completely disregard them, but:
Here's what the experts say about fuel loads and extreme weather.

"There's so much heat and strong winds that the fire is able to travel across landscapes regardless of whether they've been burnt previously. It doesn't affect the [fire] behaviour."


"It's almost like a turbo-charging effect, when you have such incredibly high temperatures and very high winds that you only need a negligible amount of fuel to produce a fire intensity that is not suppressible."

Are hazard reduction burns effective in managing bushfires? The answer is complicated

As bushfires burn in NSW and Queensland, Coalition politicians and One Nation have been pointing the finger at the Greens for preventing hazard reduction burns. RMIT ABC Fact Check lays out the facts on preventing bushfires.

mobile.abc.net.au

 

[its free real estate]

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.

The other side of the coin is they have to inform the public of when conditions will be catastrophic. The Kinglake complex was caused by downed power lines, on the hottest day on record, with 90km winds.

 

[Ron The Bear]

"There's so much heat and strong winds that the fire is able to travel across landscapes regardless of whether they've been burnt previously. It doesn't affect the [fire] behaviour."

Not sure about that. Graphic below is from an article in today's Age. The assessed risk clearly plummets after a major fire.

 

[This Is Anfield]

Not sure about that. Graphic below is from an article in today's Age. The assessed risk clearly plummets after a major fire.

Yeah but Murdoch press... hang on a minute!!!

 

[romeohwho]

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?

Ok will have another look at fuel loads but my understanding is that the changing climatic conditions are the reason why the burn offs have been harder to run.
And they can only do so much in anycase. The bigger issues are because the dryness is ‘unprecedented’, rainfall patterns have changed and lowered, wind speeds and low humidity, temperatures have increased, fires spread further and are more intense, fires are creating their own weather. And bushfire seasons are starting earlier and are finishing later because of all these things. These factors have all combined to create trends that mean big fires are likely to happen in ways we haven’t seen before.

 

[Deliverance]

Not sure about that. Graphic below is from an article in today's Age. The assessed risk clearly plummets after a major fire.

Professor Bowman was talking in relation to areas burnt by hazard reduction, not a massive event such as black Saturday.

 

[Deliverance]

There is no consensus that supports this.

Nor is there proof.

Yeah, this is just more a personal opinion at this stage. As I understand it, Trump has walked the US away from climate change talks, China has committed to nothing until 2030 and India is increasing their CO2 output. We're going to push beyond the limits that the pundits claim will keep us safe. So, if they're on the money with their predictions, we'll need to be removing all that manmade CO2 posthaste.

 

[Snake_Baker]

It's no wonder the layperson is running around like a headless chook with bullshit like this on high rotation.

He's another arts degree masquerading as a scientist.

 

[Snake_Baker]

Yeah, this is just more a personal opinion at this stage.

The difference being that I am an actual scientist and better trained to have an opinion on this subject, ahead of every single journalist on the planet.

 

[its free real estate]

Not sure about that. Graphic below is from an article in today's Age. The assessed risk clearly plummets after a major fire.

Interesting that assessed risk area was declining going into 2009, lowest it had been since the mid 80s

that’s a bit counter to the narrative at the time.

 

[Snake_Baker]

The Project: Fair & Balanced

 

[Snake_Baker]

The ABC: Fair & Balanced...................and hilarious.



I suspect by tomorrow morning the Pacific Ocean will be alight.

 

[Strapping Young Lad]

1968 was worse in NSW. It started in September. This fire season started in late November.

1957 fire season started in October.

There is literally nothing happening now which hasnt happened before.

The reason why we are seeing so many fires now is because of media coverage and arsonists. The more there is talk of catastrophic weather conditions the more of them start fires because they know they will burn so well.

wrong.

 

[Strapping Young Lad]

The ABC: Fair & Balanced...................and hilarious.



I suspect by tomorrow morning the Pacific Ocean will be alight.

You realize that is the American ABC account, don’t you?

 

[Ron The Bear]

Interesting that assessed risk area was declining going into 2009, lowest it had been since the mid 80s

that’s a bit counter to the narrative at the time.

Think there's quite a bit of statistics behind it but not sure how it works. Also appears we had a good run from about 1990.

The risk seems to rebound steadily after a bad year. Maybe they can do more to keep it down

 

[Fadge]

wrong.

'Vast majority of these bushfires have been started by lightening; less than 1 in 7 have resulted from arson.'

How can anyone say this conclusively, before the investigation has even started, let alone been completed?

 

[Northalives]

Ok will have another look at fuel loads but my understanding is that the changing climatic conditions are the reason why the burn offs have been harder to run.
And they can only do so much in anycase. The bigger issues are because the dryness is ‘unprecedented’, rainfall patterns have changed and lowered, wind speeds and low humidity, temperatures have increased, fires spread further and are more intense, fires are creating their own weather. And bushfire seasons are starting earlier and are finishing later because of all these things. These factors have all combined to create trends that mean big fires are likely to happen in ways we haven’t seen before.

There is also the fact that moisture in the soil has been getting less and less to the point where it is literally, "bone dry".

I don't know if this has been posted but it is well worth looking at. It's about the 2008 Garnaut Climate Change Review:

12-year-old study's eerie prediction of current bushfire crisis

Social media users have unearthed a 2008 report that makes some bold, and accurate, claims about the country's current bushfire crisis.

7news.com.au

and then there is this and remember, we are only half way through summer:

https://interactive.guim.co.uk/embed/iframeable/2019/01/reusable-vertical-bar-chart-v4/html/index.html?key=1yHONV9cWG0V1Yg2EY2prdxx00Z0AgGqO-6Wr6HQTux0

 

[Clems Knee]

href="">January 7, 2020</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

Looks like the latest The Australian agenda is being shown to be another distraction from the truth.

 

[Clems Knee]

It's no wonder the layperson is running around like a headless chook with bullshit like this on high rotation.

He's another arts degree masquerading as a scientist.

Plus a Masters in Science and a PhD in a scientific field.

Do you ever tell the truth?

 

[Clems Knee]

The difference being that I am an actual scientist and better trained to have an opinion on this subject, ahead of every single journalist on the planet.

Are you an actual scientist?
Based on your ability to argue a point, not a very good one.

What field? Who pays you?

“It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it!”

 

[Ron The Bear]

Looks like the latest The Australian agenda is being shown to be another distraction from the truth.

Who knows what the truth is. I listened to callers to radio talkback which was accurately summarised by the host as residents pointing the finger at councils who in turn point their finger at the state government, who then points back at councils who point back at private landowners.

This is why the federal review is required.

 

[Hawk_francais]

The difference being that I am an actual scientist and better trained to have an opinion on this subject, ahead of every single journalist on the planet.

Ive read some hilariously deluded things in my time on bigfooty. This represents the snow-capped peak towering above them all.

Unless you can share one of your publications on the subject, then you may as well tell us you’re a retired AFL star, at least it would be believable.

 

[HairyO]

wrong.

An American scientist Im sure has access to all the investigative material being gathered by various Australian police forces.

 

[Hawk_francais]

Let’s move this conversation past the annoying hoard of people who think that 99% of meteorologists can’t read temperature charts.

Three pertinent questions:
A)What are strategies for closing coal mines and redirecting those labor forces that have worked overseas?

B) How can we halt these shitty projects such as the Adani mine in QLD?

C) There is a national climate rally planned for Friday in major cities, who’s coming?