Australia arrests 183 for setting bushfires that celebrities claim were caused by climate change

That's irrelevant. The point is that you can label outlets right wing but not left wing.

 

Sure are. You should give em a follow. See where they lead. I’ll start you off with a google search recommendation.
“How are wild fires linked to climate change?”
Give it a spin.

 

Honestly I didn’t know it was part of their position until this thread. A talking head must have put it out there recently.

 

I have no idea. I'm not a scientist.

Sure, but we don't know that this rise has anything to do with bushfires. We can only suspect. And to be fair, I can understand why people are led into assumption, as it would SEEM that the higher the temperature, the easier it is for fire to spread, given the connection between heat and fire.

No. I would suggest that we wait for the facts to come out. This is the very first bushfire season in which climate change has been blamed as the major cause. I would want to see an even WORSE season next season before I take all of this seriously. I'm saying that climate change MIGHT be the reason that the fires have been so much worse than before. Others, like possibly yourself, are saying that it DEFINITELY IS, no questions asked!

 

After conviction and incarceration in one of Australia's prisons, their chances of survival will be pretty low.

 

Ok, so your premise is entirely speculative. And never forget that fire is a method that nature uses to rejuvenate itself. Of course, having man living in proximity to where these events happen never enters the conversation, nor seemingly was it important to identify that so many of those fires were arson. So, we have a problem, and perhaps it is actually having a population who are self destructive coinciding with a natural danger in the bush. But who wants to tell folks they are the problem? Better to make it climate change so politicians can bleed them with taxes and destroy their liberties.

 

Facts are facts and deflecting from the real problem here. Whenever climate change predictions come true there always seems to be some other cause other than the real cause to you people.

 

And there is the actual problem. By callously grouping natural circumstance with some mythology about catastrophic future harms, we can't ever get at the real problem, can we? Do you suppose that climate change caused those arsonists to act? I don't. But given the amount of publicity that you're willing to create by deflecting from their actions seems intentional on your part. why?

 

You’d prefer to see a worse fire season next year before you’re willing to admit this is the result of climate change? Maybe next year we’ll see a billion animals killed. Maybe 100s of people need to die. This ones not convincing enough for you? Let me help you out with your research.
https://lmgtfy.com/?q=How+does+global+warming+contribute+to+the+severity+of+forest+fires?

 

I’d imagine the Australian prison system is capable of ensuring the wellbeing of its prisoners.

 

Do you suppose climate change helped to magnify the actions of those arsonists? I think it did.

 

Ok, in what measurable way? Try to be specific here.

 

“Within the next 10 years, the world will reach a point of no return [and] a true planetary emergency [due to global warming],” Gore warned while pushing his theory back in January 2006.


https://onenewsnow.com/science-tech/2018/12/14/gores-no-arctic-ice-in-5-7-yrs-prediction-a-bust

0 for 8 … and counting

Eight dire predictions about the Earth’s imminent destruction at the hands of so-called “man-induced climate change” from Gore’s 2006 Oscar-winning film, An Inconvenient Truth, never came to fruition – as pointed out in January 2016 by TheBlaze:

1. Sea Levels Are Rising At An Alarming Rate: In his movie, Gore predicted that sea levels could rise six meters (20 feet) with the melting of the Antarctic and Greenland ice sheets. Now, we know that the South Pole is gaining more ice than it’s losing. Also, a great amount of the losing is due to underground heat. As for Greenland, its melting cycle doesn’t seem to have changed much. In fact, it seems to be quite regular. And the sea level has been increasing … at a steady level since we started recording them. But if the rising sea level is so catastrophic, why has Gore bought a beachfront mansion?
   
   
2. CO2 Is The Control Knob For Temperature: Like most climate cultists, Al Gore firmly believes that carbon dioxide – what you are exhaling – is what controls temperature. And climate models have constantly reflected that reality. Unfortunately, “it’s the sun, stupid” to paraphrase Bill Clinton. Indeed, satellite data show no increase in temperature for nearly 19 years despite a constant increase in CO2. The Sun, on the other hand, might have a much larger role in the Earth’s climate – so much that some scientists are talking about a significant cooling because the Sun is “quieter.” And of course, climate models have miserably failed – even compared to the (very probably) tampered NASA data.
   
   
3. Hurricane Katrina Was Man-Made: Two years before Gore released his movie, New Orleans had been devastated by Hurricane Katrina. At the time, many people believed that this would be the new norm because of global warming. Now, Gore was partly right: damage to New Orleans was man-made. It was caused by a dire neglect of the levees protecting the city. And their improvement might not be enough to withstand another Katrina. As for Katrina being the new norm, Gore is wrong once more. No F3+ hurricane has landed on U.S. soil since Wilma in October 2005 – the longest such “drought” ever recorded. Have Obama's actions on climate helped? Or was there no problem in the first place?
   
   
4. Severe Tornadoes Are Increasing: Along with hurricanes, climate cultist logic teaches us that other extreme wind events like tornadoes will be on the rise. However, it’s not blowing very strong. F3+ tornadoes have been declining for over 60 years. Also, the overall number of tornadoes has been unusually low in the past three years. It does have an upwards trend, but that's because we have better tools to detect them.
   
   
5. Polar Bears Are Dying: The North’s favorite mascot in going extinct according to America’s green pope. Because the ice is getting thinner because of global warming, they can’t reproduce. A recent picture of a sick polar bear also “proved” that point. Of course, this is hot air too. There are more polar bears now than when Al Gore was born. The government of Nunavut, along with Inuit hunters, have also noticed that the polar bear is doing quite well.
6. The Arctic Is Melting: The polar bears are (supposedly) disappearing because their playground, the Arctic, is melting fast. Gore even predicted its complete melting for 2014. Now that we know it’s not true, here is one more inconvenient truth about the North Pole. It’s gaining ice, and 2015 saw the largest refreezing in over a decade.
   
   
7. The Sahel Is Drying Up: The region south of the Sahara Desert is one of the poorest places on the planet. And because of global warming, it’s getting drier and drier, according to the Gore. This is not true. As shown by satellite images, the Sahel is, in fact, one of the regions that gained the most flora density since satellites exist. All of that is due to the reviled CO2, which acts as a fertilizer.
   
   
8. CO2 Is Pollution: Finally, no climate cultist nonsense would be complete without uttering their favorite lie: CO2 is carbon “pollution.” Therefore, we must fight to control it to protect our children, save the planet, stop kitten massacres, etc. But as shown above, more CO2 is desirable. In fact, agriculture seems to profit greatly from increased carbon “pollution” as shown by yields. But if CO2 does need to be controlled, then liberals might think twice about organic farming.

 

What does this mean? You think this is why they set the fires?

You don't care what rich people and celebrities think. A lot of us feel that way. We now have a lying media freak President who says climate change is a "hoax" and a whole bunch of gullible people believe him.

 

You feel confident to go off this ONE fire season? Seriously? Gee, you're easily convinced!

Why can't you just pick your preferred source? And you clearly aren't content with your earlier NASA source.

 

I’ve seen more than enough to convince me, even prior to this catastrophic bushfire. I’m just wondering what level of disaster you’re looking for exactly.
You do research through one source and one source only? Do you think that serves you well? I’m not referencing NASA in relation to wildfire because I’m not aware of any material of theirs on the matter. For that I look to groups that study the issue specifically. Why is this so hard for you to understand?

 

Already posted within the thread, but here you go.

 

Who is doing that?

The SCIENTISTS have been looking at data trends, factoring in “forcings” alterations to microclimate, changing planetary albedo and solar and cosmic influences

Now have you a scientific point to make?

 

This is summary assertion, where is the specific calculation that would support the assertion? I could suggest that the fires have more to consume because the growing season was more successful. I could actually quantify that. To suggest that somehow the drier season then created more fuel is bogus, because it could not. If, as you suggest, you're interested in the science, then by all means, demonstrate the science here. If, as it is suggested, a drier clime is being produced, the amount of available fuel would necessarily decline. And future fires would be less significant because frankly there would be less fuel. Simple stuff here. So, again, quantify your assertion here. Show the work, or at least someone else's....

 

Then is should be simple for you, or anyone else to show the work that has lead us to this place where somehow magic quantities of fuel for these fires has been created in a much drier, less friendly environment for plant growth. Feel free to show this work you assert it out there..

 

What a bullshit meme

Don’t you ever fact check anything? Just grab the first meme that has something to do with the topic and flop it onto the board expecting people to admire it?

The article is unscientific hyperbole based on what was essentially an infomercial done by someone who was not a climate scientist. You are referencing something that happened 12 years ago, is factually incorrect in its rebuttal and is not written to an academic standard

Here is one that is at the level you just posted

 

You spend your time paying heed to Algore? Egads.

But overall sea ice levels are declining:

"The line graphs above plot the monthly deviations and overall trends in polar sea ice from 1979 to 2013 as measured by satellites. The top line shows the Arctic, the middle shows Antarctica, and the third line shows the global, combined total. The sparklines at the bottom of the graphs show each year separately, enabling month-to-month comparisons across each year. The thickness of each sparkline indicates the overall growth or loss in sea ice globally. The thinning of the sparklines is indicative of the downward trend in total polar sea ice. Graphs by Josh Stevens, NASA Earth Observatory."
​

https://www.climate.gov/news-features/features/despite-antarctic-gains-global-sea-ice-shrinking

Why are you spreading BS?

https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/world-of-change/DecadalTemp​

https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/02/AR5_SYR_FINAL_SPM.pdf​

https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar5/syr/​

Why hasn't your pal...



... stopped NASA LIES, fast? Why is he playing golf like he said he wouldn't?

 

No problems!

Well not for me at least because I, unlike most denialists, have read the IPCC reports.

See to find the fact you actually have to read scientific reports and not just dismiss them out of hand

The Garnaut Review (which I have also read) predicted this 12 years ago

https://www.sbs.com.au/news/how-a-c...ars-ago-warned-of-this-horror-bushfire-season
Here is a nice juicy government report https://climatechange.environment.n...hash=070F5611F39C122D1223D26B3DA1B07E08AFCDA6

If they are too difficult for you then here is an article from the times
https://time.com/5759964/australian-bushfires-climate-change/

 

How does one know what so-called "science" to believe and not believe? Only recently, so-called "scientists" stated a black hole seventy times the size of the sun should not be able to physically exist. And yet it exists regardless, proving long-held scientific notions to be wrong, and demonstrating the so-called "experts" simply have no comprehension of what they are seeking to speak about.

https://nypost.com/2019/11/29/scientists-discover-monster-black-hole-so-big-it-shouldnt-exist/

 

Was it progressives who started the "war on drugs?" Why are we locking up people who got hooked on prescription opioids? You figure they should pay for appeals?