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

I wasn’t able to locate information about arson versus naturally occurring fires such as ones caused by lightning strikes. Given that there is usually a human element in most wildfires though (unattended bonfires, electrical lines in California) why the focus on the spark that started the blaze?

 

Because what we're trying to assess here is what is happening because of nature and climate change, not what is happening because of arson. If we aren't interested in differentiating the two, the what we're really seeing isn't climate change, but criminal conduct resulting in environmental harm.

 

Just like our system ensured the well being of Whitey Bulgar?

 

Obfuscation, plain and simple.

 

Every single time that science advances.
This is why a consensus of scientific opinion matters.

 

*shrug* I can only evaluate based on your arguments.

I don't really care what you call yourself.

 

I know this has been explained to you a few times now. The cause of the fire doesn’t have to be a natural occurrence for the results of that cause to be linked to climate change. I’ve provided you with a resource on why we see rapid growth of vegetation which in turn dries. Creating fuel. The increased fuel results in more catastrophic fires regardless of the cause of the first spark.

 

What do you propose?

 

This entire post defies reason.

It smacks of the promotion of an agenda.

First, I want to make it clear that we don't know how many fires were deliberately set. We only know that some were.

It is absurd to claim that if an arsonist succeeds in setting a fire, it's due to "climate change".

Second, it's absurd to claim that plants grow more prolifically with less water.

 

Which is simply making an excuse, one it seems, you accept. Got it the first time. And I'll respond again by saying that the only thing man made about this catastrophe was actions of criminals creating it. Even though the region is hot and dry, the fires aren't any more fierce because of being hot and dry this time, than they were in other periods of similar weather. It's as simple as that. Suggesting that somehow these fires are worse ignores the reality that unless there is more fuel (caused by better weather conditions over time that creates the fuel) there can't be worse fires because if, as I've pointed out, that the consequence of hotter and drier is in fact less fuel going forward for fires to consume, the result of the climate change in the short term isn't worse fires. Period.

 

The war on drugs does not wreck lives. Drugs do.

 

Yes, that would be a crazy thing to say. Who said that?

 

Goodness! I don’t know why I have to keep explaining this. Let me simplify it for you.

If I soak a mattress with a garden house then strike a match and toss it on top do you suppose the results would be different than if I tossed the same match onto a mattress soaked with kerosene?

What was the difference between the two matches or my action in tossing it? Nothing. What would be the difference between the two mattresses? The answer is fuel.

In the case of the Australian bushfires we are currently seeing the fuel is dried vegetation. But wait! Where is all this fuel coming from?! You ask:

“Second, it's absurd to claim that plants grow more prolifically with less water.”

Thanks for this thoughtful question. It’s the same one @drluggit posed. I appreciate both of your inquiries on this matter as it prompted me to research the matter. The results of which can be found here:

I hope you’ve found this post enlightening.

 

Hotter and dryer also leads to fires in previously unburnt areas.
“Scientists say the bushfires this spring have been unprecedented, in part because they have destroyed areas that have historically been too wet to burn. The affected area includes parts of the major remaining rainforest areas in south-east Queensland and north-east NSW, which are listed as one world heritage site.


The world heritage area includes the largest areas of subtropical rainforest on the planet, some warm temperate rainforest and nearly all the world’s Antarctic beech cool temperate rainforest. It consists of about 40 separate reserves, spread between Newcastle and Brisbane, and surrounded by fire-prone eucalypt forest and farms.”

https://www.theguardian.com/austral...damage-to-australias-gondwana-era-rainforests

 

Well I guess you must not have read the source I provided. That’s a shame. I searched it out at your behest. I broke it down further in my response to Thought Criminal if you’re interested.

 

That after conviction they be put into the general prison population and let them fend for themselves.

 

Putting prisoners, who are not sentenced to death, into a situation that would lead to their death would be a failure of justice. There is a reason protective custody exists.

 

Which simply begs the question of time. When you say "haven't burned before", do you realize how specious that is as an argument? Just because you might not be aware in your timeframe, doesn't mean that it hasn't ever happened. The fact that you wouldn't even consider that makes whatever analysis you then craft from the basic approach invalid.

So why continue to try to justify it?

 

So be intellectually honest for just a second here. If your source fails to address the question, what is the value of having sited it in the first place?

 

Did you know that, through archaeological digs, we have the means to look into the past. A fast burning fire would lead to traceable remnants. We would be able to find layers of things like fossilized wood showing signs of fire and other massive events. I can’t claim to know if such digs have been performed in the area, but we would be able to gather some idea of the area’s history. Interesting stuff.

 

You could ask my opinion on defining issues instead of making stuff up.

Uh huh. You're going to label me anyway.

No surprise you would adopt Trump's tactics.

 

Do you feel my source failed to address the question? If so, what question do you feel it didn’t answer?

 

Yes, you’ve got me!
“The forests are mountaintop islands that have been "permanently wet" for tens of millions of years.

But now, some of these forests are being burnt for the first time.”
https://www.google.com.au/search?q=...ires&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&hl=en-au&client=safari

 

But it's not absurd to point out the fires are worse--arguably much worse--because of climate change.

 

Both do. You and your anti-drug warrior pals make things worse.