Global climate change fires? (Page 1/4)
Rickady88GT SEP 15, 02:02 PM
listed as politics because......
The Gov of California "the man occupying the mansion" says that the fires are a result of gcc? But more arrests are being made on the subject......and guess what? The cause is looking more like blm "burn it down, burn it down burn it down" than mother earth being angry.
Nothing to see here people, just mostly peaceful joe biden supporters raising political billboards to advertise the real agenda. Which is "if you want us to stop this s**t, vote Trump out". It is nothing less than violent blackmail.

Now just for a second, ask yourself " if this blackmail works, how long will it take before they use the tactics again to affect more change?".
williegoat SEP 15, 02:13 PM
Yes, as of yesterday, they had four arsonists in custody in CA, OR and WA. Of course it is just a coincidence.

I suppose arson qualifies as "anthropogenic global warming". But hey, there is nothing left to burn in Portland or Seattle.

The truly sad thing is that so many have died. I hope these arsonists are all brought up on murder charges.

[This message has been edited by williegoat (edited 09-15-2020).]

cvxjet SEP 15, 02:26 PM
We have never had so many fires that are so destructive in the history of the west; The last 5 years have been absolutely holocaustic...Most of the fires start during high-wind events...In CA we never have Hurricanes and rarely have any tornadoes...But lately we have had extreme wind reaching above 70 mph. When a fire starts with that kind of wind there is no way of stopping it.

Back east you have rain during the summer, but CA rarely has rain from May to Oct...Once a fire starts you can only fight it or get out of the way.

Global Climate change; We have changed many environments locally on Earth over the last 100,000 years...The Native Americans deforested a large area in the west and then suffered thru a drought brought on by the deforestation. The Farmers in the mid-west stripped the land down and did not follow good soil management practices..Result, the Dust bowl.

"So,hey in the midwest and back east we have been suffering thru numerous blizzards every winter- See, Proof that there isn't any global warming!" Climate change states that the Earth's weather patterns will change, not just go up by "A half a degree" The atmosphere is a gigantic Heat Engine...Pumping more heat into it will cause it to spin out of control, resulting in More (And WORSE) hurricanes, Tornadoes, but also Blizzards, floods, droughts, etc...The weather will become more unpredictable. A large percentage of farmers already are suffering thru this as they loose crop after crop.

I have planned for 30 years to move up to a small town in N.Cal and build a small house I designed after I retired; Can't do it now because A) The Heat waves in Weaverville used to be 90-105, now are 100-115, B) The Lake (Trinity) is so low half the time that you can NOT launch your boat (Preceding 5 decades only a few years of drought) and C) Used to be, "Live outside of town, avoid noisy neighbors but worry about forest fires- or live in town and be protected from fires".....In 2018, the Carr fire wiped out a subdivision in Redding, which is a CITY! Weaverville will be burned to the ground in the next decade.
Patrick SEP 15, 02:40 PM

Originally posted by cvxjet:

I have planned for 30 years to move up to a small town in N.Cal...

"Go (further) north, young man."
cliffw SEP 15, 05:15 PM

Originally posted by cvxjet:
... droughts ...

Throughout history, California has experienced many droughts, such as 1841, 1864, 1924, 1928–1935, 1947–1950, 1959–1960, 1976–1977, 1986–1992, 2006–2010, and 2011–2019.
maryjane SEP 15, 05:31 PM

At some point in the next 30 years, global temperatures are expected to rise 1.5°C above their pre-industrial levels, according to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. If we doubled the average fuel efficiency of all the cars on the planet, decreased the amount of global automotive travel by one half, increased solar-energy usage 100-fold, and increased wind-power capacity by ten times, we would go half of the way toward averting that temperature increase, assuming all the projections are correct and nothing else in the world changes in the interim.

A tall task, but that is how California governor Gavin Newsom plans to combat the wildfires consuming his state. “This is a climate damn emergency. This is real and it’s happening,” said Newsom during a press conference.

We wish the governor luck in reducing annual worldwide carbon emissions by the 8 billion tons necessary to stabilize temperatures while maintaining a vibrant economy. In the meantime, how about a plan B?

Fire plays a natural role in regulating the life cycles of trees and vegetation. In the pre-industrial era, more than 4 million acres burned in California annually. “Skies were likely smoky much of the summer and fall in California during the prehistoric period,” according to environmental scientists at the University of California, Berkeley.

Fortunately, we now have the knowledge and technology to diminish the frequency and extent of wildfires. Prescribed burns and proactive clearing of dead vegetation are known to reduce the speed and intensity of fires by diminishing the stock of combustible material, but federal and state agencies have long put a monomaniacal emphasis on suppression, rather than prevention, of fires.

After a series of devastating fires across the American West, in 1911 Congress passed the Weeks Act, which increased federal funding for firefighting efforts. The U.S. Forest Service subsequently required that all fires be suppressed before reaching ten acres and committed sufficient resources to put out any fire within the day.

In California, the upshot was a reduction in annual burning by 95 percent, and an attendant increase in the state’s vulnerability to fires. Dead trees and overcrowded forests became literal tinderboxes. Add to the decades of mismanagement a recent spike in tree mortality, due primarily to drought, and you get frequent, desolating fires.

The solution is simple in principle if not in practice, but a web of interests has held back progress in the Golden State. As a recent ProPublica investigation points out, “burn bosses in California can more easily be held liable than their peers in some other states if the wind comes up and their burn goes awry,” but they face no consequences for allowing overgrowth. Federal legislation requiring environmental reviews for the simplest of forest-management projects makes it doubly difficult. Meanwhile, homeowners strenuously oppose the inconveniences that come with controlled burns in their neighborhoods.

Better forest management would go a long way toward making California safer, but given Newsom’s response, we won’t hold our breath. Instead, we should make room for businesses and households to solve the problem on their own by incentivizing private burning and clearing.

If not, households may take a different approach — leaving the state altogether. The cost of wildfire insurance has already caused a drop-off in home sales in California, a trend exacerbated by high taxes and poor government services. California lost a net total of 1 million residents between 2007 and 2016, and a UC Berkeley poll found that more than half of the state’s voters have considered leaving for political reasons.
We suspect a reduction in carbon emissions won’t stem the flow.

Log it.
Graze it.
Or watch it burn.

Their choice.
cvxjet SEP 15, 06:20 PM
So you guys are saying we need to hack down all of the forests......Why don't you go eliminate the forests all over the world? That would increase CO2....Which you guys love so much...But wait, since you can't see CO2, you don't believe in CO2, right?

The anti-science guys "KNow" that the answer always "lies" in whatever the Oil industry tells them....

Do you all go to anti-science meetings in cars? And text each other about anti-science on your Cell-phones? You need to ELIMINATE all Science from your lives....Only live by the Bible (But Trump wants the bible rewritten with him as the messiah)

Burn, Witch, BURN!!! ("Right"?)
MidEngineManiac SEP 15, 06:28 PM
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, in a tweet, put out this advice to help people protect themselves from the dangers of smoky wildfires, such as the kind sweeping through California and Oregon and other points West: “Wearing cloth masks in public can help slow the spread of #COVID19, but cloth masks won’t protect you from small particles in #wildfire smoke. Limit your time outside when it’s smoky.”
And all the Twitter followers go: LOL.
“Lol. What?!!” wrote one. “That’s insane! It [is] literally the opposite. The particles from the fire are tremendously larger than the China virus particles which can go through the mask material weave like a mosquito through a chain ink fence. What the heck [h]ave you guys been drinking up there?”
That was just the beginning.
“C’mon @cdcgov,” another tweeted. “[T]he only ppl buying that are those voting for a guy with advanced dementia. CV virions are 0.125 microns while most smoke particles can be seen with the naked eye. Pls stop lying to us. Masks don’t work for CV.”
Another, replying to @CDCgov: “If this makes sense, public education has failed you!”
Another: “Aren’t the particles of c19 even smaller than smoke?”
Another: “The only consistency in the CDC communications, is the inconsistency.”
Another, drawing a parallel to a satire news site: “Are you guys competing with the @TheBabylonBee?”
Another: “I. Can’t Even.”
Another: “Obviously CDC stands for ‘China Disease Center.’ “
Another. “No.”
Another: “Something very hokey here. If masks are good enough for the virus, then they are good enough for P-10 particulates.”
And yet another, touching at the deeper root of the matter: “I’m an American and I feel so betrayed by the CDC. I am sorry that none of you horrible people will ever face any real consequences for the damage you’ve done to your own credibility.”
rinselberg SEP 15, 06:45 PM
From the CDC

Wearing cloth masks in public can help slow the spread of #COVID19, but cloth masks won’t protect you from small particles in #wildfire smoke. Limit your time outside when it’s smoky.

Wearing cloth masks in public can help slow [not completely stop] the spread of #COVID19

Sounds good to me. "Fauci says..."

Limit your time outside when it’s smoky.

I agree that this is sage advice, because there are limitations to what simple disposable or cloth face masks can achieve. There could be leakage around the boundaries of the mask, especially for the disposable kind that's made of a paper-like fabric. And what about a person's eyes? "Smoke gets in your eyes..." So the CDC is making sense with this last sentence.

cloth masks won’t protect you from small particles in wildfire smoke

I think that a word or two--a small qualifier--was simply omitted by the CDC. It should read

cloth masks won’t protect you from small particles in wildfire smoke all day long

[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 09-15-2020).]

cliffw SEP 15, 08:52 PM

Originally posted by cvxjet:
So you guys are saying we need to hack down all of the forests......Why don't you go eliminate the forests all over the world?

No, just the un-mannaged ones in your anti forrestation maintenance State.

Why are not forrests everywhere burning down ?