| Pages:
1
..
109
110
111 |
RFClark
Super Nomad
Posts: 2358
Registered: 8-27-2015
Member Is Offline
Mood: Looking forward to 2024
|
|
No, you’re never wrong! But your statistic is just for the US not the world and not for the number of fires but for the area that the human caused
fires burned in the US!
You also can’t spell just like the rest of us lesser mortals!
“Nor were there anywhere near the number of forest fires, because 85% of forest fires are caused by humans.” Your complete quote on the subject!
By total number not area!
You also overlook the fact that Volcanos and asteroid impacts have in the past (which is what was being discussed) burned up a majority of all living
things both plant and animal on the earth in minutes to hours quite a few times! Both classes are “Natural wildfires”! Both classes overshadow any
human caused destruction to date!
[Edited on 5-7-2024 by RFClark]
|
|
|
surabi
Ultra Nomad
Posts: 3279
Registered: 5-6-2016
Member Is Offline
|
|
Sure, sometimes I'm wrong and when I am I admit it. I'm not that insecure.
Okay, yes those stats were for the US. Worldwide, it's 75%. Still far more than caused by natural means, lightning, volcanos, etc.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/news.mongabay.com/2020/09/aroun...
|
|
|
RFClark
Super Nomad
Posts: 2358
Registered: 8-27-2015
Member Is Offline
Mood: Looking forward to 2024
|
|
Interesting Wildfire facts
Area destroyed by Mt St Helens was 292 sq miles. Area destroyed by the Russian invasion of the Ukraine 4600 sq miles. The average total area burned by
wildfire yearly slightly favors natural fires (53%) and is about equal to the area destroyed by Russia in over 2 years of war.
The US Federal Government spends around $3Billion annually on wildfire suppression.
The US recent aid package to the Ukraine was $60 Billion.
“Most wildfires are human-caused (89% of the average
number of wildfires from 2018 to 2022). Wildfires caused
by lightning tend to be slightly larger and to burn more
acreage (53% of the average acreage burned from 2018 to
2022) than human-caused fires.”
|
|
|
surabi
Ultra Nomad
Posts: 3279
Registered: 5-6-2016
Member Is Offline
|
|
"Human-sparked fires typically spread about 1.83 kilometers per day, more than twice as fast as the 0.83 kilometers per day for lightning-induced
burns, the team reports today at a virtual meeting of the American Geophysical Union. The faster spreading fires also burned more intensely and killed
"double or triple" the trees as slower, lightning-caused ones, Hantson says."
https://www.science.org/content/article/human-sparked-wildfi...
|
|
|
Cliffy
Senior Nomad
Posts: 980
Registered: 12-19-2013
Member Is Offline
|
|
Quote: Originally posted by surabi  | Cliffy likes to blather on pretending he is knowledgeable. I'm sure he's never seen anyone selllng 10 mangoes for a penny.
| Quote: Originally posted by Cliffy |
Again all the climate N&zis do is pontificate without offering real solutions to real problems from the stance they take.
Address the problems noted rather than bloviate We're listening.
|
What problems, Cliffy? You keep telling us there is no climate change problem because "the climate has always changed". And helpfully tell us the sun
doesn't shine at night, just in case someone wasn't aware of that. (Actually it does in the Arctic part of the year)
All you ever do is deny the problem, and give reasons why any and all proposed solutions won't work. Your "solutions" are to maintain the status quo.
|
Have you ever been to Dakar and seen the poverty there like I have?
Have you ever been to Guadalcanal and seen 6 year old kids selling anything they can just to survive (10 mangos for a penny) like I have?
Have you ever been to Zimbabwe and seen the mud huts that tribes live in like I have?
Have you ever been to South Africa and seen the "Black Areas" out in the middle of nowhere over thousands of acres, 1 family to 10 acres with a
government hut (10X10) and NO electricity and no sewer system like I have?
NOTHING in Mexico is as bad as many areas around the world. NO ONE in the USA no matter how bad their housing is has any idea of what real poverty and
slums really are on the world scale.
And they are supposed to build THEIR electricity grid on renewables?
Some pampered people need to wake up and smell the roses around the world
Stop oil? Stop fossil fuels? The world can not survive without dino juice period!
Even Germany sees the folly in going with wind now.
Do I presume that you never watched the last video I posted on bad data to support the climate change argument? Or is it just so easy to deny that
possibility? That which questions the current thinking.
Just how would (does) someone get funding for an academic study to investigate the accuracy of the current climate mantra?
Just how much money is involved in the current climate mantra?
Follow the money.
Have a difference of opinion and all they can do is ostracize.
Yet questioning the outcome of any paper or position is (was) the foundation of the Scientific Method- but no more.
Given the recent retractions to medical scientific papers and the realization of fraud on the part of several worshiped academics published papers
maybe questioning the status quo on climate might be a good thing rather than submit blindly to the cornucopia of noise from the climate crowd.
Also stop and think who is pushing the mantra of climate change and WHY ?
Do we really think they are being altruistic to save the world or is it coming from a cabal of independent, non-elected, self-important people who
have a narcissistic regard for themselves and want to govern the world.
One only has to look at the WHO and the WEF to see the trajectory of what they want to do on a world scale - unelected bureaucrats one and all.
You chose your position in life today by what YOU did yesterday
|
|
|
AKgringo
Elite Nomad
Posts: 5843
Registered: 9-20-2014
Location: Anchorage, AK (no mas!)
Member Is Offline
Mood: Retireded
|
|
Robbing Peter to pay Paul will always have the support of Paul!
If you are not living on the edge, you are taking up too much space!
"Could do better if he tried!" Report card comments from most of my grade school teachers. Sadly, still true!
|
|
|
RFClark
Super Nomad
Posts: 2358
Registered: 8-27-2015
Member Is Offline
Mood: Looking forward to 2024
|
|
Lenin may be gone but his “Полезные дураки” are still here posting on the internet!
None of them are even curious why you can’t get permits to thin forests, clear roadside brush or clear transmission right of ways! They also don’t
understand the wildfire based ecology west of the Mississippi and south into Mexico.
|
|
|
surabi
Ultra Nomad
Posts: 3279
Registered: 5-6-2016
Member Is Offline
|
|
Lenin? Who has exactly what to do with climate change or anyone here?
And what makes you think you know what other people are curious about or understand?
All you can come up with are insults to others' intelligence and somehow befuddling those who are concerned about climate change with communism?
|
|
|
JZ
Elite Nomad
Posts: 9346
Registered: 10-3-2003
Member Is Offline
|
|
The climate crisis is the biggest grift of the last 50 years. It's obvious to any reasonable person.
It's all about $, power, and votes. I understand younger, naive people being confused. But if you've been around the block a few times there are no
excuses.
|
|
|
RFClark
Super Nomad
Posts: 2358
Registered: 8-27-2015
Member Is Offline
Mood: Looking forward to 2024
|
|
So why didn’t you post a comment about this!
https://www.technologyreview.com/2024/04/11/1091087/the-inad...
MIT a “Rightwing Institution”?
[Edited on 5-9-2024 by RFClark]
|
|
|
JZ
Elite Nomad
Posts: 9346
Registered: 10-3-2003
Member Is Offline
|
|
These people have lost their minds. Gigantic windbags. I can't take any of them seriously.
|
|
|
RFClark
Super Nomad
Posts: 2358
Registered: 8-27-2015
Member Is Offline
Mood: Looking forward to 2024
|
|
Useful Fools!
|
|
|
surabi
Ultra Nomad
Posts: 3279
Registered: 5-6-2016
Member Is Offline
|
|
You don't take anything seriously that doesn't conform to and bolster your preconceived opinions.
|
|
|
RFClark
Super Nomad
Posts: 2358
Registered: 8-27-2015
Member Is Offline
Mood: Looking forward to 2024
|
|
Not sure where you’re going with this.
The Science is in regarding Clean Air contributing 38% to the increase in the increase in temperatures. If you have a problem with MIT’s paper feel
free to take it up with them!
Clearer air, fewer clouds, more heating seems pretty simple. The ‘90s clean air movement could or should have know the danger at the time! I don’t
remember hearing a single word. Perhaps you can post some!
And then there is Sudbury! The former world’s Largest SO2 polluter! Still going strong though no longer the world’s largest but still polluting!
[Edited on 5-9-2024 by RFClark]
|
|
|
SFandH
Elite Nomad
Posts: 6957
Registered: 8-5-2011
Member Is Offline
|
|
Are you suggesting we should keep polluting the atmosphere by burning fossil fuels because clean air lets energy in?
If 38% of the temperature rise is due to taking out the dirt, isn't 62% due to greenhouse gases?
Of course, it's a good idea to replace fossil fuels with renewables, even though there is a side effect of clean air.
[Edited on 5-9-2024 by SFandH]
|
|
|
RFClark
Super Nomad
Posts: 2358
Registered: 8-27-2015
Member Is Offline
Mood: Looking forward to 2024
|
|
SF&H,
No, I suggest that you read the MIT report. There is a proposal in it that accomplishes both goals. That said the report states that the percentage is
higher than 38% as new stricter emission standards are now in place.
https://climate.mit.edu/explainers/radiative-forcing
The temperature rate of increase per decade prior to 1982 was .11F after 1982 it jumped to .36F. If you subtract the help clean air adds the rate
would be .21F per decade.
There is the issue of what did the group pushing the Clean Air Bills know and when did they know it!
Nothing else proposed makes as much of a difference!
https://www.technologyreview.com/2024/04/11/1091087/the-inad...
[Edited on 5-10-2024 by RFClark]
|
|
|
| Pages:
1
..
109
110
111 |
![[*]](images/xmbforum/default_icon.gif){kind=icon}
