It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

'This is what climate change looks like'

page: 1
12
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 6 2019 @ 05:08 PM
link   
thehill.com...

This isn't to pick on AOC, she is just one who said something like this publicly. I have heard others make this claim. That California Wildfires are caused by climate change.

In the article, it mentions this:


Research indicates that major wildfires now burn nearly double the area they did in 1970, and other factors such as earlier snowmelt contribute to the dry conditions that create the fires.


Eluding to offering some credibility to that theory, but am I to understand that this:

en.wikipedia.org...



The California water wars were a series of political conflicts between the city of Los Angeles and farmers and ranchers in the Owens Valley of Eastern California over water rights.

As Los Angeles expanded during the late 19th century, it began outgrowing its water supply. Fred Eaton, mayor of Los Angeles, realized that water could flow from Owens Valley to Los Angeles via an aqueduct. The aqueduct construction was overseen by William Mulholland and was finished in 1913. The water rights were acquired through political fighting and, as described by one author, "chicanery, subterfuge ... and a strategy of lies".[1]:62

Since 1913, the Owens River had been diverted to Los Angeles, causing the ruin of the valley's economy. By the 1920s, so much water was diverted from the Owens Valley that agriculture became difficult. This led to the farmers trying to destroy the aqueduct in 1924. Los Angeles prevailed and kept the water flowing. By 1926, Owens Lake at the bottom of Owens Valley was completely dry due to water diversion.

has nothing to do with it?

How does this fit in?
en.wikipedia.org...

If you look at the list in the above link, you see that fires have increased in frequency in a very short period of time. How much has the average temperature in California increased since 1970?

earthobservatory.nasa.gov...
2 degrees. according to NASA.

Does all that point to increased fires due to rising temperatures, or is LA California using too much water. The population in ever increasing.
And the dry conditions, coupled with minimal fire mitigation practices, are a recipe for disaster.
www.forbes.com...
edit on 6-11-2019 by network dude because: added thought

edit on 6-11-2019 by network dude because: went off while I was cleaning it.




posted on Nov, 6 2019 @ 05:31 PM
link   
a reply to: network dude

Good find.

They did it to themselves. Called themselves the victims and blame the rest of the world.

[snipped]


edit on Wed Nov 6 2019 by DontTreadOnMe because: No Political Trolling.....either in words or images. Please read new thread.



posted on Nov, 6 2019 @ 05:33 PM
link   
So to be honest I think its a combination of a ton of things:

1) Climate change is real. Only the worst kind of denier would say otherwise. An increase in temperature can stress trees and the like, making them more prone to disease, bugs etc which leads to more dead trees, more fuel etc.

2) Drought. We are still seeing the effects of the prolonged drought with lots of dead areas and again more fuel. It also forced excessive use of groundwater in the Central Valley during that time for agriculture purposes etc

3) Bad prior fire management practices. The fire fighting philosophy from 1900 to say 1980's was a disaster. The fight fires tooth and nail period. This lead to a buildup of fuel etc. Current practices allow some to burn as long as their are not a major threat which leads to healthier forests etc long terms (See the Yellowstone experience) . There are still parts of national forests that are basically and literally a tinderbox just waiting to be lit.

4) back to water. Yes the present water system can barely support the population. Its not a question of building more dams. There is not a lot of viable places to build anymore. Expansion of existing watersheds and dams is possible, but at some point, you will not be able to balance the needs of agriculture and the population. This is not only a CA issue mind you but cities and states and countries are all struggling with this.

5) Back to the population: They are building in areas that are at risk as the states population increases. If you look at some of those SoCal cities they are literally surrounded in a burn zone. Better building codes and enforcement of definable perimeters helps but you also have to design structures to withstand earthquakes so its a difficult balance.



posted on Nov, 6 2019 @ 05:46 PM
link   


4) back to water. Yes the present water system can barely support the population. Its not a question of building more dams. There is not a lot of viable places to build anymore. Expansion of existing watersheds and dams is possible, but at some point, you will not be able to balance the needs of agriculture and the population. This is not only a CA issue mind you but cities and states and countries are all struggling with this.

If the Governors would stop squashing the plans that Gov. Pat Brown had (over a newt that is not even native to Cali) , they would have had plenty of water by now.



posted on Nov, 6 2019 @ 06:12 PM
link   
a reply to: FredT
May I happily confess to be the worst kind of denier, and point to Tony Heller's vids as my guide? Guilty...now what happens to me ?



posted on Nov, 6 2019 @ 06:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: Zrtst
a reply to: FredT
May I happily confess to be the worst kind of denier, and point to Tony Heller's vids as my guide? Guilty...now what happens to me ?


Well you die like the rest of us either from lack of water, or other calamity rendering the amount of arable land on the planet down to nothing, or the inevitable global war over the lack of water and food because the climate will no longer support us at present numbers and actions

While you can debate the cause and how to mitigate it, the reality is that the climate is changing and not for the better.



posted on Nov, 6 2019 @ 07:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: FredT
So to be honest I think its a combination of a ton of things:

You left out the possibility that this has been acts of terrorism all along.



posted on Nov, 6 2019 @ 07:28 PM
link   
a reply to: network dude

It's time to get rid of fossil fuels with a viable alternative.



posted on Nov, 6 2019 @ 07:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: dfnj2015
a reply to: network dude

It's time to get rid of fossil fuels with a viable alternative.


Totally agree. What should we use?



posted on Nov, 6 2019 @ 07:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: Deplorable

originally posted by: FredT
So to be honest I think its a combination of a ton of things:

You left out the possibility that this has been acts of terrorism all along.


I'm not surprised that ISIS would do this after all the Japan tried that with balloons in WWII. I'm not discounting that but many fo these fires have had non terrorism related causes



posted on Nov, 6 2019 @ 07:56 PM
link   

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: dfnj2015
a reply to: network dude

It's time to get rid of fossil fuels with a viable alternative.


Totally agree. What should we use?


Obviously wind and solar will go a long way especially if we develop the ability for large scale dispatch-able storage. For that 530 PM conundrum. Off shore wind coupled with solar and any combination of:

Pumped hydroelectric power (excess electricity pumps water to a watershed higher up then releases it when needed)
Compressed air storage (same thing but with air)
Molten Salt storage
Utility grid battery banks



posted on Nov, 6 2019 @ 07:58 PM
link   
Good googly moogly the only man-made climate disasters are generated by the policies of the greenies.



posted on Nov, 6 2019 @ 08:51 PM
link   
They are sucking the water dry in California which is why the trees are parched and burn easier. They just recently started to conserve, after it was too late. Everyone wanted great looking yards and wasted the water. That has nothing to do with climate change. The winds that spread the fires this year were normal winds, it also had nothing to do with climate change. The power companies have been neglecting to take care of their power line easements, the government there demands cheap power, cuts had to be made to keep the power cheaper. Again not climate change. California just wants to blame their problems on everyone instead of looking at their failed policies. They are trying to do this to show all Americans are responsible to pay to fight their fires even though they neglected to take necessary precautions, they were warned by the white house last year and did little to fix the problems. It would have saved the government many millions of dollars if they would have just got someone to brush certain areas over there. Both the California government and the Federal government picked up the bill for their ignorance.



posted on Nov, 6 2019 @ 11:29 PM
link   
a reply to: rickymouse



They are sucking the water dry in California which is why the trees are parched and burn easier.

I live in an area of N Ca that is always green and always wet.

It has been getting dryer because we used to have rain all year and it doesn't rain.

We have had fires bad ones even though it is always green year round, the lack of rain is drying wells sometimes.

It is the weather.



posted on Nov, 7 2019 @ 03:57 AM
link   
a reply to: SeaWorthy

And if there was a word over a longer time, like half a year or longer, that would be ... climate.

Congrats, you witnessed climate change!

*fake show-applause*

Seriously, there are things wrong with the climate. We need to work on this.



posted on Nov, 7 2019 @ 04:03 AM
link   
The fires are the new weapon in terrorism of course, fires these intense do not start on their own.

Now which terrorist group/s is responsible now that's the key question. ( sleeper cells new strategy )



posted on Nov, 7 2019 @ 05:12 AM
link   

originally posted by: FredT


While you can debate the cause and how to mitigate it, the reality is that the climate is changing and not for the better.


In who's eyes?

I am pretty sure Russia would love for Siberia to warm up and have more usable land. As well as other regions. Just because an increase in temp is bad for some, does not make it bad globally. That is an obtuse way of thinking. There is a lot of unused land due to extreme winter conditions, and I am sure those countries that are not as perfectly placed as the US could use it.



posted on Nov, 7 2019 @ 05:36 AM
link   
I read someplace that California had stopped doing forest management several years ago such as clearing and controlled back burning to mitigate the big forest fires. It was either due to budget or going all green and natural .. Welcome to all natural !



posted on Nov, 7 2019 @ 07:58 AM
link   

originally posted by: FredT

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: dfnj2015
a reply to: network dude

It's time to get rid of fossil fuels with a viable alternative.


Totally agree. What should we use?


Obviously wind and solar will go a long way especially if we develop the ability for large scale dispatch-able storage. For that 530 PM conundrum. Off shore wind coupled with solar and any combination of:

Pumped hydroelectric power (excess electricity pumps water to a watershed higher up then releases it when needed)
Compressed air storage (same thing but with air)
Molten Salt storage
Utility grid battery banks




while green energy is moving in a positive direction, none of those you mentioned can be used to propel cars, busses, and planes anytime soon. As with the facts put forth in the OP, if this is climate change, then it all happened in a very short period of time, and as I have been told, there is a difference between weather and climate. It's cold in NC and it's not supposed to be. Was last few years as well. But I know that's not climate, that's just local weather.



posted on Nov, 7 2019 @ 09:50 AM
link   
The Big Umbrella catch-phrase Climate Change is a dullards way of explaining the Abnormal Weather we are experiencing...

the Grand Solar Minimum, the Space Weather Factors such as the increased influx of high energy cosmic rays which disturbs all layers of the Earth's atmosphere, the fluxuations of the Magnetosphere, the Volcano ash from many reactivated Lava producers over the decades of increased activity, the changes in the salinity & temperatures of Ocean Currents, the disturbances caused by the undersea heat vents to those same ocean currents & ocean temperatures...

then there's the unnatural injections of foreign nano-particles into the lofty regions of our skies to thwart global warming (actually its deadly terraforming for poisoning our breathable air for some secretive reason)

the 'Climate Change' we are seeing is wrought by Nature & the Rare occurrence of numerous natural cycles at the same time.
...And Certainly not solely by man-made civilization, in the productive acts in which we sustain ourselves by
(as AOC & an Army of fanatics suggest)


If the Climate is actually Changing...it will likely be a cold Ice Age...if our weather is in high Disarray from normal patterns and is expected to remain-that-way

Then the Climate is not Changing into a different 'Pattern' but will Remain in a state of Unpredictability until-the-cows-come-home..

making extreme abnormality the New-Normal for daily/hourly weather forecasts
edit on th30157314241607002019 by St Udio because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
12
<<   2 >>

log in

join