Hey, Climate Change Activists: MANY Australian Bush Fires Are Deliberately Set

"...we still fail to make the connection between the climate crisis and increased extreme weather events and nature disasters like #AustraliaFires. That's what has to change. Now."
-Greta Thunberg

There have been many comments already concerning these awful fires, ranging from climate change, to better bush management. Those who insist that these fires are due to global warming, should realize that a vast majority of these fires were intentionally caused by some sick people.

FROM LATE SEPT. 2019:

Dr Paul Read, co-director of the National Centre for Research in Bushfire and Arson, said the great majority of bushfires are deliberately lit by "cunning, furtive and versatile criminals".

"About 85 per cent are related to human activity, 13 per cent confirmed arson and 37 per cent suspected arson," he said.

www.abc.net.au...

TWO ARTICLES FROM LATE NOV. 2019:

A 19-year-old volunteer fire fighter in Australia has been charged with arson and accused of lighting seven fires in the Bega Valley area, New South Wales.

New South Wales has suffered from a horrific bush fire crisis in recent weeks, with six people killed, 600 homes destroyed and almost 1.7 million hectares of land burnt through.

www.telegraph.co.uk...

Dozens of fires continue to burn in the states of Queensland and New South Wales, where more than 50 people have been charged with arson since August. Another 150 suspects are being interviewed by investigators.

More than 2 million hectares of land, including vast areas of forest, have been scorched in eastern Australia’s bushfire crisis. Hundreds of homes have been destroyed, and six people have died.

The Australian Institute of Criminology has estimated that around half of the nation’s bushfires are either arson or suspected arson.

Most offenders are male. Many are children.

www.voanews.com...

a reply to: shawmanfromny

One lesson to be learned is don't get climate advice from a teenager or a bartender...

The other thing to be learned is the most important.
There are three sides to every story.
One side.
The other side.
The truth.

a reply to: shawmanfromny

Does that mean climate change cannot exacerbate the problem?

Wow that speech, it’s almost like an adult wrote it.

Wait...

With how the news reads you would think it's so hot there plants just spontaneously combust

a reply to: Phage

No...
But it also means never waste a tragedy to make a political statement.

Probably paid by the Chinese to get ready for their ultimate takeover. I mean this is a conspiracy site right?

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: shawmanfromny

Does that mean climate change cannot exacerbate the problem?

ENOUGH!!

You and like-minded are WRONG !!

Climate taxes /carbon credits are ONLY a scheme to enrich unqualified assholes like Al Gore incapable of making money any other way.

If you want to give YOUR money to YOUR religion, go ahead.

Millions of us do not want to FORCED to participate in what is clearly a fraudulent scheme for the gullible.

No # people start fires, we had a dickhead start 2 in my town on 28th December, he is 31 years old.

It doesn't mean that climate change isn't real, deniers sound like flat Earthers to be honest.
Climate change is pretty obvious if you pay attention to what going on around you.
And some people still think it's about collecting tax? Total morons.

a reply to: shawmanfromny

The initial 'cause' of any given fire is not the issue.

It is the conditions on the ground that allow for easy combustion and difficulty in controlling and extinguishing the fire once begun.

This counter argument that X, Y or Z did not cause an incident (i.e. global warming is not caused by mankind) is overly simplistic and dangerous. It does not take into account all the factors involved nor the context which the initiating 'spark' so to speak was a single piece.

It's the same argument that tobacco company's used, "Cigarette smoking doesn't 'cause'" lung cancer." The 19th and 20th centuries deconstructive methods of the science and thinking are no longer valid for the complex problems we need to answer contemporary questions.

originally posted by: M5xaz

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: shawmanfromny

Does that mean climate change cannot exacerbate the problem?

ENOUGH!!

You and like-minded are WRONG !!

Climate taxes /carbon credits are ONLY a scheme to enrich unqualified assholes like Al Gore incapable of making money any other way.

If you want to give YOUR money to YOUR religion, go ahead.

Millions of us do not want to FORCED to participate in what is clearly a fraudulent scheme for the gullible.

ENOUGH!!

You and like-minded are WRONG !!

Al Gore has nothing to do with what is happening now FFS

I hope they find the bastards and put them in prison for a long time.

Activists do some weird things to back their 'causes'. Mental illness I say to do that kind of crap.

a reply to: M5xaz

Taxes and money cause climate change?

originally posted by: M5xaz

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: shawmanfromny

Does that mean climate change cannot exacerbate the problem?

ENOUGH!!

You and like-minded are WRONG !!

Climate taxes /carbon credits are ONLY a scheme to enrich unqualified assholes like Al Gore incapable of making money any other way.

If you want to give YOUR money to YOUR religion, go ahead.

Millions of us do not want to FORCED to participate in what is clearly a fraudulent scheme for the gullible.

This is wrong.

originally posted by: FyreByrd
a reply to: shawmanfromny

The initial 'cause' of any given fire is not the issue.

It is the conditions on the ground that allow for easy combustion and difficulty in controlling and extinguishing the fire once begun.

This counter argument that X, Y or Z did not cause an incident (i.e. global warming is not caused by mankind) is overly simplistic and dangerous. It does not take into account all the factors involved nor the context which the initiating 'spark' so to speak was a single piece.

It's the same argument that tobacco company's used, "Cigarette smoking doesn't 'cause'" lung cancer." The 19th and 20th centuries deconstructive methods of the science and thinking are no longer valid for the complex problems we need to answer contemporary questions.

Why isn't New Zealand as dry?

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: shawmanfromny

Does that mean climate change cannot exacerbate the problem?

Are you admitting then that climate change is not the main issue after all?

What if, as the world population grows, more people spread out to the more dangerous areas?

Tornado Alley wasn't so dangerous to people once upon a time.

originally posted by: Wardaddy454

originally posted by: FyreByrd
a reply to: shawmanfromny

The initial 'cause' of any given fire is not the issue.

It is the conditions on the ground that allow for easy combustion and difficulty in controlling and extinguishing the fire once begun.

This counter argument that X, Y or Z did not cause an incident (i.e. global warming is not caused by mankind) is overly simplistic and dangerous. It does not take into account all the factors involved nor the context which the initiating 'spark' so to speak was a single piece.

It's the same argument that tobacco company's used, "Cigarette smoking doesn't 'cause'" lung cancer." The 19th and 20th centuries deconstructive methods of the science and thinking are no longer valid for the complex problems we need to answer contemporary questions.

Why isn't New Zealand as dry?

All those tears from wanting to be americans?

a reply to: weirdguy

Al Gore has nothing to do with what is happening now FFS

neither does climate has to do with what Australia is going through

originally posted by: Wardaddy454

originally posted by: FyreByrd
a reply to: shawmanfromny

The initial 'cause' of any given fire is not the issue.

It is the conditions on the ground that allow for easy combustion and difficulty in controlling and extinguishing the fire once begun.

This counter argument that X, Y or Z did not cause an incident (i.e. global warming is not caused by mankind) is overly simplistic and dangerous. It does not take into account all the factors involved nor the context which the initiating 'spark' so to speak was a single piece.

It's the same argument that tobacco company's used, "Cigarette smoking doesn't 'cause'" lung cancer." The 19th and 20th centuries deconstructive methods of the science and thinking are no longer valid for the complex problems we need to answer contemporary questions.

Why isn't New Zealand as dry?

Why isn't New Hampshire as dry as Arizona?

a reply to: shawmanfromny

Many of the fires have been lit deliberately. Many have also been started by dry lightning and, as a result of super hot days, spontaneous combustion.

The current fire conditions were forecast last year in about September. Let that sink in for a moment.

There was (is) a Sudden Stratospheric Warming (SSW) event that has forced a collapse of late spring & early summer rains. The SSW has also brought temperatures that are well above average, to say the least. We knew this was coming, it was forecast and modelled, the data is all there if you'd care to look for it. We also know that this event has NOTHING to do with Human Induced Climate Change, because we know that SSWs are naturally occurring events.

It is sad to see over the last week or so the disgusting politicisation of this event. The trotting out of the CC explanation, for me anyway, has done nothing but reinforce the fact that we are being rolled. We're being rolled by people with disingenuous agendas who will ultimately do SFA for the climate. And we're being rolled by fckuwits who are doing nothing but emboldening the bastards who just want to make money and have control.

And just for the record, again, manmade CC is real. It's just not as significant as some people would like to believe nor does it have anywhere near the same level of impact that the sun has and is currently having on this planet, not even close.