Who is responsible for the Australian Bush fires - ITS NOT CLIMATE CHANGE...

a reply to: rickymouse

those kids/people responsible should be put in jail for life after the damage they did. If they lived in the US i would ask for the death penalty.

originally posted by: dfnj2015
Burning gasoline causes pollution. Pollution is bad. Simple logic.

I don't think you'll find a single person on ATS crying the opposite. I'm pretty sure 99% of people here and in general will agree pollution is bad and fossil fuels are where most of our pollution comes from. Can you site anybody wanting more pollution?

The disconnect comes when pollution = climate change.

originally posted by: yuppa
a reply to: rickymouse

those kids/people responsible should be put in jail for life after the damage they did. If they lived in the US i would ask for the death penalty.

All of the people who lost their houses, and all the animals in the woods that died because those people wanted to start fires to cause chaos in their country. Yes, those people need to go to prison for at least twenty years and if anyone died from the fire, there should be a murder charge imposed also. Let the people who lost everything be allowed to each kick the person in the groin, after thousands of kicks in the nuts, the criminals can then serve their sentence if they are still alive.

Killing mass amounts of wildlife pisses me off, killing all of those trees also pisses me off. I will volunteer to kick them in the nuts if someone hasn't got the balls.

originally posted by: weirdguy
"I agree that pollution is bad, but there is a huge difference between pollution, and your ridiculous and factually baseless claim that carbon from fossil fuels is 'raising global temperatures making deserts and dry areas dryer'."

You are wrong

That graph proves nothing.

First, I can't tell you how many times I've seen someone post a graph, then learn later that the data it is based on is massively flawed, or was even fabricated.

Second, even if carbon has risen a little, it doesn't even remotely equate to proof of AGW.

Try again...

originally posted by: tanstaafl

originally posted by: weirdguy
"I agree that pollution is bad, but there is a huge difference between pollution, and your ridiculous and factually baseless claim that carbon from fossil fuels is 'raising global temperatures making deserts and dry areas dryer'."

You are wrong

That graph proves nothing.

First, I can't tell you how many times I've seen someone post a graph, then learn later that the data it is based on is massively flawed, or was even fabricated.

Second, even if carbon has risen a little, it doesn't even remotely equate to proof of AGW.

Try again...

The guy that created the hockey stick graph refused to show his evidence in court...That doesn't lend itself to trustworthy data.

a reply to: Wardaddy454

The guy that created the hockey stick graph refused to show his evidence in court.

According to whom?

originally posted by: dfnj2015
a reply to: maddy21

We have to find alternatives to fossil fuel. All the carbon being put into the atmosphere is raising global temperatures making deserts and dry areas dryer. Now these areas are very susceptible to massive fires. California has had raging fires for years. It's almost biblical.

Burning gasoline causes pollution. Pollution is bad. Simple logic.

FALSE...

Why do you keep on lying?...

According to NASA...

April 26, 2016
Carbon Dioxide Fertilization Greening Earth, Study Finds

From a quarter to half of Earth’s vegetated lands has shown significant greening over the last 35 years largely due to rising levels of atmospheric carbon dioxide, according to a new study published in the journal Nature Climate Change on April 25.

An international team of 32 authors from 24 institutions in eight countries led the effort, which involved using satellite data from NASA’s Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectrometer and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s Advanced Very High Resolution Radiometer instruments to help determine the leaf area index, or amount of leaf cover, over the planet’s vegetated regions. The greening represents an increase in leaves on plants and trees equivalent in area to two times the continental United States.
...

www.nasa.gov...

Because of the increase in atmospheric CO2 Earth has in fact GREENED...

This thread needs to go in the Hoax bin or preferably be deleted outright. It is an extremely insidious form of misinformation being spread here and IT NEEDS TO STOP!!!!!!

Australia's bushfire emergency is being exploited on social media, as misinformation is spread through cyberspace via hundreds of thousands of posts.

Key points:

Bushfire discussion on social media is attracting a high number of "bot-like and troll-like accounts"
Some of the misinformation includes the idea left-wing "ecoterrorists" are behind some fires
The lies are highly sharable, which means they can spread faster than the truth
Out-of-date photos of survivors and inaccurate fire maps have been widely shared, including by international celebrities.

As authorities fight the flames on firegrounds around the country, an ABC investigation has revealed a battle of a very different kind online.

One area of misinformation has been the hashtag #ArsonEmergency on Twitter.

Queensland University of Technology (QUT) researcher Dr Timothy Graham analysed a sample 315 accounts posting #ArsonEmergency and said around a third of them displayed highly automated and inauthentic behaviour.

In layman's terms, that means they could be bots or trolls.

The ABC found some of the suspicious accounts were amplifying unproven suggestions arson had been the overwhelming cause of Australia's disastrous bushfire season.

A number of the tweets took police figures out of context and claimed almost 200 arsonists had been arrested in NSW.

The actual number of people charged with deliberately lighting a fire is 24 — even fewer managed to spark large blazes.

An article posted by an American far-right figure went one step further, claiming left-wing ecoterrorists were responsible for lighting the blazes. It has been shared almost 100,000 times across Facebook, Twitter and Reddit and reached a potential 2.8 million accounts — significantly more than general bushfire fact checks.

www.abc.net.au...

a reply to: harold223

Ironic, as this is similar to the FALSE claims from the left that pro-Trump twitter accounts are mostly bots/Russian bots... And that those "Russian bots/bots" were the reason why Trump was made POTUS...

Perhaps it is you whom needs to find your way into the "hoax bin"?...

originally posted by: ElectricUniverse
a reply to: harold223

Ironic, as this is similar to the FALSE claims from the left that pro-Trump twitter accounts are mostly bots/Russian bots... And that those "Russian bots/bots" were the reason why Trump was made POTUS...

Yes, it is ironic.

www.dni.gov...

Why would automated bots be spreading FASLE information about bushfires in Australia of all things? Is it because the word "CLIMATE CHANGE" got mentioned? There is an insidious agenda going on here and as an Australian, witnessing a national disaster of historic proportions I am incandescent with rage.

KEEP YOUR DAMN CULTURE WARS OUT OF THIS CRISIS

a reply to: chr0naut

Some places go through long-term (as in decades or longer at a time) drought cycles. I'd tell you to task the Anasazi of the desert SW of the US about it, but the last one out there killed them off. I'm sure they thought the climate was changing dramatically, drastically and forever too.

Think fires will become even extreme when they modify data with

Acorn sat version 3
Acorn sat version 4
Acorn sat version 5

a reply to: Skorpiogurl

Here's is what I can't understand about climate change. Why are people so against it?

Because the "solutions" will do nothing to counteract it... they are as false as the theory itself. What they will do is place hundreds of millions of people in extreme poverty.

I mean even if everything about climate change is false, isn't it still a great idea to take care of our environment?

Yes, it is. The problem is that those obsessed with Global Warming are not interested in taking care of our environment. They instead seem to focus on controlling our environment, and their idea of control would destroy many species of flora and fauna, as well as likely bring about the very thing they falsely claim will happen if we do not follow their advice.

And yes, the Earth will always take care of itself that's true, but don't we want to at least try to keep our home clean and uncluttered while we are here?

Clean and uncluttered is what one wants for a home. I do not want my environment clean and uncluttered. I do not want it sterile. Clean and uncluttered brings up images of nice, flat concrete, freshly swept so no dirt dirties it. Plants can't grow in concrete. Animals can't eat concrete.

I want the environment "dirty" because it is supposed to be "dirty." That's why it came made of dirt! Dirt will grow trees and smaller plants so people can eat. Plants growing in dirt feed animals.

The last few days, a young buck deer has been hanging around the place. Every once in a while I get a glimpse of him out my window while I am working. He's a beautiful animal, maybe a three-point so still very young. We see him all around the yard at various times, except where there is no dirt. He prefers the grass growing in the dirt.

And I prefer him to concrete.

If we had taken good care of the Earth can you imagine how beautiful it would be and how awesome our relationship with it would be?

It already is beautiful here. Wide areas of nothing but nature. I can take a walk in the woods mere feet from my house any time I want and be out of sight of any human activity within a couple of minutes. I used to spend days up there, literally disappearing for a few days at a time and sleeping in the wild. There's plenty of food if one knows where to look.

I have spent my life both enjoying and protecting this place from those who would love to destroy it. I can't count the number of people who have told me how useless it is and how I needed to level it and put up a housing project or some other such silly notion. Nope, not gonna do it. This place will be as natural the day I die as it was when I came into it over a half-century ago. That's real environmentalism... not running around making a mess while holding up signs proclaiming the end of the world because of plant food.

It's stupid. It's like people talking about how utterly devastated they are about the loss of over half a million animals and ordering steak for dinner. Wake the # up people.

I can be upset over the loss of endangered animals and still eat venison in peace. There are more deer here now than there ever were in recorded history. When we (man) moved into this area, we killed off most of the natural predators. As a result, the deer population exploded... and if we didn't now do what those predators used to do (eat the deer), the deer would become sickly for lack of food and overpopulation. They would die horrible deaths of starvation and disease during the winters, and would even wipe out the plant life that sustains them. Nature will seek a balance whether we want it to or not, and that seeking of balance will not always be a pleasant thing.

When you have spent your life, and a long life, not just a few decades, caring for some place like mine, then you get to tell me about how to take care of nature. Until then, you can complain all you want and it'll fall on deaf ears. Especially when the complaining is also promoting worse things that it is supposed to address. Gasoline is bad? OK, given, it's concentrated, quite corrosive, and highly flammable... but batteries are worse. Those electric cars being promoted? They have some good points, but they are more polluting than a gas guzzler pickup! The difference is that the pollution happens somewhere else, when the vehicle is built instead of when it is being operated. Those batteries contain acid and toxic chemicals that were produced using even more toxic chemicals that were then dumped, undiluted, right back into the environment. All that electronic circuitry that makes it operate? Do you have any idea what kinds of pollution are produced to make semiconductors? The motors contain something called "magnet wire"... that's fine copper wire (ignore the pollution caused by refining copper for now; it's minor) coated with something called "corona dope." I have some corona dope here... it is probably the single most toxic chemical I have here. Nothing breaks it down... it lasts seemingly forever... the fumes are enough to make a dung beetle gag... and it is listed as highly toxic. I used to wash car parts in gasoline with my bare hands, but this stuff I treat with a lot of respect. And those electric motors contain large amounts of it!

Just one example of why we don't listen when people cry about how the world is changing. It is; we know that. We also know that we're not causing it, we'll survive it just fine if we don't panic and do something stupid, and and the solutions you guys give are usually worse than the original problem.

TheRedneck

We also know that we're not causing it, we'll survive it just fine if we don't panic and do something stupid, and and the solutions you guys give are usually worse than the original problem.

BULL%^&* We are causing it. The evidence that we are is no longer disputed by any credible climate scientist or scientific organisation world wide. Those who dispute this are on the same level as those who claim the earth is flat at this point, except those people are harmless, and somewhat entertaining. Those who continue in their ignorant refusal of the science on this issue are much more of a problem, they are stifling attempts to do what we need to do as a species to attempt to rectify this problem. That is, rapid transition away from a fossil energy system.

a reply to: harold223

We are causing it. The evidence that we are is no longer disputed by any credible climate scientist or scientific organisation world wide. Those who dispute this are on the same level as those who claim the earth is flat at this point, except those people are harmless, and somewhat entertaining.

Translation: everyone who agrees with me agrees with me. Everyone else doesn't and I don't care what they say.

Your opinion is duly noted and rejected.

TheRedneck

No ones saying it so I'll put it out there -

Australian gov paid operatives to start the fires to stop the population seeing Nibiru and taking snapshots alerting the world on the net with undeniable mass sightings.

Smoke of that intensity will do that.

Could this be why "cornflake" sediment is washing up on Australian beaches from deep deep underground and why uncountable amounts of dead deep sea jellyfish are also washing up on Australian shores coupled with the fact the whole continent has shifted 1.8m to the North forcing recalibration of GPS to correct everything.

Their hiding something and someone is paying them to do it.

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: harold223

We are causing it. The evidence that we are is no longer disputed by any credible climate scientist or scientific organisation world wide. Those who dispute this are on the same level as those who claim the earth is flat at this point, except those people are harmless, and somewhat entertaining.

Translation: everyone who agrees with me agrees with me. Everyone else doesn't and I don't care what they say.

Your opinion is duly noted and rejected.

TheRedneck

I'll believe the opinion of the vast majority of climate scientists over your opinion. Your opinion is also noted and duly rejected.

originally posted by: harold223

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: harold223

We are causing it. The evidence that we are is no longer disputed by any credible climate scientist or scientific organisation world wide. Those who dispute this are on the same level as those who claim the earth is flat at this point, except those people are harmless, and somewhat entertaining.

Translation: everyone who agrees with me agrees with me. Everyone else doesn't and I don't care what they say.

Your opinion is duly noted and rejected.

TheRedneck

I'll believe the opinion of the vast majority of climate scientists over your opinion. Your opinion is also noted and duly rejected.

Consensus is not science, it's politics. Einstein said "Why do you need 100 scientists to prove me wrong? One would do."

a reply to: harold223

I'll believe the opinion of the vast majority of climate scientists over your opinion. Your opinion is also noted and duly rejected.

That is your prerogative. At least you admitted it's all opinion instead of trying to claim it as science.

TheRedneck

The right conditions for catastrophic fires come up just about every year - like high fuel loads in bush areas combined with a spell of high temperatures drying it out and topped off with strong hot winds blowing in from the desert inland areas.

Declarations of catastrophic dangers are an enticement to a certain element of society that just wants to see the world burn for their own entertainment regardless of the loss of lives and property. More of them seem to be getting caught these days.

Dry lightning, careless campers, smokers and operation of machinery in risky areas are also a factor. I recall a major fire south of Sydney being started accidentally by workers welding/grinding on a pipeline under construction some years back.