-
IMPORTANT // Please look after your loved ones, yourself and be kind to others. If you are feeling that the world is too hard to handle there is always help - I implore you not to hesitate in contacting one of these wonderful organisations Lifeline and Beyond Blue ... and I'm sure reaching out to our PRE community we will find a way to help. T.
Global Warming
- Thread starter Disco08
- Start date
Liverpool said:So in other words, this fire had nothing to do with climate change?
Climate change doesn't "start" fires any more than prayer puts them out. It contributes to conditions that make them more prevelant and more dangerous. Does the fact "climate change" didn't start the fire logically lead to a conclusion that the two are wholly unrelated? Of course not that is a logical failure.
KnightersRevenge said:Climate change doesn't "start" fires any more than prayer puts them out. It contributes to conditions that make them more prevelant and more dangerous. Does the fact "climate change" didn't start the fire logically lead to a conclusion that the two are wholly unrelated? Of course not that is a logical failure.
Azza said:
antman said:
The climate didn't start the fire and there are multiple variables as to why the fire took off and became deadly.
The weather on the day just ONE of them.
We have recently discussed burn-offs by the CFA, the recent lack of action of the DSE, etc.
Considering history shows there have been fires in the Blue Mountains at this time of year in the past and the fires were deliberately lit (or 'accidentally' lit, in the case of the Army)...and with a couple of the variables discussed also being in play....then its a long bow to draw for some people linking climate change to these bushfires.
I think this conclusion is logical and certainly not a failure. Its reality.
Liverpool said:
So close to logical, it just breaks down in your second last paragraph.
Yes, there are many variables that can contribute to the frequency and intesity of a bushfire. Then you decide to dismiss climate change as one of them, out of hand. This is despite the fact that we are breaking heatwave records annually. You don't see a link between more regular heatwaves and the intensity and frequency of large bushfires?
You REALLY hate to lose an argument, don't you Livers.
The opposing sides of the argument are
A "... these fires are certainly not a function of climate change."
T. Abbott & Liverpool
B "climate change may have a bearing on the timing, extent, and intensity of the fires"
Climate scientists and fire scientists.
The first point is the absolute statement, so the onus is on you and Tony to prove it. So far you haven't come anywhere near it, and frankly I don't think it's possible.
But feel free to keep wasting your time trying to - remember you have to prove that 'these fires re not a function of climate change'.
The opposing sides of the argument are
A "... these fires are certainly not a function of climate change."
T. Abbott & Liverpool
B "climate change may have a bearing on the timing, extent, and intensity of the fires"
Climate scientists and fire scientists.
The first point is the absolute statement, so the onus is on you and Tony to prove it. So far you haven't come anywhere near it, and frankly I don't think it's possible.
But feel free to keep wasting your time trying to - remember you have to prove that 'these fires re not a function of climate change'.
it seems the arguments of slivers (and others of similar ilk) go something like:
The climate isnt changing.
But if it is it isnt because of human activity.
But if it is Australia shouldnt act because we pollute so little anyway.
But if we do a price on carbon is not the right way to do it.
It appears the same people claim:
The climate isnt changing.
But if it is it isnt because of human activity.
But if it is hotter, drier temperatures have no effect on the likelihood and impact of fires.
seem about right?
The climate isnt changing.
But if it is it isnt because of human activity.
But if it is Australia shouldnt act because we pollute so little anyway.
But if we do a price on carbon is not the right way to do it.
It appears the same people claim:
The climate isnt changing.
But if it is it isnt because of human activity.
But if it is hotter, drier temperatures have no effect on the likelihood and impact of fires.
seem about right?
Liverpool said:
Oh for goodness sake this has been explained every which way Livers I refuse to believe you still don't get it. I am forced to assume you willfully misunderstand in order to keep your stance in tact. But here we go...again:
weather and climate are linked but are not one and the same. The changing climate (the entire system, the atmosphere of the entire globe - massive and mindbogglingly complex) affects the weather (the local system - wind, rain etc). Changes in the climate systems bring about changes in weather systems, this not conjecture Livers. So yes it is a logical failure to assert that climate change "cannot" impact the local conditions that would increase the fire hazard.
Climate by it's very nature is variable.
Is mankind stuffing up the Earth we live on? Undoubtedly.
Pollution, deforestation, overpopulation, extinctions.
Is the Earth warming at an alarming rate? Not so undoubtedly.
I remember the first summer in Australia in 1967 - well in excess of 40 for weeks it seemed, poor mum wanted to run back to Blighty.
Read in the New York Times (maybe not an acceptable source on this thread) that if our temperatures keep rising as is we will reach the warm temperatures of the middle ages in 200/300 years!
Also read that if the world temperatures rise by 2% it would actually be a good thing! Not sure where unfortunately.
Severe cold kills far more than heat apparently.
Are alarmists like Gore, Flannery etc scare mongering & making outrageous unfounded predictions for their own ends? I'd probably agree with that view.
Wet periods followed by a dry spell are the conditions that are the most dangerous for bushfires as I understand it, this allows for a huge build up of fuel for the fires & in the present economic & green influenced climate there is little or no clearing or back burning on crown lands. This is a huge change from yesteryear.
I also wouldn't be surprised if the incidence of arson is increasing, feel free to enlighten me otherwise.
In summation it is extremely difficult for a layman to completely understand the issue as there are so many conflicting opinions out there all backed by seemingly irrefutable facts & information. The opinions of many on here seem to be so set in stone that reason seems to missing.
Probably making a bit of a fool of myself in posting this but the intrangience of some is a bit off putting. It seems that if you have a slightly different view on things you are considered to be a complete idiot.
Is mankind stuffing up the Earth we live on? Undoubtedly.
Pollution, deforestation, overpopulation, extinctions.
Is the Earth warming at an alarming rate? Not so undoubtedly.
I remember the first summer in Australia in 1967 - well in excess of 40 for weeks it seemed, poor mum wanted to run back to Blighty.
Read in the New York Times (maybe not an acceptable source on this thread) that if our temperatures keep rising as is we will reach the warm temperatures of the middle ages in 200/300 years!
Also read that if the world temperatures rise by 2% it would actually be a good thing! Not sure where unfortunately.
Severe cold kills far more than heat apparently.
Are alarmists like Gore, Flannery etc scare mongering & making outrageous unfounded predictions for their own ends? I'd probably agree with that view.
Wet periods followed by a dry spell are the conditions that are the most dangerous for bushfires as I understand it, this allows for a huge build up of fuel for the fires & in the present economic & green influenced climate there is little or no clearing or back burning on crown lands. This is a huge change from yesteryear.
I also wouldn't be surprised if the incidence of arson is increasing, feel free to enlighten me otherwise.
In summation it is extremely difficult for a layman to completely understand the issue as there are so many conflicting opinions out there all backed by seemingly irrefutable facts & information. The opinions of many on here seem to be so set in stone that reason seems to missing.
Probably making a bit of a fool of myself in posting this but the intrangience of some is a bit off putting. It seems that if you have a slightly different view on things you are considered to be a complete idiot.
This Is Anfield said:
Most here choose to heed the advice of climatologists, others prefer to listen to shock jocks and lobby groups. Take your pick.
This Is Anfield said:
There are people on here with a much closer relationship to the scientific method than others but it is great that you have decided to be part of the discussion. The danger of trying to simplify complex systems is that the facts get lost and the dissenting voice is given equal weight to the multiude of scientific experts who have dedicated their life's work to the study of those complex systems. It is not idiotic to ask questions in attempt to better understand things, it is a little disingenuous to then ignore the facts if they disagree with your uninformed opinion as some like to do.
p.s. that last crack wasn't aimed at you Anfield
This Is Anfield said:
There are massive controlled burn-offs and fire break works every year in our area. There are also some pretty horrendous bushfires. It would be impossible to burn all bushland and I doubt very much that would have happened in yesteryear either.
Brodders17 said:
No.
Livers to the best of my knowledge and without putting words in his mouth, has never agreed with your first sentence ("The climate isn't changing"), so your assertions flowing from this sentence can be ignored.
poppa x said:
No.
Even if Livers has never made such a statement (which I find hard to believe), the subsequent statements are not contingent on the first. Each of them are valid in their own right. The point being that Livers stance is classic goal post shifting. He has definitely argued from more than one of those listed positions. It is the classic argument of manufacturing doubt that has been used successfully by the tobacco lobby and now the anti-AGW crowd.
FACTS ABOUT SEPTEMBER 2013 IN SYDNEY
*Warmest September on record!
*Total rainfall for the month about half of average.
*Only 4 days in the month had rainfall - the average is 11 days.
*Average maximum temperatures 4.4 degrees warmer than normal
*Average minimum temperatures 2.7 degrees warmer than normal
Daytime temperatures were persistently warm during the month, with only three days dropping below 20 °C associated with a mid-month rain event, an equal record with September 2012 (average 17 cool days). This included 20 consecutive days above 20 °C between August 24 and September 12, the longest such spell on record for September and two weeks earlier than the previous record (19 days 7-25 September 2001).
There were also several very warm days during the month. Seven days reached at least 28 °C during the month, well above the historical average of 1 warm day and the most on record (previous record 6 days in 1928). Three of these days reached 30 °C, the equal-highest on record (4 other times), two of which occurred during the first ten days of the month.
No nights dropped below 10 °C during the month for the first time on record (average 11 nights), while 10 nights exceeded 15 °C (average 2-3 nights), the equal highest on record with 2009. The warmest night was 20.1 °C on the 10th, the earliest 20 °C night on record for Sydney.
The warmest days also featured unusually warm mornings. The 9am temperature was 25.9 °C on the 10th, the equal-warmest on record for September and the earliest such warm morning by two weeks (previous earliest was 24 September 2009). This record was later broken when temperatures reached 26.9 °C at 9am on September 26, before reaching 29.9 °C at 10 am.
Sydney Airport recorded an average of 8.8 hours of bright sunshine, above the historical average of 7.9 hours but not as sunny as September 2012 (9.2 hours).
The prevailing wind direction was northerly, with 33% of 3 pm winds N-W and 53% N-E, well above average for September; only 13% of 3 pm winds were southerly, half the historical average. The northwesterly winds brought warm inland air to Sydney, contributing to the record-breaking temperatures for the month.
There were eight days with strong winds observed, reaching 87 km/h at the airport and 96 km/h at Kurnell on the 26th, with gusts of 91 km/h at Port Botany on the 12th. The strong winds on the 26th caused some fallen trees and roof damage, mostly in western Sydney.
The combination of dry weather, warm temperatures and strong winds resulted in significant early-season bushfire activity during the month. Major bushfires impacted western Sydney and the Blue Mountains on the 10th, resulting in some evacuations, closed roads, and two destroyed houses. Bushfires also burnt large areas of Barrenjoey Head in the Northern Beaches on the 28th.
*Warmest September on record!
*Total rainfall for the month about half of average.
*Only 4 days in the month had rainfall - the average is 11 days.
*Average maximum temperatures 4.4 degrees warmer than normal
*Average minimum temperatures 2.7 degrees warmer than normal
Daytime temperatures were persistently warm during the month, with only three days dropping below 20 °C associated with a mid-month rain event, an equal record with September 2012 (average 17 cool days). This included 20 consecutive days above 20 °C between August 24 and September 12, the longest such spell on record for September and two weeks earlier than the previous record (19 days 7-25 September 2001).
There were also several very warm days during the month. Seven days reached at least 28 °C during the month, well above the historical average of 1 warm day and the most on record (previous record 6 days in 1928). Three of these days reached 30 °C, the equal-highest on record (4 other times), two of which occurred during the first ten days of the month.
No nights dropped below 10 °C during the month for the first time on record (average 11 nights), while 10 nights exceeded 15 °C (average 2-3 nights), the equal highest on record with 2009. The warmest night was 20.1 °C on the 10th, the earliest 20 °C night on record for Sydney.
The warmest days also featured unusually warm mornings. The 9am temperature was 25.9 °C on the 10th, the equal-warmest on record for September and the earliest such warm morning by two weeks (previous earliest was 24 September 2009). This record was later broken when temperatures reached 26.9 °C at 9am on September 26, before reaching 29.9 °C at 10 am.
Sydney Airport recorded an average of 8.8 hours of bright sunshine, above the historical average of 7.9 hours but not as sunny as September 2012 (9.2 hours).
The prevailing wind direction was northerly, with 33% of 3 pm winds N-W and 53% N-E, well above average for September; only 13% of 3 pm winds were southerly, half the historical average. The northwesterly winds brought warm inland air to Sydney, contributing to the record-breaking temperatures for the month.
There were eight days with strong winds observed, reaching 87 km/h at the airport and 96 km/h at Kurnell on the 26th, with gusts of 91 km/h at Port Botany on the 12th. The strong winds on the 26th caused some fallen trees and roof damage, mostly in western Sydney.
The combination of dry weather, warm temperatures and strong winds resulted in significant early-season bushfire activity during the month. Major bushfires impacted western Sydney and the Blue Mountains on the 10th, resulting in some evacuations, closed roads, and two destroyed houses. Bushfires also burnt large areas of Barrenjoey Head in the Northern Beaches on the 28th.
This Is Anfield said:
Different views are great - but its your ability to argue them that puts you in the complete idiot category or not.
For example, Livers claimed that because the fires were lit by humans, climate change was not a factor. It was pointed out that climate impacts on the ferocity, duration, velocity etc etc of fires. Livers posted a lot of stuff about floods in China and then he was back to "the fires were deliberately lit so climate is not a factor".
You can decide which camp he belongs in.
rosy23 said:
Cheers Rosy,
Good to hear - the controlled burnoffs not the bushfires of course!
Most of my family live up the Seville/Warburton areas & over the years there has been a lot of local talk about less burnoffs, access to fire tracks & shire interference in land clearing etc.
I assume all local governance is different.
PS: How's the arm?
Thank you for the replies.
Bit tough exercising the brain after years of inactivity! ;D
Will continue to question & read the opinions on this thread with interest & a very open mind.
Hard not to be sympathetic to a poster with the user name Liverpool!
If he called himself ManUtd I'd probably turn into Bob Brown!
As usual I'll go sit on my fence!
Bit tough exercising the brain after years of inactivity! ;D
Will continue to question & read the opinions on this thread with interest & a very open mind.
Hard not to be sympathetic to a poster with the user name Liverpool!
If he called himself ManUtd I'd probably turn into Bob Brown!
As usual I'll go sit on my fence!
