- Joined
- Jul 15, 2005
- Messages
- 28,991
- Reaction score
- 16,561
- Location
- Canada's Capital
- Gender
- Female
- Political Leaning
- Progressive
Which is a good thing.
Why is it a good thing? And idea of why this would be bad?
Which is a good thing.
Jeepers newbie, you have waterfalls behind your ears. :roll:
Why would I take the time to read a crock of **** paper that our friend Mr Hays probably got off of his daily feed? He does not go to any legit sites. He looks for **** that backs his pre-conceived notions. Heck, if I were to only go to sites that push that the earth is flat, I would ****ing believe it after a while.
BTW, 7-8 years ago, Hays constantly pushed and posted paper after idiotic paper about how were are in a cooling phase and the world was getting colder! He's more-or-less stopped that nonsense because reality got into the way. It's like that last doctor holding onto the belief that cigs don't cause cancer even though most of his smoking patients had lung cancer.
The paper was published in Nature Climate Change, one of the most prestigious journals in the world.
My thread "Global Cooling is Under Way" is quite a bit more recent than 7-8 years ago (launched 2018), is alive and well, and is accurate.
I've noticed Nature is slowly changing direction on the papers they publish regarding climate change.
The paper was published in Nature Climate Change, one of the most prestigious journals in the world.
My thread "Global Cooling is Under Way" is quite a bit more recent than 7-8 years ago (launched 2018), is alive and well, and is accurate.
Why is it a good thing? And idea of why this would be bad?
It is always a good thing when there is more arable land. It means a growing agricultural industry, which is sorely needed in Alaska which imports much of its food from the lower-48. The more food that can be gown locally, the better it is for all Alaskans. If you can't comprehend why more frozen tundra and more permafrost is a bad thing for humanity there is no helping you.
Additionally, every warming period throughout history has greatly benefited humanity technologically, socially, and culturally. Consider how far we have advanced since the Modern Warming Period began in 1850. Similar advancements occurred during the Medieval Warming, the Roman Warming, and the Minoan Warming periods. The Vikings discovered Greenland at the beginning of the Medieval Warming Period and thrived until it ended in 1350 and the Little Ice-Age began. By 1408 there was no one left in Greenland, they had all either left or died.
You thinking is very short-sighted. It may be good in some respects for Alaska, but what about the parts of the world that are burning up? What about the extinction of plants and animals? You might be better off investing in greenhouses if you want local food.
You thinking is very short-sighted. It may be good in some respects for Alaska, but what about the parts of the world that are burning up? What about the extinction of plants and animals? You might be better off investing in greenhouses if you want local food.
Which bits of the world do you think are going to burn up and how hot is that?
There is no part of the world "burning up" and all of humanity benefits from warming periods.
Animals go extinct everyday, just as new species popup into existence a daily basis as well. That has been happening since life began 3.8 billion years ago and won't stop until life comes to an end on this planet.
We do use greenhouses in Alaska, but you can't feed a population of three-quarters of a million people using greenhouses. More arable land is required.
Australia. California. The fires are getting worse and worse each and every year. And humanity benefits from cooling too.
Not to the point where it's so rapid, ecosystems are forced to change which could lead to a massive die-off.
It's a start. I work for a research organization that is researching just that.
Fires in California and Australia have nothing to do with climate change.
Wrong. They have a lot to do with CC. Ask most Aussies.
You thinking is very short-sighted. It may be good in some respects for Alaska, but what about the parts of the world that are burning up? What about the extinction of plants and animals? You might be better off investing in greenhouses if you want local food.
Wrong. They have a lot to do with CC. Ask most Aussies.
Sure. Let's ask 'em.
Bushfires: Firebugs fuelling crisis as arson ... - The Australian
https://www.theaustralian.com.au › nation
Australian climate variability & change - Time series graphs
The chart in the link makes very clear that the climate of the last 50 years is MUCH WETTER than the previous 50 years before that.
![]()
Too bad that advocacy piece is contradicted by the actual research.
[FONT="]". . . However, important exceptions aside, the quantitative evidence available does not support these perceived overall trends. Instead, global area burned appears to have overall declined over past decades, and there is increasing evidence that there is less fire in the global landscape today than centuries ago. . . . "[/FONT][/COLOR]
[FONT=Roboto][URL="https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/full/10.1098/rstb.2015.0345"]Global trends in wildfire and its impacts: perceptions versus ...
royalsocietypublishing.org › doi › full › rstb.2015.0345![]()
[/URL]![]()
[/FONT]
by SH Doerr - 2016 - Cited by 123 - Related articles
Jun 5, 2016 - Wildfire has been an important process affecting the Earth's surface and ... The 'command and control' attitude of most Western societies neglects ... for organizing the Royal Society Discussion Meeting 'The interaction of fire ..
Doesn't change anything.
Nothing ever will for you
Climate change increases the risk of wildfires confirms new review -- ScienceDaily
This one reviews 57 studies
Analysis confirms that climate change is making wildfires worse | New Scientist
You'll note that neither challenges the Royal Society's conclusion that wildfires have declined.
Making
Wildfires
Worse
Duh