Why We Pay No Attention to the Doom Mongers

[Tim the plumber]

Tim, I think I can answer your question, but it requires real empathy.
Place yourself in the worn organic shoes of the rabid greenie.
They view Humans as a cancer upon mother earth.
A warmer world, means that more Humans (I.E. Cancer) can thrive, prosper, and expand,
which they see as a VERY BAD thing.:mrgreen:

Well, yes, that is my opinion also. It would be nice though to have a better view of humanity. So I keep asking for some sort of reason why this garden of Eden like fertile warm, wet and highly powered world of wealth should be avoided.

 

[marke]

Chain email.

Ignorantly compliant dummies on chicken little group-think doomsday parade.

 

[lwf]

Please tell me what you expect to happen that s bad.

Keep it to one single bad aspect of a warmer world and one place. This is just so we can look at it and see how real this is. Otherwise the discussion will wander all over the place.

An increase in the number of forest fires in the American west is one current problem directly related to climate change.

 

[Jack Hays]

An increase in the number of forest fires in the American west is one current problem directly related to climate change.

No. It explicitly is not.

[h=3]Global trends in wildfire and its impacts: perceptions versus realities in ...[/h]
[url]https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/abs/10.1098/rstb.2015.0345
[/URL]
by SH Doerr - ‎2016 - ‎Cited by 80 - ‎Related articles
Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences ... Wildfire has been an important process affecting the Earth's surface and ... over 350 million years and human societies have coexisted with fire since their emergence.

 

[lwf]

No. It explicitly is not.

[h=3]Global trends in wildfire and its impacts: perceptions versus realities in ...[/h]
[url]https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/abs/10.1098/rstb.2015.0345
[/URL]
by SH Doerr - ‎2016 - ‎Cited by 80 - ‎Related articles
Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences ... Wildfire has been an important process affecting the Earth's surface and ... over 350 million years and human societies have coexisted with fire since their emergence.

Yes, it explicitly is:

 

[Jack Hays]

Yes, it explicitly is:

View attachment 67255811

View attachment 67255812

Has nothing to do with climate change, and apparently you read nothing of the Royal Society paper.

 

[lwf]

Has nothing to do with climate change, and apparently you read nothing of the Royal Society paper.

I read it. Then I read these and determined that that paper you referenced was based on bad science.

Factcheck: How global warming has increased US wildfires | Carbon Brief

Climate Change Is Fueling Wildfires Nationwide, New Report Warns - The New York Times

How Does Climate Change Affect Forest Fires? | Climate Reality

How Fires In Europe Are Fueled By Climate Change

How Wildfires Can Affect Climate Change (and Vice Versa) | InsideClimate News

https://www.npr.org/2018/11/12/666951838/megafires-more-frequent-because-of-climate-change-and-forest-management

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/weather/extreme-heat-wildfires-worsened-climate-change-say-scientists-n895496

https://www.yaleclimateconnections.org/2018/11/the-many-ways-climate-change-worsens-california-wildfires/

https://climate.nasa.gov/news/2791/a-world-on-fire/

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/climate-change-make-wildfires-spread-factor/story?id=56937704https://skepticalscience.com/cc-worsens-ca-wildfires.html

https://skepticalscience.com/cc-worsens-ca-wildfires.html

https://energyinnovation.org/2018/09/25/what-do-we-know-about-wildfire-attribution-and-climate-change/

 

[Jack Hays]

I read it. Then I read these and determined that that paper you referenced was based on bad science.

Factcheck: How global warming has increased US wildfires | Carbon Brief

Climate Change Is Fueling Wildfires Nationwide, New Report Warns - The New York Times

How Does Climate Change Affect Forest Fires? | Climate Reality

How Fires In Europe Are Fueled By Climate Change

How Wildfires Can Affect Climate Change (and Vice Versa) | InsideClimate News

https://www.npr.org/2018/11/12/6669...cause-of-climate-change-and-forest-management

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/weathe...orsened-climate-change-say-scientists-n895496

https://www.yaleclimateconnections....-climate-change-worsens-california-wildfires/

https://climate.nasa.gov/news/2791/a-world-on-fire/

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/climate-change-make-wildfires-spread-factor/story?id=56937704https://skepticalscience.com/cc-worsens-ca-wildfires.html

https://skepticalscience.com/cc-worsens-ca-wildfires.html

https://energyinnovation.org/2018/0...bout-wildfire-attribution-and-climate-change/

The Royal Society trumps all that advocacy shouting. Sorry.

 

[lwf]

The Royal Society trumps all that advocacy shouting. Sorry.

lol! Not likely my friend. You hitched your wagon to the wrong horse.

 

[Jack Hays]

lol! Not likely my friend. You hitched your wagon to the wrong horse.

No. Quality matters. Most of your list is advocacy shouters, not practitioners of science.

[h=2]Ward et al., 2018[/h][h=3]Trends and Variability of Global Fire Emissions
Due To Historical Anthropogenic Activities[/h]“Globally, fires are a major source of carbon from the terrestrial biosphere to the atmosphere, occurring on a seasonal cycle and with substantial interannual variability. To understand past trends and variability in sources and sinks of terrestrial carbon, we need quantitative estimates of global fire distributions. … Global fire emissions of carbon increase by about 10% between 1700 and 1900, reaching a maximum of 3.4 Pg C yr−1 in the 1910s, followed by a decrease to about 5% below year 1700 levels by 2010. The decrease in emissions from the 1910s to the present day is driven mainly by land use change, with a smaller contribution from increased fire suppression due to increased human population and is largest in Sub‐Saharan Africa and South Asia. Interannual variability of global fire emissions is similar in the present day as in the early historical period, but present‐day wildfires would be more variable in the absence of land use change.”

---

[h=2][/h][h=2][/h][h=2][/h][h=2][/h][h=2][/h][h=2][/h][h=2][/h][h=2][/h][h=2][/h][h=2][/h][h=2][/h][h=2][/h][h=2][/h][h=2][/h][h=2][/h][h=2][/h][h=2][/h][h=2][/h][h=2][/h][h=2][/h][h=2][/h][h=2][/h][h=2][/h][h=2][/h][h=2][/h][h=2][/h][h=2][/h]

 

[Jack Hays]

lol! Not likely my friend. You hitched your wagon to the wrong horse.

[h=2]Earl and Simmonds, 2018[/h][h=3]Spatial and Temporal Variability and
Trends in 2001–2016 Global Fire Activity[/h]
“We find that there is a strong statistically significant decline in 2001–2016 active fires globally linked to an increase in net primary productivity observed in northern Africa, along with global agricultural expansion and intensification, which generally reduces fire activity.”

---

 

[Jack Hays]

lol! Not likely my friend. You hitched your wagon to the wrong horse.

[h=2]Doerr and Santín, 2016[/h][h=3]Global trends in wildfire and its impacts:
perceptions versus realities in a changing world[/h]“Wildfire has been an important process affecting the Earth’s surface and atmosphere for over 350 million years and human societies have coexisted with fire since their emergence. Yet many consider wildfire as an accelerating problem, with widely held perceptions both in the media and scientific papers of increasing fire occurrence, severity and resulting losses.”
“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.”
“Analysis of charcoal records in sediments [Marlon et al., 2008] and isotope-ratio records in ice cores [Wang et al., 2010] suggest that global biomass burning during the past century has been lower than at any time in the past 2000 years.”
“Regarding fire severity, limited data are available. For the western USA, they indicate little change overall, and also that area burned at high severity has overall declined compared to pre-European settlement. Direct fatalities from fire and economic losses also show no clear trends over the past three decades. Trends in indirect impacts, such as health problems from smoke or disruption to social functioning, remain insufficiently quantified to be examined. Global predictions for increased fire under a warming climate highlight the already urgent need for a more sustainable coexistence with fire. The data evaluation presented here aims to contribute to this by reducing misconceptions and facilitating a more informed understanding of the realities of global fire.”

---

 

[Jack Hays]

lol! Not likely my friend. You hitched your wagon to the wrong horse.

[h=2]Marlon et al., 2012[/h][h=3]Long-term perspective on
wildfires in the western USA[/h]“Understanding the causes and consequences of wildfires in forests of the western United States requires integrated information about fire, climate changes, and human activity on multiple temporal scales. We use sedimentary charcoal accumulation rates to construct long-term variations in fire during the past 3,000 y in the American West and compare this record to independent fire-history data from historical records and fire scars. There has been a slight decline in burning over the past 3,000 y, with the lowest levels attained during the 20th century and during the Little Ice Age (LIA, ca. 1400–1700 CE). Prominent peaks in forest fires occurred during the Medieval Climate Anomaly (ca. 950–1250 CE) and during the 1800s.”
“Analysis of climate reconstructions beginning from 500 CE and population data show that temperature and drought predict changes in biomass burning up to the late 1800s CE. Since the late 1800s , human activities and the ecological effects of recent high fire activity caused a large, abrupt decline in burning similar to the LIA fire decline. Consequently, there is now a forest “fire deficit” in the western United States attributable to the combined effects of human activities, ecological, and climate changes. Large fires in the late 20th and 21st century fires have begun to address the fire deficit, but it is continuing to grow.”

 

[Jack Hays]

Lies, lies and more lies.


[h=1]Cliscep v. the BBC: Round 1[/h]Posted on 26 Apr 19 by GEOFF CHAMBERS • 7 Comments
A few days ago I sent a complaint to the BBC about the Attenborough programme “Climate Change – the Facts.” Complaints by email are limited to 2000 characters (about 300 words.) I wanted to get the maximum factual criticism in, so it’s written in Twitterspeak. Here it is, as posted, except that I’ve added numbers to … Continue reading →

 

[slick]

There seems to be a pattern of people combining several worst case events together to arrive at some catastrophic conclusion.

The "pattern of people combining several worst case events together to arrive at some catastrophic conclusion.' are a group
of nutty professors with various degrees pimping as scientists afraid of losing their cushy grants from the government if they
don't continue to embellish their goofy 'global warming' theories.

 

[longview]

The "pattern of people combining several worst case events together to arrive at some catastrophic conclusion.' are a group
of nutty professors with various degrees pimping as scientists afraid of losing their cushy grants from the government if they
don't continue to embellish their goofy 'global warming' theories.

To some extent, I think most of the embellishment, is from journalist, choosing the combined high estimates as truth.

 

[Sunsettommy]

Yes, it explicitly is:

View attachment 67255811

View attachment 67255812

Your post is highly misleading because it used a NARROW parameter of a 1,000 acre number. It left out total acres, number of fires and what was the CAUSE of fires, and what wasn't being done about forest fuel levels being addressed by the state.

You didn't show that it was "climate change" that starts fires in your post at all.

 

[Surface Detail]

The Royal Society trumps all that advocacy shouting. Sorry.

You might want to read a little more from the Royal Society (and the US National Academy of Sciences):

Climate Change: Evidence & Causes

"Climate change is one of the defining issues of our time. It is now more certain than ever, based on many lines of evidence, that humans are changing Earth’s climate. The atmosphere and oceans have warmed, accompanied by sea-level rise, a strong decline in Arctic sea ice, and other climate-related changes."

 

[Jack Hays]

You might want to read a little more from the Royal Society (and the US National Academy of Sciences):

Climate Change: Evidence & Causes

"Climate change is one of the defining issues of our time. It is now more certain than ever, based on many lines of evidence, that humans are changing Earth’s climate. The atmosphere and oceans have warmed, accompanied by sea-level rise, a strong decline in Arctic sea ice, and other climate-related changes."

I admire and respect their work product. Their political boilerplate, not so much.

 

[Surface Detail]

I admire and respect their work product. Their political boilerplate, not so much.

You mean you accept what they say when it matches your worldview and reject it when it doesn't.

 

[longview]

I admire and respect their work product. Their political boilerplate, not so much.

I fully accept the ideals expressed in the motto, "take no one's word!"