Resisting Climate Hysteria

[basilio]

Nice comment from The Guardian which identifies and skewers) the straw man argument Tony Abbott is using with regard to bushfires in Australia.

Bushfires: Coalition deploys straw man against burning issue of climate change

Government is desperate to keep bushfires and climate change apart for fear its emissions reduction policy will be found wanting


Lenore Taylor


The Abbott government is desperately constructing a straw man to help it fight the potentially big political problem of rising public concern about climate change and scrutiny of its Direct Action policy.

The straw man is the contention that anyone making a perfectly reasonable and scientifically justifiable point – that climate change is likely to cause a higher prevalence of the weather conditions that pose a bushfire risk – has actually been making the unreasonable and scientifically unjustifiable point that climate change has caused a particular fire.

And once the straw man contention has been ridiculed, the Coalition quickly skips over the justifiable connection and contends that fires are “part of the Australian experience” and that nothing different is happening.

The straw man was wielded most recently against the executive secretary of the United Nations framework convention on climate change, Christiana Figueres, who said in an interview with CNN there was “absolutely” a link between climate change and bushfires.

She did not say that climate change causes bushfires. She did say climate change causes increasing heatwaves – in other words, bushfire weather.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/oct/24/bushfires-coalition-straw-man-against-burning-issue

 

[Calliope]

interesting to note no major bush fire since European settlement has occurred before December.

It may be interesting, but it is also bullsh!t. And this list doesn't include November!

The Canberra Times, August 21, 1994:

EARLY start to bushfire season.

The Canberra Times, September 27, 1965:

HOTTEST September Day. Early bushfires widespread.

Sydney Morning Herald, October 24, 1951:

FIREFIGHTERS battled yesterday with more than 100 bushfires near Sydney and in the country.

SMH, October 25, 1951:

HUGE N.T. Blaze ... Biggest Fire Ever.

SMH October 25, 1951:

BUSHFIRES Devastate 64 State Forests ... described as "the worst in history".

SMH October 25, 1951:

BUSHFIRE in N.S.W. in the last 10 days have destroyed at least 250 million super feet of timber

SMH October 12, 1948:

QUEENSLAND'S Director of Meteorological Services, Mr. A. S. Richards, last night described the dust storm as one of the worst in ... history.

SMH, October 13, 1948:

MORE than 40 homes were threatened by bushfires in the Mount Colah district yesterday.

SMH October 22, 1948:

BUSH Fire Threatens Farms Near Mona Vale. Thirty firemen, police, and civilians fought throughout last night and early this morning to prevent bushfires engulfing two Mona Vale farm properties.

SMH, October 28, 1948:

MANY Bushfires ... as the temperature again soared over 90 degrees to set a four-year record.

The Brisbane Courier, September 27, 1932:

HUGE Bushfire. Farms In Danger. Rockhampton Menace.

SMH, October 8, 1928:

FIRES and Storm. The city was encircled by bushfires, and many buildings were Unroofed. ... In common with the greater part of NSW and the whole of the southern states, the city experienced an exceptional wind storm and excessive heat, which created a maximum of discomfort. In the early afternoon, great volumes of dust from inland districts and smoke from extensive bush fires produced a thick yellow haze.

Townsville Daily Bulletin, September 26, 1918:

A TERRIFIC Bushfire - Enormous Damage In Tambo District. Mitchell

- See more at: http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opi...y-fn72xczz-1226744792166#sthash.RnrikpMP.dpuf

 

[Knobby22]

I like the last two paragraphs of the article Basilio.

After interviewing Hunt, the BBC spoke to Professor Roger Jones from Victoria University, who took the same history of disastrous Australian bushfires Abbott had listed to make his “it’s all part of the Australian experience” argument and pointed out how many years had elapsed between them.

“Twenty-nine years, 14, 11, nine, six, four … you might detect a pattern in that in that the gap between the fires is getting shorter,” he noted

Add that to syd's point: "interesting to note no major bush fire since European settlement has occurred before December."

Nothing to see here.

 

[burglar]

... “Twenty-nine years, 14, 11, nine, six, four … you might detect a pattern in that in that the gap between the fires is getting shorter,” he noted ...

You should juxtapose natural bushfires, accidental bushfires and deliberately-lit bushfires against those gaps.
Also some measure of development in those areas.


Else totally misleading!!!

 

[burglar]

BHP boss rejects climate change criticism

bhp-boss-rejects-climate-change-criticism

 

[basilio]

BHP boss rejects climate change criticism

Interesting article. Ian Dunlop is standing for the BHP Board and his argument is that currently BHP is so focused on fossil fuel development it is not recognising the impact of CC on the world. In particular he believes they will be caught with billions of dollars of fossil fuel resources that will be worthless if they are not allowed to be developed by changes in legislation..

This is the carbon bubble idea.

 

[Whiskers]

You should juxtapose natural bushfires, accidental bushfires and deliberately-lit bushfires against those gaps.
Also some measure of development in those areas.


Else totally misleading!!!

Not to mention that off season controlled burn offs have increasingly been reducing due to pressure from irresponsible extreme conservation elements in some, but not all areas.

A properly managed off season controlled burn off goes hardly noticed in rural areas simply because it burns so slowly with very low intensity, even patchy (ie not burning everything in sight to a cynder) with little impact on the community or environment.

Off season controlled burn offs have become extinct in many new rural residential areas because people don't know how to manage them or prefer to live in (un)idealistic 'natural' surroundings... until the natural consequences catch up with them.

 

[Julia]

interesting to note no major bush fire since European settlement has occurred before December.

Just completely untrue, syd and Knobby. See Calliope's list (which I was about to go and dig out from my copy of The Australian).

It may be interesting, but it is also bullsh!t. And this list doesn't include November!

 

[noco]

Nice comment from The Guardian which identifies and skewers) the straw man argument Tony Abbott is using with regard to bushfires in Australia.




http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/oct/24/bushfires-coalition-straw-man-against-burning-issue

Yeah, well we are all aware Lenore Taylor is a socialist left wing Greenie so nothing would surprise me as to what comes out of her mouth.

I have seen how she performs on Insiders and she is a good mate of David Marr and Barry Cassidy.

I am old enough to remember severe bush fires in the 30's and 40's and experienced them first hand in the early 50's when working on sheep stations in south west Queensland.

The only thing in those days people were not so stupid to be building in such well wooded country, hence we did not hear of the loss of life and homes.

CLIMATE CHANGE???????????????? WHAT CLIMATE CHANGE are we talking about?

 

[IFocus]

Nope nothing happening here keep moving........... WA's records every time I look at them I weep


http://www.watercorporation.com.au/water-supply-and-services/rainfall-and-dams/streamflow

 

[Garpal Gumnut]

Nope nothing happening here keep moving........... WA's records every time I look at them I weep


http://www.watercorporation.com.au/water-supply-and-services/rainfall-and-dams/streamflow

The real problem, with your data and argument is, iFocus, that warmists have overegged it.

We are looking at computer projections and data input.

You may very well be correct, you may be not.

It has been presented though in an anorak and thong method of political debate, akin to godbothering, by sad sacks agin everything modern.

"Repent ye eejits, or ye will burn." type people.

We need to look at data sans godbothering.

Flannery and his ilk have damaged the cause of science for decades.

gg

 

[IFocus]

The real problem, with your data and argument is, iFocus, that warmists have overegged it.

We are looking at computer projections and data input.

You may very well be correct, you may be not.

It has been presented though in an anorak and thong method of political debate, akin to godbothering, by sad sacks agin everything modern.

"Repent ye eejits, or ye will burn." type people.

We need to look at data sans godbothering.

Flannery and his ilk have damaged the cause of science for decades.

gg

I agree with your thoughts GG unfortunately CC is real for the SW corner of WA and the fire seasons issues that go with it I get my fire pumps out tomorrow.

 

[bellenuit]

I don't know why the Abbott government is so defensive about the links between bushfires and global warming. So what if global warming is likely to increase either the number or severity of bushfires. The point they should be stressing is that a carbon tax or an ETS will have zero effect on global warming so long as they are not universally supported by the major emitting countries and at rates (at least for a CT) far in excess of where they are now. This is not the case now and will not be the case in the foreseeable future. Being defensive about the links gives the impression that they think a CT/ETS would stop global warming, but because a CT/ETS is not their policy, they have to make excuses as to why global warming is not relevant to the bushfire debate.

The way the Greens/ABC and those of a similar ilk talk about a CT/ETS gives the impression that the only thing holding the world back from adopting such schemes is Abbott's intransigence. Australia would be going out on a limb by implementing Labor/Green policies and the effect would be negligible from a global warming point of view and disastrous from an economic point of view.

When proponents state that a CT or ETS is the most effective way to reduce carbon emissions, they should be asked to state what the suppositions are to make such statements. Market mechanisms assume everybody or all those who matter are part of the market. It is no different to the nonsense we hear from Green/Labor councils like say Fremantle in WA that declare Fremantle a nuclear free zone as if that matters one whit. Feel good clap trap.

 

[springhill]

Wildfires have been occurring long before man started 'polluting the atmosphere with carbon'.

Our original inhabitants were well aware of this and took steps to mitigate this by burning off when appropriate.

Something that Greens have slapped a massive handbrake on.

Who is more responsible for, and aware of, the environment - the original Aborigines or the Greens?

I was right next to the bushfires in Kelmscott, in the Perth Hills, a couple of years ago. The only thing that stopped that fire from sweeping down the hill front that faces us and annihilating our neighbours was the prescribed burning and clearing of paths for firefighting units that happened only 6 months before.

Eye witness proof that prescribed burns work. No amount of climate change would have burnt that hillside.

If you wish to look for a reason for the prevelance of large bush fires, look no further than the levels of fuel load & the number of miscreant humans populating the earth (arsonists, cigarette butt flickers etc).

Was the army not responsible for the fires in NSW?

When you have an agenda (Bandt) it is more convenient to point to what suits your cause.

 

[IFocus]

Wildfires have been occurring long before man started 'polluting the atmosphere with carbon'.

Our original inhabitants were well aware of this and took steps to mitigate this by burning off when appropriate.

Something that Greens have slapped a massive handbrake on.

Who is more responsible for, and aware of, the environment - the original Aborigines or the Greens?

I was right next to the bushfires in Kelmscott, in the Perth Hills, a couple of years ago. The only thing that stopped that fire from sweeping down the hill front that faces us and annihilating our neighbours was the prescribed burning and clearing of paths for firefighting units that happened only 6 months before.

Eye witness proof that prescribed burns work. No amount of climate change would have burnt that hillside.

If you wish to look for a reason for the prevelance of large bush fires, look no further than the levels of fuel load & the number of miscreant humans populating the earth (arsonists, cigarette butt flickers etc).

Was the army not responsible for the fires in NSW?

When you have an agenda (Bandt) it is more convenient to point to what suits your cause.

The resistance against prescribed burns in Perth / South West area (I am talking about the ones with political clout not the ones the governments conveniently blame i.e. greenies)are the residents complaining about the smoke haze and the health problems that go with it just watch channel 7 / 9 10 news after a big burn off.

The darling range will go up in flames big time one of these years (I hope not but think its just a matter of time)

 

[basilio]

Allow more cool burning off to reduce excess fuel ? Great. Let's do it. In fact you will probably find most Greenies understanding and agreeing to that argument in light of the experience with massive fires.

One small but very obvious problem.

With CC the available period for safe cool burns will sharply decrease. As the average temperatures rise and grasslands dry quicker it will simply be too dangerous to burn off in march/april or even Sept/Oct. And obviously you can't do burns when everything is too wet.

I had experience in the farming community in the 80's. In those days farmers would just trail a lighted kero soaked rag around a paddock(behind a ute) and then go the pub for the afternoon. (Truly!!) Most of the times the fires would do their job Sometimes they got away .. but then xhit happens doesn't it ?

There is no way you could get away with such a blase approach in 2013. And on the same point Government environment departments that do controlled burns are also very careful/concerned about judgments on when to burn.

And its all because of "the issue that can't be discussed". Or as most people here believe "the issue that isn't real"

 

[burglar]

... Or as most people here believe "the issue that isn't real"

I see it as real. Just overrated!


And the solution does not lie in reversing change.
It lies in adapting to change.

Perhaps revelling in new opportunities.
e.g. Market gardens in Greenland!

Few will willing give up the lifestyle afforded us by fossil fuels.
You will be headbanging till the day you die!

 

[Garpal Gumnut]

I agree with your thoughts GG unfortunately CC is real for the SW corner of WA and the fire seasons issues that go with it I get my fire pumps out tomorrow.

Stay safe and well.

gg

 

[wayneL]

Basilio, as you either:

a) are having difficulties with English comprehension, or

b) just being a petulant child,

allow me to clarify something.

There has never been any directive that climate change cannot be discussed, ever. There was however a suggestion that the Abbott thread was not the place for alarmist propaganda and evangelizing. That is all.

Now, would you please behave in manner commensurate with your chronological age.

Thanks

 

[basilio]

Basilio, as you either:

a) are having difficulties with English comprehension, or

b) just being a petulant child,

allow me to clarify something.

There has never been any directive that climate change cannot be discussed, ever. There was however a suggestion that the Abbott thread was not the place for alarmist propaganda and evangelizing. That is all.

Now, would you please behave in manner commensurate with your chronological age.

Thanks

I thought about your request that CC issues not be discussed in the political thread.

As I said then and repeat now I believe it was a totally inappropriate direction. CC is a critical issue for the policy directions of this country. How and what the government does in that regard is in the square of the general nature of that thread ie The Abbott Government. As I pointed out then if you were so concerned about discussing particular issues then we should have separate threads for the various other elements of government policy - but that would be impartcial wouldn't it ?

My observation about "the issue that cannot be discussed" was spot on. The fact that the government is throwing enormous energy into denying the the role CC plays in intensifying bushfires in Australia underlines theirs and your determination to bury this discussion - preferably in a place that won't take it seriously.

This thread is called Resisting Climate Hysteria. It's major purpose has been to denigrate the scientific community and the evidence its offers on this topic. Hence "the issue that isn't real".