Interesting stuff
I was more thinking of your views on the military, but AGW denial is up there as well.
Like Stu said, tribalism.
I never thought of that aspect Indo army (TNI) i don't think have ever been sent out of Indonesia, obviously our army has (and looks like might possibly could again)
BTW. Speaking of Indo military, Indo navy boats have just been sent up to Natuna Islands of Indonesia area that sits in the South China Sea, China has been playing silly buggers again trying to push their limits in the area with presence of patrol boats, Indonesia isn't mucking around though sent eight war ships up there and flew a few fighter jets over the islands yesterday, strangely enough also sent up a fleet of about 60 fishing boats too to occupy the area.
Tribalism ?
I don’t know what you’re referring too . And where did the accusations of AGW denial come from ? Is it the fact that I questioned whether this drought ( which led to the fire conditions) was a regular climactic event ( 1 in 500 years ) ?
And I’m sorry to inform you , but the regular Earth patterns are still appropriate, it’s just that the short term cycle may get a bit out of whack.
As for the military bit ....if it’s a left wing belief that our military should be unskilled and unfamiliar with their roles and more predisposed to traffic control than defending our borders then yes , I’m far from left wing in that regard.
If that is how the Left truly behave , then our relatives would have been overwhelmed and slaughtered by the a Japanese 80 years ago.....which I somehow doubt. The GENUINE and ORIGINAL left know that we need to defend our borders from the avaricious and greedy expansionist states which develop around the globe. And the only way to repel them is with hardened military might.
Please, anything but that!
Apparently
The urge to cup is strong with these two.
Geez , this is getting out of hand.
Andy , there’s some fricken stupid people out there ..... but you’re not one of them. All I’m saying is that this drought was going to happen sooner or later and the fire service have been dragging their feet for years .
And now the fire is here and cunts are trying to tell me that they’ve had no time because......climate change !
Fuck off !
The Brisbane floods ( new normal !!!! ) occurred in 2011. There hasn’t been ANY fire reduction for at least 6 years previous to that. Are you seriously trying to get me to believe that the fire service has been so hemmed in by XTREME hot weather and shortened burn seasons after at least 12 very moderate winters that they can’t do their required reduction burns ?
When did an accusation of inept political devotion to periodic fire reduction burns and underfunding become climate denial ?
.
I prefer the term MAXXTREME.
Yeah , I couldn’t come and concrete your driveway / mow your lawn / unblock your toilet any time since 2005 because climate change and it’s associated MAXXXTREME weather has only left a short window of approximately 140 moderately cool days with light morning winds each year.....Sorry !
"Got FUCK ALL to do with climate change," he says, when it demonstrably does.
I like Freeride's one-liner from the other day - we can't burn our way out of this.
Blowin, I agree fuel reduction is a good thing, gee I would love some behind my place which last burnt in a controlled burn about 15 years ago (as a mop up to an uncontrolled fire). I guess I’m repeating what my CFA mates say: it’s not going to help during extreme conditions. Because spotting can occur up to 20-40 kms ahead of any fire during those extreme days my mates also say no-one is totally safe from being burnt out if you live anywhere near fuel sources.
Guy .....I had to evacuate my parents for almost a week in early November due to a fire which was burning out of control on the other side of their valley. The fire fighters couldn’t do anything due to the scale and intensity of the blaze ( no previous fuel reduction ! ) .
You know what saved them , even when a 60 km hour plus Southerly drove the fire straight at them ?
The fact that the farmer on the south side of the valley had done his own controlled burn and put it out with his massive sprinkler system earlier in the year.
This is a real world example from the very fires that everyone is talking up. People died in that fire on that side of the valley. Fire reduction burns saved my parent’s place .....so enough of the theoretical, abstract dribble.
As Stu says ....at what point do you find you’re arguing a point , rather than a belief ?
Crew wonder why I’m defending this.....it’s because it has literally saved me huge heartache.
FFS .....How much more genuine, heartfelt and honest can I be ?
You can stick your left wing/ right wing shit in your arse , I do not give a fuck. I’m talking about what works.
If the farmers on the surrounding properties did the same I would be able to relax and not check the RFS site / wind and weather forecast every few hours to ensure that a fire hasn’t begun upwind of their place.
If the fire crew had got around to the backburn ive been asking for for years I could relax about their place.
If the fire crew / national parks had done their job around here I could relax.
The National park station has metre high weeds growing out of the gutters at their ranger station FFS .
Underfunded or not giving a fuck ? I don’t know.
PS Andy ....I don’t care which pithy comments you liked. This is the reality , deal with it.
There ought not be any left or right wing just science.
Go for under funding every time, the NP service is poorly resourced, fire protection, weed control and feral pest eradication all done or not on a shoe string. The NP behind us is full of weeds and feral cats the size of small dogs .... but are we (the electorate) prepared to pay for proper management, don’t think so.
As an aside I’ve hiked in remote parts of the UK, Europe, NZ and in every state of AU, from my experience we run a very poor last in management of our NPs.
What do you mean are we prepared to fund it ?
We pay higher taxes than any of those countries.....we do fund it. But our money is wasted elsewhere.
Why do you always have to put the boot into regular Australians who are just like you and me ?
It’s a derogatory form of cultural stereotyping ie racism.
Guy .....yeah , thanks for meeting me halfway. Situation is shit. You’ve got a good attitude.
.
Blowin, I’m done arguing, I have no point to prove nor push and I’m happy to accept what experts say, not that I’m saying you don’t but what I will say while your experience is valid but like us all it’s not the full picture.
We may pay higher taxes and yes I agree much is wasted but I also think the environment nor its management is valued as it should in AU and I’m not being racist in saying that FFS.
A final thing, I routinely cut down /remove scrub and grass in the NP behind my property, the rangers are ok about it so I’m not passive when it comes to what’s growing over the fence!
If you see it as a cult Blowin, I don't know what else to say.
The evidence is all there, the studies have been done, the science is being proven as frighteningly accurate so far.
The only pariahs are the ones with their heads in the sand.
good onya blowin, I have a feeling you reluctantly let all that info. out, pushed to the brink by the righteous and the hypocritical
It is all tribalism though
It's tribalism that makes a person lose their shit when someone else mentions climate change
just as it is tribalism that makes a person lose their shit when someone mentions fuel loads
then there's a whole heap of people who'd like to talk about climate change and fuel loads...
but we can't, and I'm not really sure why, especially when everyone is condemning tribalism
funny old world...
Andy .....if you honestly believe that your insulting me on an Internet forum in order to bolster respect for climate change is more constructive than my actively working towards minimising my footprint on the Earth , then yes , it is a cult and you are a member.
Think of what Stu was saying about tribalism......I am doing the right thing whilst occasionally challenging blind faith , whilst you are saying all the right things but doing fuck all ..... yet you think the problem lies with me .
Guess what....the Earth and it’s climate doesn’t give a rats arse about your purity of thought and nor do I .
Andy , In that whole piece you only registered the word cult .....please read it again as though your mind wasn’t clamped shut like a triggered bear trap and tell me that is your honest opinion.
You’ve even managed to somehow ignore the part where I explicitly acknowledged the science .
Tired , retarded or desperate to pigeon hole me as an enemy of the CULT ?
The climate science isn’t the cult , the purity of thought police state building up around it is the cult.
Seems like the discussion has changed tack yet again.
It’s funny though, your frequent flyer lifestyle would blow any gains made by growing some veggies right out of the water.
In any case I think that’s all largely irrelevant and a red herring to the discussion.
My main concern is we’re not going to get our “leaders” to change shit unless we acknowledge what’s going on, stop blaming it on bullshit scapegoats and instead apply political pressure to treat the symptoms while at the same time addressing the cause.
Calling this desire a cult is ridiculous.
If you agree that the science isn’t the issue, why are you fighting so hard against it?
Just to be contrary?
Because the people delivering the messsge annoy you?
Fucking hell, talk about cutting off your nose to spite your face.
Hahahahahaha. Stop it! You're killing us (not literally...well...)!
Good ol' Blowindo.
& lil Sepp. poms poms at the ready, cheering on from the sidelines.
Gold, fellas, gold.
Ya gotta laugh in tough times like these.
Bravo.
For our 24/7 Swellnet 'cultists':
https://www.sciencefocus.com/science/what-is-the-carbon-footprint-of-the...
https://searchengineland.com/calculating-the-carbon-footprint-of-a-googl...
Blowindo!
Haha! Thar she blows!
Yo Blowin
So you’re angry at underfunded volunteers doing something for the environment in their spare time and heavily underpaid (WA rangers get paid shit and the work crews even less) national parks workers?Or are you angry at the greens. Just asking.
Hey Blowin, what do you mean by using the word cult?
serious question.
looking around me , I can't see any signs of a climate cult. I see pretty much business as usual, with the dial turned up, if anything.
I don't watch much mainstream news but looking around the internets; a lot of what I see is a full climate change denial Mong out. That seems far more of a cult to me.
"I don't watch much mainstream news but looking around the internets; a lot of what I see is a full climate change denial Mong out. That seems far more of a cult to me."
Touche.
speaking of poms poms...
...and here's our little resident high school bitch cheerleader piling on with anyone who challenges blowin
a routine straight outa mean girls....
it's the impression of a cult that's for sure, where regardless of the topic, or it's intensity, 'climate change' is the catch all cause and solution
...and no negotiations will be entered into...
it is about belief, and becomes very cult like for those that jump in 100%
intended or not, that's the impression given...
Freeride ....appreciate you maintaining reason whilst others lose theirs.
I see it like this : Normal climate is driving your car at the speed limit ....accidents ( weather events) still occur , but not too often.
AGW is like you are now speeding in your car . Incidents are now more likely to happen and their outcomes will be more severe. We have just started to gain speed . The longer we drive , the more speed we will gain , but right now we are just going a bit faster than average .
So now we are speeding along in the car and we are suddenly involved in a huge crash with another car ( the fires ) .
When I question whether the accident would have occurred anyway , even though we were speeding , it is a genuine concern. We’re we T Boned by another car which was driving recklessly ( 1 in 500 year fire event/ drought ) or was the crash a result of our speeding. Perhaps the other car was going to hit us regardless of our speed and the accident was unavoidable ?
All I enquire is whether this accident was provably the result of our speeding. I didn’t deny we were speeding ( AGW ) , I don’t deny that we need to slow down ( address humanity’s affect on the planet . In fact , I actively try to make less of an impact on the planet. I know that if we keep speeding we will have accidents like this anyway.
Yet as soon as I asked this question the pitchforks come out and the mob gets ready to burn the witch. That’s because people’s reactions are cult- like . They say that the result is the same and it just goes to show we need to stop speeding. But when I say “ yes , I know we need to stop speeding, I was just wondering....” Then the weirdness comes around.
People say it doesn’t matter. And that I shouldn’t be asking questions because it doesn’t help us slow down . But here’s the thing .....They are caught in a feeding frenzy which isn’t driven by the concern for the planet that they say it is , it’s driven by group think and conformity.....the “ don’t question anything or you are against us “ mentality.
If these people were driven by care for the planet like they say ...then they’d never turn on another air conditioner in their lives . They’d reduce meat consumption to minimum. They’d be doing all they personally can to slow the car each and every minute of the day.
But they don’t.
Now it doesn’t matter what you do , it matters what you say.....which is ludicrous.
That’s the cult side of things.
hahaha!
Everyone else has lost their reason I'm just asking a simple question as to whether this would have happened? Fucken hell who is this guy??
How many experts have to explain the answer to your question that no this wouldnt have been such an extreme fire year without climate change?
Let's see, we've had posts from the garnaut report written a decade ago, explaining that by 2020 the outcomes of climate change on bush fires would be directly observable.
We've had the blog on the scientific American explaining all the science, complete with links to the primary literature and the summary reports from the iocc predicting these increased fire intensities based on that primary literature.
We've had every senior firey in the country explaining how the shorter windows for safe burns have meant many burns couldn't be done safely and even where they have been done it's made fuck all difference.
We've had firies on the ground saying Exactly. The. Same. Fucken. Thing.
But apparently everyone else has lost their reason except this blown guy. Everyone else is in a cult.
Oh and they're racist apparently. Lol.
Only just woke to this so haven't read the full spiel:
Think most people who are siding with AGW would realise there are mixed factors, but constantly questioning every single thing is the exact same modus operandi the deniers have been using for decades to slow progress, muddy the waters, cause division, and generally sow seeds of discontent amongst what was for a time a united front.
So their MO has worked.
And that's why people get frustrated and angry.
You appear to be continuing a well-worn strategy.
If what you see is "cult-like" it's only because people are very familiar with what you're currently doing.
Agree with the divide and obfuscate theory.
Obviously if there is less fuel load the fires will be less intense. When the bush is tinder dry though, fires will still take hold quickly. You can't back burn the canopy and you can't backburn the entire country.
Lack of rainfall and the resulting conditions are the main cause. In more beningn conditions the fires would be less likely to start and less likely to get out of control. Lack of moisture over a huge area of the country is the main problem, not the fuel load on the ground.
We just had sub tropical rainforests burn, that's not normal.
When you say I’m questioning everything, what does that mean exactly ?
I asked whether this fire was literally unprecedented as I’m relentlessly told by people who aren’t scientists but who seem to think that their fervour makes up for this lack of credentials.
And I said that the fires were exacerbated because there wasn’t enough fire reduction burning done. Which is true and which is caused as much by underfunding as it is by climate change. This has been acknowledged by anyone in a position of authority. People actually take offence when it is suggested that we could do anything to mitigate the fire because they take this as denying the overwhelming power of their God. They may as well say Allah Akbar ( If God wills it ) when I say that the area of my house needs fire reduction burning.
They will argue till they are blue in the face that there is nothing we can do in the face of their God and refuse to accept that a light burn could help save our house. They will put up link after link and insult my intelligence, despite never having seen the area I’m describing and despite the fact that I’ve had the RFS fella out there a few times and he has said that we really need to burn it , but that we would have to get in the queue.
People have actually argued this point with me.....why ? Why wouldn’t they just say - “ Yeah , the fires are hectic. Shame you didn’t get that burnt earlier.” ? Instead they say - “ You are a moron . A denier Hazard reduction won’t save you ....this is climate change “
I’d say it’s more like a religion than a cult.
AGW has assumed the status of Allah to many. Now when I ask if the fire conditions would have arisen naturally anyway , people take offence because I’m basically saying that their God isnt the only being powerful enough to create such a situation and to dare ask such a question is blasphemy.
OK VB.....you are obviously more committed to saving the planet than I am . You talk a great story of your dedication to policing language and ideas.
So exactly how are you contributing to the effort ? By accusing Scomo of sabotaging the effort ?
Guess what....the electricity ( coal )that you lose your mind over accounts for 30 percent of Australia’s emissions . Agriculture accounts for almost half that amount and by agriculture , they mostly mean livestock and it’s indirect impacts.
So are you still eating meat ? That’s not Scomo’s fault ....it’s yours . Are you hassling everyone you know to not eat meat ?Do you have an air conditioner ?
What are you doing besides acting like the head of the inquisition ?
Stu.....so it’s my fault that people are dumb cunts who only see black and white ?
I’m not allowed to say anything unless I upset the idiots who can’t colour inside the lines ?
Divide and obfuscate....fucking hell. I’m not sure how many times I’ve written here that I’m not a denier ....probably a dozen times in the past couple of days. But the cultists don’t care.
Allah Akbar !
People aren’t frustrated and angry. They’re mobbish and fucking stupid. If they were frustrated and angry they’d do something more than just point their fingers , apportion blame and then smugly believe that they’ve done their bit because they ticked a box on a ballot paper.
No, it's just the country is bigger than your patch of unburnt bush, the issue is wider than how you've framed it, and the questions you raise have been answered multiple times.
From 1970 till 1989 Exxon accepted AGW and were actually leading the research and possible mitigation strategies. However, in 1989 they took a sharp turn under new management and began denying it.
Here's a very small part of a real internal memo from 1989:
It's worked pretty well wouldn't you say?
I'm punching pearl divers over the rails of boats, every single day.
Understand that if people are frustrated it's because thirty years of corporate, and now civic, obfuscation has worked.
You're just the next cab on the rank. Maybe your intentions are more innocent, but I understand the frustration when the delivery is straight from the playbook.
This is very interesting and a great graphic representation of 2019..
More words , VB ?
Be a smart arse all you like , but go and have a think about what I’m saying. Why are you so desperate to pointlessly and unfairly create an enemy with me , when you could literally achieve more for your cause by strolling around your house for five minutes and making a few changes.
Turning your TV off standby mode would do more for the environment than trying to push my round body of AGW acceptance into the square hole of evil denier.
Why don’t you quit meat for the month of January ?
People want to point the finger cause it’s an easier way to gain the feel-good mob moral high ground than actually doing anything themselves.
And telling me that your little bit makes no difference is no different than saying Australia’s 1.3 percent global emissions is too small to make a difference.
IMHO you nailed it the other day Blowin, it's very obvious that in the past/old days they were willing to take greater risk than they are today.
If they were still doing things as they were in the past you can bet that more burns would get done even if you factor in a smaller window.
But yeah 100% more fucks up too, so probably not realistic to do things as have been done in the past.
Problem is today the consequence of a fuck up is much much bigger, and they need more resources to ensure there is no fuck up.
Guys article also says the cost to do controlled burns where they are most effective to saving houses is up to ten times more costly. (more men and resources to ensure no fuck up)
So also a factor of cost, and in this day and age you can guarantee all kinds of other processes, hurdles, red tape to go through and jump over.
In the old days people just got shit done. its the same with everything, in the old days, people on the ground made decisions based on experience, they decided something needed getting done, and they did it as soon as they could in this case as soon as best conditions came around, only red tape might have being ringing someone higher up who gave them permission.
These days probably likely people on the ground suggest to people sitting in offices that something needs to be done, it sits in a pile of papers on a desk (or these days on a computer) once it's reached in the pile it then needs to go through all kinds of BS to be accessed, then needs to be approved, weeks/months/years latter guys on the ground are told its okay to go ahead most probably only have permission for a certain window, miss that window and most likely its back to a piece of paper on desk to go through the whole process again..
I think the word would be there are official processes that need to be gone through.
BTW. Not saying this is exactly how it goes for this area, but it's how it goes for many things these days, so you can imagine it would go something like that.
WTF Stu .....I’ve said since day one that people need to think globally, act locally. Do as much as they personally can and you think that my delivery is straight from the climate denial playbook ?
That’s some perverse, distorted thinking.
Seriously. Do,people even read what I write or are they in too great a hurry to get to the part where they get to stick the boot in ?
Mate, perhaps you don't realise it, but on here you come across pretty aggressive.
And despite what you think...yes, your delivery is smack bang as Exxon (and others since then) orchestrated it.
Personally, I think everyone should be broadly curious, but I reckon people also oughta be aware of the games being played, how their words get perceived, cos it's not a game, it's a very real strategy by enablers of the fossil fuel industry.
If we don't want to be "useful idiots" - not calling you that, using the term as intended, to unintentionally propagandize - then somehow we've gotta find a way to do it that doesn't sow the seeds of uncertainty and give the industry exactly what they want.
"Seriously. Do,people even read what I write...?"
Unfortunately, yes, which brings us to where we are.
@Caig
That map is interesting, to be honest its not what i expect, it doesn't really show any set patterns, seems very random.
Only thing from recent history that stands out is 2019 being the most dry, but there is nothing to say that the year before these maps, could have been exactly the same.
Yeah the interesting things to note are the wet years associated with La Nina years and strong negative IOD years.
This year just gone so dry from the strong positive IOD event.
Temperature a different story.
Here's temperature ID, 38 months consecutive of warmer than average temperature..
Blowin the personal responsibility thing unfortunately is total bullsh!t. The old you are guilty if you don't lead the perfect example life and BTW no one can comment or argue against unless you do.
The big moves and direction always and note its always from policy and law.
ID being old I remember the old days grew up in the bush Jarrah tress up to the front and back doors, we didnt get power to the house until I was 15, family were also farmers so we burn, cleared and generally fu(ked the environment in WA.
Yeah we had the odd fire but never got the conditions currently being faced on the east coast.
Personally I think climate change is a factor in the current fires among a few others but for me the big issue is this is the future on a good day.
Normal will be far worse and this is what we are handing over to my kids and gran-kids, terrifying.
Cannot image what it will be like on a bad day.
Australians will almost certainly become climate refugees some time in the future.
Have it cunts