Read what I provided, clean the blood spewing from your face, and then pivot to something else like usual. Can you do that?You did not provide proof that arson is the cause of the increase in forest fires, as you claimed.
try again
Read what I provided, clean the blood spewing from your face, and then pivot to something else like usual. Can you do that?You did not provide proof that arson is the cause of the increase in forest fires, as you claimed.
try again
Already done, skoob.Read what I provided, clean the blood spewing from your face, and then pivot to something else like usual. Can you do that?
I shared an article that states that arson and accidents cause forest fires. You didn't read it before you started spewing bullshit.Already done, skoob.
That's why you keep back pedalling from your initial claim that the increase in forest fires is because of arsonists.
It was an idiotic claim to start with and you're still idiotically defending it.
Which means you've been 'distracting' because you can't answer to the evidence and science.
You shared a 4 year old article that claimed 13% of Australian wildfires are arson. But that article came from a right wing Australian source with links to fossil fuel funding. Its bullshit, like almost all that you post here. That article lists all fires that are 'deliberately' lit as arson.I shared an article that states that arson and accidents cause forest fires. You didn't read it before you started spewing bullshit.
What part of that is back peddling?
Oh yes, this is where you try to invent an alternate reality to distract.
So your source is a left-wing outlet and that's ok?You shared a 4 year old article that claimed 13% of Australian wildfires are arson. But that article came from a right wing Australian source with links to fossil fuel funding. Its bullshit, like almost all that you post here. That article lists all fires that are 'deliberately' lit as arson.
Your sole source was that one article.
The 'arson emergency' trending amid Australia's bushfire crisis is actually not a thing
An evidence-free troll campaign blames arsonists for the worst fire season in modern Australian history, not climate change. It's BS.
You failed skoob. You tried to defend a larue claim that was based on faked charts with a bullshit article.So your source is a left-wing outlet and that's ok?
btw Your article basically says the same thing...arson or accidents...they just word it differently.
Set by people is the key takeaway here.
Can't you wrap your head around that fact? Too confusing? Doesn't jive with your narrative I guess.
Another FF fail!
here is frankfooter back peddlingI shared an article that states that arson and accidents cause forest fires. You didn't read it before you started spewing bullshit.
What part of that is back peddling?
Oh yes, this is where you try to invent an alternate reality to distract.
30 minutes after he posted thisThere is no evidence anywhere that the increase in forest fire is from 'arsonists', the reports say that they are likely human caused but that also includes accidental fires from machinery, trains, tools, cigarettes or multiple possibilities that are accidents and not 'arson'.
clearly implying / acknowledging environmental activists have startedYou think environmental activists started all the forest fires?
If you think that forest fires are just deliberately started then of course you buy all the conspiracy theories!!You think Australia is the only place on earth where forest fires are started by people and nowhere else?
Arsonists don't just pick hot summers to start fires so they can fool people into thinking it's due to climate change.
Flooding? hahaha
You think the Don Valley Parkway south floods due to climate change?
You're being played.
Frankfooter is the ultimate product of leftist indoctrination and is in serious need of de-programming.here is frankfooter back peddling
30 minutes after he posted this
clearly implying / acknowledging environmental activists have startedall theforest fires
he went absolutely ballistic when he saw this
View attachment 317241
which is backed up by this
File:Total Wildland Acres Burned Annually (1926-2019) in the United States.png - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
there is a date stamp indicating the data was downloaded as publicly available data on October 24, 2020 , before pre 1983 was disappeared.
but according to Frankfooter the public is not permitted to view publicly available data (do you smell authoritarianism with hints of communism ?)
he did not stop to consider he may have been previously misled about forest fire burn acreage trends?
he did not stop to consider how fire management technology has improved since 1920s (airplanes/ water bombers / dedicated forest fighting crews) as well as more roads into the wilderness and improved communications obviously supporting a decline in acreage burnt since the 1920s ?
no he pissed his pants because a key climate change propaganda piece had just gone up in flames
called me a lair several times (he was Trudeauing)
his bullshit argument is the data prior to 1983 is not ''sanctioned" by the NFIC the same organization that disappeared the data prior to 1983.
Science does not require an organization to "sanction" data
its not like forest fires did not exist prior to 1983 , but Frankfooter does not want anyone to see how much acreage was reported as burnt
he wants to keep that previously available public information hidden so as not to cast doubts on a key "Climate Change" narrative
It makes one wonder if / how other historical data is being manipulated
we do know climate science conveniently ignores data issues in surface temp records , Urban Island heat effect , incomplete world wide data, adjustments , data holes etc
And then there is Michael Mann's broken hockey stick & 'Hide the decline" emails (more hiding of data from the public tisk tisk)
tony Heller claims
NASA is also dicking with the data
Tony Heller (@TonyClimate) / X (twitter.com)
View attachment 317251
View attachment 317250
quite a difference
cooling the past to inflate the present ???
Both of my grandpas told me how bloody hot the 1930s were
is that evidence? no its food for thought though
tony has been keeping publicly available data for quite some time & one could have taken screen shots back in 1999
is Tony Haller to be trusted ?
vs Frankfooter ?
I will let you be the judge of that based on your experience with Frankfooter
What is a fella expected to believe after Frankfooter tried to cover up a lie by bureaucracy ?
Frankfooter is not at all credible, however he is predictable
Ok lets watch Frankfooter blow a fuse and default to character assassination on Tony Haller (he will call me a liar as well)
get some popcorn
"Most fires are caused by climate change" ? Really?If you think that forest fires are just deliberately started then of course you buy all the conspiracy theories!!
You claimed that forest fires are deliberately started by those who believe in Climate Change. No proof of that in any of those links."Most fires are caused by climate change" ? Really?
The National Park Service would disagree with you.
Nearly 85 percent* of wildland fires in the United States are caused by humans. Human-caused fires result from campfires left unattended, the burning of debris, equipment use and malfunctions, negligently discarded cigarettes, and intentional acts of arson.
https://www.nps.gov/articles/wildfire-causes-and-evaluation.htm
Ecologists would also disagree with you.
Nationwide, humans are responsible for starting 84% of wildfires, according to a paper co-authored by Balch, published this past March in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
https://www.science.org/content/article/who-starting-all-those-wildfires-we-are
The UN would also disagree with you.
Various scientific studies suggest that 70-90% of fire are started by people
https://www.un.org/development/desa...-growing-concern-for-sustainable-development/
And most importantly, I disagree with you.
ps you're being played.
How did the fires in Canada start?
Dry, hot weather also breeds more lightning. In a normal season, half of Canada's wildfires are started by lightning, but those fires account for more than 85% of wildfire destruction. The other half are human-caused.
What might seem like slight increases in average temperatures have major consequences.
"Most fires in the boreal forest of northern Canada are started by lightning. A one-degree Celsius increase in temperature amounts to about 12% more lightning. So the warmer it gets as the climate heats up, the more triggers there are for fires to burn," said Struzik.
In Quebec, for example, fires were sparked by lightning, but officials in Alberta have said that the cause of fires there is currently unknown. Elsewhere in the country, these fires have been human-caused in various ways from discarded cigarette butts to sparks from passing trains.
larue, I called out skoob for first claiming that the increase in forest fires was from arsonists. That claim fell apart.here is frankfooter back peddling
30 minutes after he posted this
clearly implying / acknowledging environmental activists have startedall theforest fires
This chart does not appear on the NIFC site and this data is not supported by the NIFC.
Your link also says that using that chart is misleading as the NIFC thinks that old data is faulty.File:Total Wildland Acres Burned Annually (1926-2019) in the United States.png - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
there is a date stamp indicating the data was downloaded as publicly available data on October 24, 2020 , before pre 1983 was disappeared.
but according to Frankfooter the public is not permitted to view publicly available data (do you smell authoritarianism with hints of communism ?)
he did not stop to consider he may have been previously misled about forest fire burn acreage trends?
he did not stop to consider how fire management technology has improved since 1920s (airplanes/ water bombers / dedicated forest fighting crews) as well as more roads into the wilderness and improved communications obviously supporting a decline in acreage burnt since the 1920s ?
no he pissed his pants because a key climate change propaganda piece had just gone up in flames
called me a lair several times (he was Trudeauing)
his bullshit argument is the data prior to 1983 is not ''sanctioned" by the NFIC the same organization that disappeared the data prior to 1983.
Science does not require an organization to "sanction" data
its not like forest fires did not exist prior to 1983 , but Frankfooter does not want anyone to see how much acreage was reported as burnt
he wants to keep that previously available public information hidden so as not to cast doubts on a key "Climate Change" narrative
It makes one wonder if / how other historical data is being manipulated
we do know climate science conveniently ignores data issues in surface temp records , Urban Island heat effect , incomplete world wide data, adjustments , data holes etc
And then there is Michael Mann's broken hockey stick & 'Hide the decline" emails (more hiding of data from the public tisk tisk)
tony Heller claims
NASA is also dicking with the data
Tony Heller (@TonyClimate) / X (twitter.com)
Now you're posting a 25 year old chart about US temps and implying that they are current and global temps.View attachment 317251
View attachment 317250
quite a difference
cooling the past to inflate the present ???
Both of my grandpas told me how bloody hot the 1930s were
is that evidence? no its food for thought though
tony has been keeping publicly available data for quite some time & one could have taken screen shots back in 1999
is Tony Haller to be trusted ?
vs Frankfooter ?
I will let you be the judge of that based on your experience with Frankfooter
What is a fella expected to believe after Frankfooter tried to cover up a lie by bureaucracy ?
Frankfooter is not at all credible, however he is predictable
Ok lets watch Frankfooter blow a fuse and default to character assassination on Tony Haller (he will call me a liar as well)
get some popcorn
Says the guy who defends rump and DoFo and then says he's against corruption.Frankfooter is the ultimate product of leftist indoctrination and is in serious need of de-programming.
So, you think that only Liberals spew crap. The above nonsense of an argument proves that you are on the right wing spectrum. That is what I stated all along. ROTFLMAO!!Fuck off...if Pee Pee will suck at fixing rhetoric problem, I'd ditch him too... that's how common sense work...you don't pick a candidate and live and die with them....you chose to eat the liberal shit and thought that's the best thing even though it's shit....what a joke you have become...
there is a date stamp indicating the data was downloaded as publicly available data on October 24, 2020 , before pre 1983 was disappeared.This chart does not appear on the NIFC site and this data is not supported by the NIFC.
You are intentionally posting known bullshit charts.
That's really low, larue.
Your link also says that using that chart is misleading as the NIFC thinks that old data is faulty.
it does not say the data is faultyBEWARE: The National Interagency Fire Center (NIFC) cautionS against comparing their pre-1983 data to their post-1983 data (see statement below). Therefore this chart may be misleading even though the NIFC includes all of this yearly data in one table.
???Now you're posting a 25 year old chart about US temps and implying that they are current and global temps.
so it was propaganda directed towards kids that brain washed you, ...... I see... yikes !That's really stupid, no wonder you can't understand the NASA kids page on the greenhouse effect.
do you mean like the moron who intentionally disappeared 70 odd years of forest fire data ?Only a moron would try such an incredibly weak bait and switch.
facts you say?These are the facts. just like I proved to you that flooding and forest fires intensity of destruction is caused by Climate Change....... something that you keep on being in denial!!
What the IPCC Actually Says About Extreme Weather
Back to extreme weather — let’s take a look what IPCC AR6 says about the time of emergence for various extreme events. Here are some direct quotes related to specific phenomena:
- There is low confidence in the emergence of heavy precipitation and pluvial and river flood frequency in observations, despite trends that have been found in a few regions
- There is low confidence in the emergence of drought frequency in observations, for any type of drought, in all regions.
According to Canada’s Department of Natural Resources, fires have been occurring for thousands of years in the boreal forests of eastern Canada – not exactly unprecedented. In addition, they call fire a primary change agent that is as crucial to forest renewal as the sun and rain -perhaps not a calamity either.
It appears that 2023 is on pace to be a year with unusually high numbers of fires. Yet the previous year was one of historically low numbers. The Canadian National Fire Database (2023) provides facts to dispute the idea of climate change-driven increases in fires in Canadian fires. According the CNFD, there has been a significant and continuing decline in the number of fires and no discernible trend in the area burned.
Why are you making stuff up that you think I said?...are you reading my posts?You claimed that forest fires are deliberately started by those who believe in Climate Change. No proof of that in any of those links.
But the major destruction caused by forest fires in are due to:
.How did the Canadian wildfires start? A look at what caused the fires that are sending smoke across the U.S.
Canada is on track to have its most destructive wildfire season in history.www.cbsnews.com
Yes, the destruction of 85% of the forests are by lightning, especially when impacted by Climate Change!!
It is not surprising that cigarette butts, raucous teenagers cause the fires, but in most of those cases under normal temperatures they can be contained rather than get out of hand.
However, the scale of the lightnings due to the Climate change causes the most damage.
These are the facts. just like I proved to you that flooding and forest fires intensity of destruction is caused by Climate Change....... something that you keep on being in denial!!
Ah yes, the "Frankfooter make shit up to blur reality response" right on queue.Says the guy who defends rump and DoFo and then says he's against corruption.
Says the guy who defends genocide and says he's not racist.
Says the guy who can't even read a chart correctly or define 'fair share'.