Maui Forest Fire: We need to change the Global Warming narrative

I have honestly always suspected that to be the case, but do you have a link I can use, to win this battle?

 

But there is no proof that was caused by man. There have been changes like this for billions of years. Up and down.

My argument was that there was no consensus. You proved there was no consensus.

YOU have no technical knowledge of the subject. You are just repeating bits and pieces of about what half the knowledgeable scientists are saying.

The argument has been that the vast majority of scientists believe that the earth is doomed. It turns out that half of the scientists have doubts. These are the experts who have the technical knowledge to evaluate the studies and about half of them have their doubts.

 

You have your preference; I have mine. I believe my citations explain themselves sufficiently.

 

So, can we say now, definitively, that the Maui fires were caused by man. Clearly, the State of Hawaii didn't enforce codes, clearly, they didn't enforce infrastructure standards in building that would have precluded power lines from being so effected by predictably strong winds that frankly are ongoing challenges to that infrastructure. We know that the water folks wouldn't allocate usage to fire fighting once the infrastructure broke in the predictable wind event, and the inability of the state of Hawaii to regulate non native species led to a firestorm of fuel that wasn't able to be extinguished because of poor decision making.

So, instead of taking accountability for those failures of the State of Hawaii government, the climate card is being used to distract folks from just how stupid and moronic the government of the State of Hawaii has been and continues to run itself.

 

Nothing in that sentence makes sense or has any grounding whatsoever in reality. You have too much to learn. Please start by reading up on the basics and come back when you understand the topic.

 

Science is used to being attacked by religion throughout history. Now it's attacked by extreme-right politics. Which is very very similar. Science has always prevailed. However that is not what this thread is about. It's about a RATIONAL discussion of phenomena that was PREDICTED by science. So, as it relates to this thread, attacking science shuts down any expectation of a meaningful debate.

Thanks for playing...

 

You refuse to credit anything that disagrees with your religion, climate change. Since heat waves, cold waves, hurricanes, droughts, heavy rain, and just about any meteorological conditions are the product of climate change, there is no way to falsify the religion's views. That's what makes it a religion, not a science.

 

You wouldn't recognize REAL SCIENCE if you tripped on it. The nonsense you're spewing is the religion side of this discussion - you have your high priests -Climatology PhDs, you holy script - "Man is the cause of global warming". And a complete refusal to consider any contrary evidence or science that cased doubt on your Holy Idol.

 

Nonsense, pure über-left babble. Your lack of understanding is clearly shown by the fact you think the Maui fire was caused by global warming. That's nonsense. Maui was experiencing typical seasonal weather as it has for millenia.

 

Another alarmist claim debunked by data.
A new paper shows that U.S. tornado damage & strong tornado incidence are both sharply down
Guest Blogger
There is simply no evidence to support claims that tornadoes are getting worse or causing more damage. . . .

 

The Maui wildfire issue has been conclusively put to bed in the peer-reviewed literature.
March 12, 2024
The Origin of Last Summer's Maui Wildfire

During the past six months, research scientist David Ovens and I have worked intensively on the meteorology of the August 2023 Maui wildfires and have completed a paper that was accepted in an American Meteorological Society journal with a few revisions.

This blog will describe our results, some of which provide different conclusions than those discussed in many media accounts. . . .

 

IMO, this highlights the need to aggressively move to renewable energy generation.

A New Surge in Power Use Is Threatening U.S. Climate Goals

Something unusual is happening in America. Demand for electricity, which has stayed largely flat for two decades, has begun to surge.

Over the past year, electric utilities have nearly doubled their forecasts of how much additional power they’ll need by 2028 as they confront an unexpected explosion in the number of data centers, an abrupt resurgence in manufacturing driven by new federal laws, and millions of electric vehicles being plugged in.

Many power companies were already struggling to keep the lights on, especially during extreme weather, and say the strain on grids will only increase. Peak demand in the summer is projected to grow by 38,000 megawatts nationwide in the next five years, according to an analysis by the consulting firm Grid Strategies, which is like adding another California to the grid.
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2024/03/13/climate/electric-power-climate-change.html

 

This shows that EV's are more a problem than a solution.

 

AFAIK every forest fire ever was caused by lightning strikes, accidents, or human actions. None have been caused by climate or weather (other than the lightning bit). By far the largest forest fires in North America came around the early 1900s, long before climate change was even a twinge in the pants of scientists and environmentalists.

 

Kind of unrelated to your post but I just wanted to comment that I watched the documentary recently on Jack Hays.... A most interesting fellow. I'm guessing few people here know that he was a well respected commander of the Texas rangers at the tender young age of 24 or so

 

This isn't well founded.

The climate contribution involves periods of dryness that offers fire sources better opportunity.

And, in the early 1900's, there weren't resources for reducing fires that start.

 

Bull crap

It isn't the climate, it is the lack of clearing deadwood from the forests that states and sometimes the feds impose.

which has zero to do with the question.

 

The comparison was 1900 wildfire compared to wildfire today.

So, what I say was absolutely accurate.

And, as you mention cleaning up forests, that isn't something that would have every been considered in the early 1900's. So, you are just adding to what I pointed out.

 

Yup. And later a founder of the city of Oakland, CA.