Australia arrests 183 for setting bushfires that celebrities claim were caused by climate change

https://www.newscientist.com/articl...he-medieval-period-with-vineyards-in-england/

 

The next thing is the politically charged part. Despite the political charge, the science is not split down the middle. It is so lopsided that hardly anything else compares. The dems don't have an out sized influence, in fact, they have much less influence. So why is the science so lopsided if it's only based on politics? Also, the external influences are so lopsided in the opposite direction that they can't possibly be the reason. So, there really is no reasonable excuse.

 

They ALL &@$#* understand that! What they also understand, which seems to escape many, is that those variations have a root cause

What is causing the current variation (oh! Please please please try to tell me it is the sun!)

 

Why would you not take the research of actual climate change scientists seriously but instead point towards the words of a barmaid turned politician?
Why, if not to support the cult of climate change deniers?
There is plenty of peer-reviewed research to support the warming effects of greenhouse gases so why would you think that doubling CO2 in the atmosphere since the industrial revolution would not raise temperatures?

 

And I suppose that the laws of kinetic energy are just fabrication and things move or don’t move because of wishful thinking? Gravity is a myth we don’t fall off the planet because earth is flat and God makes things fall to the ground.

You do know you are arguing with physics that have been known for over 200 years?

Look up Arrhenius

 

What evidence is there that the politics of the issue are biased against the idea of Human Caused Global Warming? Do you dispute that that vast majority of academia are leftist?

If that's the case that you wish to make, I would love to see you make the attempt.

Personally, I think that your post reeks of fantasy.

 

0.0391%

 

Why do the Global Warming alarmists take the word of some "experts", but dismiss the word of other "experts"?

 

I said external influences. There is no money or external motivation to champion global warming, on the other hand, doing so could not possibly gain you a more powerful enemy.

The left leaning of most scientists probably speaks more to the reasons we shouldn't believe rightists. But, what evidence do you have that it affects their work? If science was only based on politics, how do we ever cure a disease or get an airplane in the air?

 

Because the experts so overwhelmingly agree.

 

For example, another thing that the whole-foods-shopping, clean-eating, vegan lefty scientists have a consensus on is that genetically modified foods are safe and effective.

 

Well it is 173 (reported as ALMOST 200), but that is for all of 2019, not just this bushfire season. Anyway, that's irrelevant, because I thought that you were talking about the evidence connecting climate change to bushfires, not the evidence for the arson stuff.

 

WTF? The INSANE Green New Deal isn't active policy is it?

 

Images which say "THIS IS NOT NORMAL" in big letters, is NOT research I'm afraid.

 

But the arson explanation makes no sense. So why suddenly?

 

If leftists control which studies get published in academic journals, and having a study published in an academic journal determines your pay grade, what would you expect to happen?

 

Brush fires can start in many ways besides arson related acts; lightning can start brush fires, as can discarded glass or bales of hay that are left unattended for long periods of time or chemicals that are improperly stored outside. I will say that those who deliberately start fires (whether brush or other) need to be severely punished to the fullest extent of the law.

 

Many people see it as presenting a serious problem based on what they know about it, which isn't much. The worst thing is most people have no idea of how to fix the problem without seriously damaging the economy.

You're trying to dismiss climate science because a few well meaning change advocates come up with unworkable solutions?

 

Leftists have no such control.

 

How on earth do leftists control all of that?

 

A few??!?

It's the whole lot of them!

 

Yes, they do.

 

By being in charge of those systems.

 

No they aren't. There is a left leaning tendency among academics. Which is a universe away from 'leftists' controlling every aspect of an entire scientific field across the globe. That is a flat earth level leap of logic. Maybe worse.

Also, remember there are literally trillions of dollars in profit from causing global warming. So which way do you think the pressures of this global conspiracy really lean?

 

No, it isn't. You're focusing on who says the wildest stuff for the media.

Consider nuclear energy as a climate change solution:

https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=nuclear+energy+climate+change&hl=en&as_sdt=0&as_vis=1&oi=scholart​

There are serious people working on answers.