Resistance is never futile

[CdnFox]

Climate change is real.  One would be a fool to deny it.  The climate is in a near constant state of change - always has been - and often goes from one extreme to another.

It's also a fair bet to say man affects climate change. Seriously - there's billions of us all doing things that put out heat and change the atmosphere - it's got to have SOME effect. We can all argue as to how much of an effect or how little.

But at the end of the day - there are severe limits to how much we can do anything about that as a nation.

So if we really believe that climate change is going to make things worse, we should be pouring most of our efforts into adapting.  New forest management practices, new forest fire practices, figure it the eff out and make the changes we need to.

Instead we got a carbon tax and called it 'mission complete' and left it there.

[Guest]

1 hour ago, OftenWrong said:

Am simply trying to help you assuage your fear and paranoia over what is called Climate Change. Despite all the intense media hype, these events are not due to it. Not if we believe the official model.

The earth's average temp has risen about 0.85 degrees from the standard. Meanwhile the Paris accord sets a limit of 1.5 degrees, close to double this.

I am just quoting the Paris accord and observing the numbers.

You people do the math.

What events, and what official model?

No matter how many times deniers are told that climate change will make extreme weather events more extreme, and more likely, they continue to argue with someone who has said we are all going to die by the end of next week.

As for your numbers, where did you get them?  0.85C is significant, and other experts put it even higher:

According to an ongoing temperature analysis led by scientists at NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS), the average global temperature on Earth has increased by at least 1.1° Celsius (1.9° Fahrenheit) since 1880. The majority of the warming has occurred since 1975, at a rate of roughly 0.15 to 0.20°C per decade.

https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/world-of-change/global-temperatures

The average global temperature in 2022 was about 1.15°C above the 1850-1900 average. The cooling influence of La Niña conditions over much of the past three years temporarily reined in the longer-term warming trend. But La Niña ended in March 2023 and an El Niño is forecast to develop in the coming months. Typically, El Niño increases global temperatures in the year after it develops – in this case this would be 2024.

https://public.wmo.int/en/media/press-release/global-temperatures-set-reach-new-records-next-five-years

The Paris Accord set a goal of keeping a temperature increase above pre-industrial levels well below 2C, and pursue efforts to limit it even further, to <1.5C  It never stated anything up to 1.5C was going to be just fine.

Most experts think we have a reasonable chance of exceeding the 1.5C increase monthly or annually before the end of this decade, with global averages reaching that point by mid century.

[CdnFox]

8 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

No matter how many times deniers are told that climate change will make extreme weather events more extreme, and more likely, they continue to argue with someone who has said we are all going to die by the end of next week.

I think the challenge is that no matter how many times climate zealots clame things are going to get more extreme, they demand we do nothing to prepare for it and instead focus on a carbon tax that won't fix the problem in the slightest. Not you specifically but it's the reality for the vast majority.

So how do the other side take them seriously? IF they really felt that extreme weather was coming - wouldn't they be demanding we get ready for it? But they're not - in fact they dont' like that idea because it takes away from things like "fighting" climate change in their mind.

Both positions are difficult to defend and honestly both ignore science and reason where necessary.  And now the whole thing has become cultist.  Meanwhile our forests burn and we're not doing a single thing to address that, climate or not.

 

[Army Guy]

3 hours ago, ExFlyer said:

Yeah, I have been to Germany where towns are separated by parks (you can call them forests if you want. Cities, towns and villages are often only a few kilometres apart and the population is 84 million over and area of only 350,000 sq kms.

In comparison, BC alone is 950,000sq kms and has a population of 5 million and has more forest alone, 60 million hectares (149 million acres) – the size of France and Germany combined.

This idea may sound foreign to you, but it is coming from our national Forrest sector. and if it is stupid idea then perhaps we should be looking at replacing those so called experts in this governmental panel...and i don't think they are suggesting that we look after all our forest up to and including the artic circle. in this manner, but we could take care around our communities, or as you suggested it is to large a project  maybe just say fuc* it and watch it burn, insurance pays out we build again, then we watch it burn rinse and repeat...until like in NB and flood insurance they just say no more, move or if it floods again its out of your pocket...Not sure how much money gets poured into these clean ups after a fire, i'm sure however it might be cheaper to take these forest service recommendations and put them into action...

Black forest area is a heavily forested area, is it as large as BC, no it is not however BC is also heavily logged, with that industry comes many rules and policies, that could include new ones such as those recommended by the forest service...and if the project is to large in scope, and we decide to leave it all to mother nature, then   we should really prepare for bigger and more deadly forest fires...

Bjorn Lomborg: Fear-mongering over forest fires and climate change isn't rooted in reality (msn.com)

Edited August 25, 2023 by Army Guy

[Guest]

14 hours ago, CdnFox said:

I think the challenge is that no matter how many times climate zealots clame things are going to get more extreme, they demand we do nothing to prepare for it and instead focus on a carbon tax that won't fix the problem in the slightest. Not you specifically but it's the reality for the vast majority.

So how do the other side take them seriously? IF they really felt that extreme weather was coming - wouldn't they be demanding we get ready for it? But they're not - in fact they dont' like that idea because it takes away from things like "fighting" climate change in their mind.

Both positions are difficult to defend and honestly both ignore science and reason where necessary.  And now the whole thing has become cultist.  Meanwhile our forests burn and we're not doing a single thing to address that, climate or not.

 

I've always maintained that anyone who thinks nuclear power is a bad idea, and thinks China and India et al should be given decades to sort their emissions out doesn't really believe in climate change.  But that view began thirty years or so ago and doesn't mean much now.  As @eyeball said somewhere recently, It's too late.  

Given the lag in changes in emissions and changes in effects, which some experts say can be up to thirty years, we are pretty much committed to riding it out.  I'll be dead long before the worst of it is seen.

It's still a good idea to cut emissions.  It's still a good idea to invest in making renewable energy and electric vehicles work well enough to take a greater share of the burden, but fossil fuels aren't going anywhere for the foreseeable future.  And I'd rather the world used our fossil fuels than anyone else's, given the regulations involved in their extraction.  I'd rather China burned our natural gas than our coal.

Edited August 26, 2023 by bcsapper

[Guest]

5 hours ago, Army Guy said:

I think this entire climate change thing has grown into a out of control monster, much like covid was...it is at the point where any change in the climate whether normal or not is considered climate change... and yet we have records going back 50, 60 years that say that variations in our weather is normal, BC has gotten heat waves before, and certainly has had forest fires...This may be the worst on record, but 3/4 of them have been started by id*ots...who had they stayed home this would have been an uneventful fire season...and certainly would not be not attributed to climate change, as it does not fit the narrative. 

NB, NS have had their largest fire season yet, we have also had our wettest season in over 40 years...all our fires have led to arrests, and in our media the fire season climate change was to blame... not sure how they connected the dots on that one...but having a wet summer is normal for the Maritimes.

forest service has told government at all levels if nothing is done, about removing fuel, or controlled burns, fires are only going to get worse...Kind of hard to blame it all on climate change...when we have always had forest fires, since the beginning of time....

 

We don't blame it all on climate change.  As I've said, climate change allows for the conditions to make extreme events more extreme, and more likely.  Or something to that effect.  If you are looking for tabs on things, so you can sort them out into a climate change bucket and a non-climate change bucket, you are going to be disappointed.

Removing fuel, having controlled burns, cutting down swathes of trees near populated areas are all things that should be done.  But there are a lot of forests in Canada.  We aren't going to touch any more than a minute fraction of them.

[blackbird]

On 8/16/2023 at 12:26 PM, eyeball said:

Like I said it's the start of a learning process that should lead to better stronger cases.

I'd push kids in the direction of demonstrating, lobbying, suing whatever and wherever they can to lower the voting age and the age at which they can run for office.

It's like the climate changing, kids have needed to assume responsibility for their own survival for hundreds of thousands of years. It's completely natural.

Kids should learn to respect their parents and authorities, not oppose it.  It appears for some of them, the opposite is the case.  Going to court over climate change is absurd and nonsensical.  They should be concentrating on learning and how to be a responsible citizen in the world, not a rebel and anarchist.  The last thing the country needs is more young people trained to be protesters and anarchists.  

[Nationalist]

6 hours ago, ExFlyer said:

So, you want to go in with a rake and garbage bags and clean it up?

You did not address ""The Forest" has been around for millions of years, long before man was around. Who managed it then? O)h yeah, Mother Nature managed it. How? Oh yeah, it allowed fire to go on unimpeded. ?

Your resolution to this situation is naive and simpleton and impossible. BC alone is 149 million forested acres.

No you use saws and you get your hands dirty.

If you wanna live in or near a forest, you care for the forest. Don't be silly.

Ever heard of the forest ranger service?

[Army Guy]

17 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

We don't blame it all on climate change.  As I've said, climate change allows for the conditions to make extreme events more extreme, and more likely.  Or something to that effect.  If you are looking for tabs on things, so you can sort them out into a climate change bucket and a non-climate change bucket, you are going to be disappointed.

Removing fuel, having controlled burns, cutting down swathes of trees near populated areas are all things that should be done.  But there are a lot of forests in Canada.  We aren't going to touch any more than a minute fraction of them.

well the media and the feds are putting out headlines one after another blaming climate change for most of the fires anyways. And yes i do want to keep score, of what is climate change and what is human error to keep it all in perspective.

I get it we have a shit ton of trees, i wonder how much these fires cost the tax payers every year... and if prevention  could work perhaps we could not only save some money but someone's home... I don't know what it is like to loss everything in a fire thats out of your control, but i'm sure it would suck, and with fires getting bigger and worse ,  one would think we could come up with a plan other than shrugging our shoulders and giving up. I mean we do the same for floods why not fires..

[eyeball]

24 minutes ago, blackbird said:

The last thing the country needs is more young people trained to be protesters and anarchists.  

Yeah, who needs long-haired protestors doing things like kicking over money changer's tables.

Quote

Kids should learn to respect their parents and authorities, not oppose it.

 BTW where the hell was Dad when all this kicking and protesting on the temple grounds was going on?

[Guest]

3 minutes ago, Army Guy said:

well the media and the feds are putting out headlines one after another blaming climate change for most of the fires anyways. And yes i do want to keep score, of what is climate change and what is human error to keep it all in perspective.

I get it we have a shit ton of trees, i wonder how much these fires cost the tax payers every year... and if prevention  could work perhaps we could not only save some money but someone's home... I don't know what it is like to loss everything in a fire thats out of your control, but i'm sure it would suck, and with fires getting bigger and worse ,  one would think we could come up with a plan other than shrugging our shoulders and giving up. I mean we do the same for floods why not fires..

Climate change and human error are not mutually exclusive.  Humans have always started a good chunk of the forest fires, and they always will.  Climate change just provides the conditions for them to be to more frequent, and/or intense, etc.

If you find a way of keeping score, patent it.  You'll make a fortune.  Just remember who gave you the idea.

[eyeball]

10 hours ago, Nationalist said:

No its now actually. Its simple forest maintenance.

Have you ever worked in the bush? Even silviculture and slope stabilization was as dangerous as logging. Especially when we'd bale out of a helicopter with one strut on a stump and the other side hanging out into space. Of course it was already near vertical so...

Yeah it was simple.

?

[CdnFox]

1 hour ago, bcsapper said:

 

Given the lag in changes in emissions and changes in effects, which some experts say can be up to thirty years, we are pretty much committed to riding it out.  I'll be dead long before the worst of it is seen.

 

Yeah, Slim comfort but still   

Quote

It's still a good idea to cut emissions.  It's still a good idea to invest in making renewable energy and electric vehicles work well enough to take a greater share of the burden, but fossil fuels aren't going anywhere for the foreseeable future.  And I'd rather the world used our fossil fuels than anyone else's, given the regulations involved in their extraction.  I'd rather China burned our natural gas than their coal.

For sure.  Even if climate change was a null issue entirely it's good to cut pollution and move to sustainables. And in the meantime it makes more sense to use 'greener' carbon than 'dirty' carbon like coal.

[eyeball]

7 hours ago, Army Guy said:

worse...Kind of hard to blame it all on climate change...when we have always had forest fires, since the beginning of time....

For the umpteenth time....no one is blaming climate change they're simply saying climate change is making things worse. In this case that includes both wildfires in the  present and the effects of poor forest practices and management in the past Maintenance in other words as some people call it now.

[eyeball]

1 hour ago, bcsapper said:

I'd rather China burned our natural gas than their coal

Oh they're burning our coal too.

https://nationalpost.com/news/politics/yes-anti-pipeline-vancouver-really-is-north-americas-largest-exporter-of-coal

 

Edited August 26, 2023 by eyeball

[Nationalist]

6 hours ago, eyeball said:

Have you ever worked in the bush? Even silviculture and slope stabilization was as dangerous as logging. Especially when we'd bale out of a helicopter with one strut on a stump and the other side hanging out into space. Of course it was already near vertical so...

Yeah it was simple.

?

Arrrr...have ya ever been t'sea Billy?

Don't be dopey. 

[ExFlyer]

11 hours ago, Army Guy said:

This idea may sound foreign to you, but it is coming from our national Forrest sector. and if it is stupid idea then perhaps we should be looking at replacing those so called experts in this governmental panel...and i don't think they are suggesting that we look after all our forest up to and including the artic circle. in this manner, but we could take care around our communities, or as you suggested it is to large a project  maybe just say fuc* it and watch it burn, insurance pays out we build again, then we watch it burn rinse and repeat...until like in NB and flood insurance they just say no more, move or if it floods again its out of your pocket...Not sure how much money gets poured into these clean ups after a fire, i'm sure however it might be cheaper to take these forest service recommendations and put them into action...

Black forest area is a heavily forested area, is it as large as BC, no it is not however BC is also heavily logged, with that industry comes many rules and policies, that could include new ones such as those recommended by the forest service...and if the project is to large in scope, and we decide to leave it all to mother nature, then   we should really prepare for bigger and more deadly forest fires...

Bjorn Lomborg: Fear-mongering over forest fires and climate change isn't rooted in reality (msn.com)

The claim is not "foreign" to me. Just totally unrealistic.  Please show me where the forset service says to go clean the underbrush in all our forests.

Most of our forested area are inaccessible to start with and we certainly do not have the people, the equipment or wherewithal to even consider this.

A comment like, clean up the forest is just a throwaway phrase to make someone seem intelligent but, intelligent folks will see the foolishness of such a statement.

[ExFlyer]

13 hours ago, Nationalist said:

No you use saws and you get your hands dirty.

If you wanna live in or near a forest, you care for the forest. Don't be silly.

Ever heard of the forest ranger service?

Use saws? To do what? Go logging? We do that now. Except when tree huggers and forest management folks get in the way. Whatcha want more trees or less trees? LOL

Where do the fires start? Generally not near where most live but way in the bush and winds and embers spread the fire.

Yes, I have heard of the forest ranger service. What is your point with that? They are firefighters and we have few of them because no one applies for the jobs.

Edited August 26, 2023 by ExFlyer

[Guest]

10 hours ago, eyeball said:

Oh they're burning our coal too.

https://nationalpost.com/news/politics/yes-anti-pipeline-vancouver-really-is-north-americas-largest-exporter-of-coal

 

Yeah, I know.  Poor wording.  I fixed it!

I remember Roberts Bank.  A familiar site on the way to Victoria.  It does seem strange that we will happily sell them the the most CO2 intensive fuel but we balk at selling them natural gas.

I do hope it's not just because it would mean BC would lose credits for GHG reduction.

So why has the Green Party in B.C. lobbied against B.C.’s nascent LNG industry?

The problem is that, while LNG could significantly reduce GHGs in China when replacing coal, its production would increase GHGs in B.C.  There are real concerns that the LNG industry, if allowed to grow, would make it impossible for B.C. to meet its greenhouse gas reductions targets.

https://biv.com/article/2022/03/bc-lng-would-take-big-bite-out-chinese-emissions-study

[eyeball]

4 hours ago, Nationalist said:

Arrrr...have ya ever been t'sea Billy?

Don't be dopey. 

Yes I work driving boats at sea a lot too. 

So again I ask what sort of experience do you have working in the bush that makes you think it'll be as simple to maintain things the way you imagine?

 

[eyeball]

1 hour ago, bcsapper said:

So why has the Green Party in B.C. lobbied against B.C.’s nascent LNG industry?

I don't know. If I had anything to say about it I'd cut them off LNG and coal just on general human rights principles.

I'd also bring criminal charges against Canadian companies that have been using slaves provided by China.

Quote

 

Canada probes Nike, Dynasty Gold over alleged use of forced labor in China

https://www.reuters.com/world/canada-probes-nike-dynasty-gold-over-alleged-use-forced-labor-china-2023-07-11/

 

The fact this sort of shit goes on is probably what convinces me most that there's no hope of turning things around on the climate file.  The future is a very dark place.

[Guest]

3 minutes ago, eyeball said:

I don't know. If I had anything to say about it I'd cut them off LNG and coal just on general human rights principles.

I'd also bring criminal charges against Canadian companies that have been using slaves provided by China.

The fact this sort of shit goes on is probably what convinces me most that there's no hope of turning things around on the climate file.  The future is a very dark place.

Yeah, but if we start dealing only with those countries with good human rights records we would probably have to do without quite a bit.

I'm with you though.  I'd like to give it a shot.

[OftenWrong]

1 hour ago, eyeball said:

I don't know. If I had anything to say about it I'd cut them off LNG and coal just on general human rights principles.

I'd also bring criminal charges against Canadian companies that have been using slaves provided by China.

The fact this sort of shit goes on is probably what convinces me most that there's no hope of turning things around on the climate file.  The future is a very dark place.

Well right now it's the left who want to do business with them, while the right is saying no, we should stop. We only embraced China during their great leap forward, with the hope that capitalism and the transfer of Hong Kong would bring them more western democratic values, including human rights.

Guess we didn't really think that one through... 

[Nationalist]

5 hours ago, ExFlyer said:

Use saws? To do what? Go logging? We do that now. Except when tree huggers and forest management folks get in the way. Whatcha want more trees or less trees? LOL

Where do the fires start? Generally not near where most live but way in the bush and winds and embers spread the fire.

Yes, I have heard of the forest ranger service. What is your point with that? They are firefighters and we have few of them because no one applies for the jobs.

You've never gone to clean a forest have you.

2 hours ago, eyeball said:

Yes I work driving boats at sea a lot too. 

So again I ask what sort of experience do you have working in the bush that makes you think it'll be as simple to maintain things the way you imagine?

 

No...I don't think you do.

[eyeball]

27 minutes ago, OftenWrong said:

Well right now it's the left who want to do business with them, while the right is saying no, we should stop. We only embraced China during their great leap forward, with the hope that capitalism and the transfer of Hong Kong would bring them more western democratic values, including human rights.

Guess we didn't really think that one through... 

No, and I really don't know what you mean by the left. I've been against globalism with China since forever.  This is in example of what I mean when I say that the government gets in no matter who you vote for.

It makes it to easy to make partisan hay out of the issue by saying, it's the left or it's the right.

Point is it's us.