Are you now choosing to ignore satellite data when it suits?

Funny you should say that. Your friends at UAH, Spencer and Christy, just reported that the November and December 2019 were the warmest November and December in their data.

Unprecedented, one might say.

Phil Clarke, so you are ignoring Satellite data when it suits

I don't entirely trust the table, either. It's clearly been drawn up by someone who wants to show that 2019 was unprecedented (e.g. the estimate of animals killed and the suggestion that it's leading to extinction - no such estimates for earlier years). Nevertheless, it's clear that it's not unprecedented, despite desperate attempts to ignore inconvenient data.

It's clear how this works. Every disaster has to be based on climate change and climate hysterics are shameless in making political capital out of other people's misery. It can only work, however, if every new event is unprecedented (if it's hotter/drier/wetter/colder/windier/take your pick, than ever before, then the consequences must also be more extreme, hence the need for everything to be unprecedented. Plus, people have to be scared into destroying their lifestyles - they certainly won't do it voluntarily - so again everything has to be scarily more extreme than ever before). Pointing out when such events are not unprecedented is unacceptable, hence the air-brushing of history. Hence my other thread pointing out numerous extreme weather events and records in the past, many of which suggest that what's going on today, all over the world, isn't unprecedented, even when climate hysterics claim that it is.

In the case of the bushfires there's a double pushback, since the fires aren't unprecedented, and may well be worse than they otherwise would have been, thanks to excessive fuel load arising from "green" pressure to reduce burning in the "safer" seasons. The idea that it's not unprecedented, but nevertheless worse than it might have been, thanks to "green" pressures, is anathema to the true believers. Anyone daring to suggest otherwise has to be proved to be wrong, even if such proof doesn't exist.

When it's all over for this season (soon, I hope, for the poor benighted Aussies), they need another Royal Commission to get to the bottom of it, and they need to ensure it's not packed with climate hysterics, since it's important to find out the truth.

And sure enough, right on cue, here comes the Guardian:

"Disinformation and lies are spreading faster than Australia's bushfires"

https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2020/jan/12/disinformation-and-lies-are-spreading-faster-than-australias-bushfires

First of all, the usual risible attempt to make anyone who isn't a true believer look like a deranged nutter:

"One conspiracy bizarrely claims bushfires have been lit to clear a path for high-speed rail down Australia’s east coast. Others baselessly claim Islamic State is instructing its followers to wage war on the country with fire, that Chinese billionaires are using lasers to clear the path for new cities, or that eco-terrorists are trying to spur action on climate change by manufacturing a catastrophe."

Well, I've never seen any of those claims made, and it's interesting that the Guardian, which is usually so quick to embed links to justify its claims (even if the articles linked to are of dubious quality) doesn't do so this time, nor does it offer up any sources for this dubious reporting.

Then, having set the scene, it moves into attack mode:

"Accompanying these laughable mistruths, though, are more dangerous distortions.

They are the ones being used to deflect from climate change’s role in creating longer, more severe fire seasons.

Two pieces of disinformation stand out from the rest: that an “arson emergency”, rather than climate change, is behind the bushfires, and that “greenies” are preventing firefighters from reducing fuel loads in the Australian bush."

Of course, the truth is the other way around - it is climate hysterics, like those who write for the Guardian, who are desperate to say that climate change is making things worse, and nothing else could possibly be behind this year's very bad (but not unprecedented) fires.

"“People who are for whatever reason trying to put out false or extremely misleading information are actually doing a huge disservice to the risk to human life in the future, the risk to property, the risk to the natural world, and indeed the risk to economy.”"

So says "Esteemed climate change expert professor Will Steffen, a member of Australia’s Climate Council and the inaugural director of Australian National University’s Climate Change Institute", and he's correct, but he's aiming at the wrong target.

Next comes a thinly-veiled call for censorship of views they disagree with:

"Digital rights experts say the disinformation is yet more evidence that social media platforms are failing in their duty to act responsibly.

“We need to see social media platforms playing a greater role in responding to the disinformation being shared on their platforms about the bushfires,” Digital Rights Watch chair Tim Singleton Norton said."

Then, finally, the kick out at Australian climate hysterics' Public Enemy No. 1 - "Comments like Fitzsimmons’ have done little to stop the idea taking hold. Prime minister Scott Morrison has nominated the lack of hazard reduction work as a key issue he wants to investigate after the current crisis.

At the same time, Morrison has demonstrated little appetite for strengthening climate action."

That last sentence alone is enough to damn him for ever, obviously. And in case you haven't got the message, obviously needs to be repeated until you do get it, since departure from the accepted viewpoint is not permissible. So there's another linked article, too:

"Something else is out of control in Australia: climate disaster denialism
Ketan Joshi
Myths about the bushfires grow online before finding their way into the rightwing press and the mouths of politicians"

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/jan/08/australia-climate-disaster-denial-bushfires-online-rightwing-press-politicians

And, ironically, this contains its own conspiracy-theorising:

"Rightwing media outlets in Australia have responded to the current bushfires by either refusing to give the story its due prominence or by spreading falsehoods. Specifically, there is a claim emerging that environmentalists have blocked hazard reduction efforts by supposedly opposing dry fuel loads being burned or manually removed. It isn’t one of those half-truths – there’s no truth in it at all. Once spread by a rightwing journalist over 10 years ago, it has been given a new lease of life as a meme on social media."

The embedded link to the claim that there is no truth in the stories is, guess what, to another Guardian story, this one purporting to be a fact-check.

The last article was written by Ketan Joshi, who is of course entitled to his opinion, but the idea that his writing will be balanced is, well, suspect. Google for his articles on the Guardian, and this is a flavour of his position:

"Commentators who don't understand the grid should butt out of the battery debate
Ketan Joshi
Criticising South Australia’s battery for not meeting peak demand is akin to raging at your smartphone because it can’t send a fax

Ketan Joshi is a communications consultant for the renewable energy industry"

"Caring about climate change: it's time to build a bridge between data and emotion
Ketan Joshi
Seeing the span of our children’s lives laid over a climate projection graph slices through the boredom that comes with climate apathy"

"Think windfarms are ugly? It's not only a matter of perception, but policy too
Ketan Joshi
We will meet renewable energy targets largely with wind. But community attitudes and acceptance rely on a number of factors beyond mere aesthetics"

"For a horrible glimpse into Australia's dark future, look to Trump's views on coal
Ketan Joshi
The ugly end of decarbonisation is being yanked in different directions by political messaging, in both the US and Australia"

"Windfarm weirdness syndrome is real. Just look at our national 'debate'
Ketan Joshi
While Pacific Hydro’s report doesn’t prove the reality of ‘wind turbine syndrome’, it does show how windfarms irritate people in unique ways"

"Dismantling Australian climate policy: a case study in disagreement
Ketan Joshi
The federal government can’t convince the electorate of the ills of renewables. Perhaps they should listen instead, and leave the renewable energy target alone"

"Australia’s most effective pseudoscience: climate change denial
Ketan Joshi
The motivated rejection of science permeates the most powerful office in our country. No other pseudoscientific venture can lay claim to such a gleaming trophy"

'Nuff said.

According to Professor Stefan Doerr, of Swansea University, increases in atmospheric temperature increase lightning frequency and hence wildfire probability. Haven't read anything about increases in "dry lightning" though.

Jan 12, 2020 at 9:01 AM Mark Hodgson
Jan 12, 2020 at 8:39 AM Mark Hodgson

Climate Science and the Green Blob have combined with progressive Socialists against anyone getting in their way. This has worked in the UK to get the Climate Change Act steamroller Ed through Parliament.

It failed against Trump, failed against BREXIT and is now in propaganda panic mode in Australia.

The Green Blob in Australia has enjoyed an extended Honeymoon, but a big backfire is now on the cards. Local Government and local papers will have records of stories, letters, correspondence, warnings etc about fuel load and those that have blocked its clearance.

Personal attacks on the Prime Minister have been made. He can either resign or fight back in the style of Trump and BoJo. Narrow the list of political issues down, to a few simple ones, with yes/no answers. Reversing some Laws to give Home and Land Owners the right to prioritise Fire Prevention, or Reduction of Fire Spread, would seem a good place to start.

A lot of the clearance and disposal work of years of neglect, has been done by nature. Mass clearance by bulldozers and chainsaws will not be required. Forests that are self rejuvenating are natural and good for the environment, wildlife etc.

None of this has changed Australian Coal production that is fuelling China and Green Blob hatred.

Nevertheless, it's clear that it's not unprecedented,

Property damage is unprecedented.

Even if it were unprecedented (I haven't checked) surely property damage is just as much a reflection of increased rural populations and a desire to live close to forests.

"Even if it were unprecedented (I haven't checked) surely property damage is just as much a reflection of increased rural populations and a desire to live close to forests.

Jan 12, 2020 at 12:26 PM AK"

+ the enforced bans on people clearing scrub vegetation as a fire break.

James Cook University offers degrees of lying, and doctoral research into suspicious activity, all linked to faked claims and Climate Science. This is not Unprecedented.

http://joannenova.com.au/2020/01/busted-reef-fish-arent-bothered-by-acidification-scientific-fraud-ok-at-james-cook-uni/

“The weather activity we’re seeing, the extent and spread of the fires, the speed at which they’re going, the way in which they are attacking communities who have never ever seen fire before is unprecedented,” NSW Premier Gladys Berejiklian said.

Reuters

The Defence Minister is considering an unprecedented compulsory callout of military reserves to assist with the bushfire emergency facing NSW and Queensland, a mechanism of the Defence Act which has never been enacted.

Linda Reynolds told Question Time on Tuesday she was scoping the “availability and readiness” of reserve forces across the army, navy and air force.

“As Minister for Defence at this time of unprecedented fire threat, I am focused on ensuring that the Australian Defence Force is ready to provide additional support for the front line first responders,” Ms Reynolds said.

The Australian

Bush fires are frequent during the Australian summer, which runs from December to February, and have posed a threat to lives and property on a large scale before.

In 2009, the Black Saturday bush fires in the southern state of Victoria claimed 173 lives, the single largest loss of life from wildfires in Australian history.

But this season’s fires are widely seen as unprecedented for their intensity, scale and timing.

“Despite the availability of modern firefighting and hazard reduction methods, the burnt area is estimated to be already close to 6 million hectares, more than anything recorded ever before,” said Petr Matous, a senior lecturer at the School of Civil Engineering at the University of Sydney.

Mark Howden, director of the Climate Change Institute at the Australian National University, said the bush fires appeared to be “a less than a one-in-a-hundred year event.”

“The fire service chiefs are unequivocal in their assessment that this is an unprecedentedly severe fire season,” Howden said.

S. China Morning Post

'Unprecedented,' says former NSW fire commissioner

Already in mid-November, NSW's former fire and rescue commissioner Greg Mullins attributed Australia's looming disaster to a "warming, drying climate," which he added had also caused "unprecedented" fire storms in California — where he had just visited fire chiefs.

"The numbers don't lie, and the science is clear," Mullins told the Sydney Morning Herald. "Fires are burning in places and at intensities never before experienced."

DW

"Now 15 emergency warning fires. Unprecedented."

Tweet from Rob Rogers, Deputy Commissioner - Executive Director Operations NSW Rural Fire Service.

"Essentially this declaration is the first time these powers have been used because we face unprecedented risk to life and property in coming days," Mr Andrews said.

"The fires are unprecedented in their size, their scale and the risk they pose to so many people right across affected communities.

Daniel Andrews, Victorian Premier. ABC

Even if it were unprecedented (I haven't checked) surely property damage is just as much a reflection of increased rural populations and a desire to live close to forests.

Yes, you'd have to adjust for that, (though I believe the trend is actually for rural population decline) and other factors, such as fire fighting resources and improved techniques.

To me the welcome down trend in fatalities speaks of improved communications and evacuation processes. 1,000 people rescued by the Navy off Mallacoota beach for example. (Unprecedented in peacetime, btw).

Well, I've never seen any of those claims made, and it's interesting that the Guardian, which is usually so quick to embed links to justify its claims (even if the articles linked to are of dubious quality) doesn't do so this time, nor does it offer up any sources for this dubious reporting.

The ISIS Bushfire Jihad thing was on 4chan, the High Speed Rail was on Facebook, Facebook users are also blaming lasers rather than lightning..

Buzzfeed are on the case here and here for example.

Missing link fixed.

Well, I've never seen any of those claims made, and it's interesting that the Guardian, which is usually so quick to embed links to justify its claims (even if the articles linked to are of dubious quality) doesn't do so this time, nor does it offer up any sources for this dubious reporting.

The ISIS Bushfire Jihad thing was on 4chan, the High Speed Rail was on Facebook, Facebook users are also blaming lasers rather than lightning..

Buzzfeed are on the case here and here for example.

Phil Clarke, so no reliable sources able to defend the accumulation of fuel load as demanded by Climate Scientists and the Green Blob.

I suppose I could make up a defence to that made up accusation if you like.... :-)

Jan 12, 2020 at 3:28 PM Phil Clarke
Lying is part of Climate Science

As Peter Ridd has been found innocent and JCU guilty of supporting liars and fraudsters, previous articles confirm how much support JCU had from those who did not understand honesty in science:

https://www.desmogblog.com/2018/05/21/climate-science-deniers-around-globe-rally-around-sacked-scientist-peter-ridd
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/aug/28/great-barrier-reef-expert-panel-says-peter-ridd-misrepresenting-science

Here's what the judge actually ruled:-

1. Some have thought that this trial was about freedom of speech and intellectual freedom. Others have thought that this trial was about the manner in which academics should conduct themselves. Some observers may have thought that this trial was about the use of non-offensive words when promulgating scientific ideas. Media reports have considered that this trial was about silencing persons with controversial or unpopular views.

2. Though many of those issues were canvased and discussed throughout the hearing of this matter, this trial was about none of the above. Rather, this trial was purely and simply about the proper construction of a clause in an Enterprise Agreement. 

(My bold).

http://www7.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/cases/cth/FCCA/2019/997.html

http://joannenova.com.au/2020/01/busted-reef-fish-arent-bothered-by-acidification-scientific-fraud-ok-at-james-cook-uni/

"This is the “replication crisis” Peter Ridd warned us about. He was fired from JCU in 2018 after stating that work from JCU’s coral reef centre (ARCCoE) was not trustworthy. He also helped expose manipulated photos of reef fish. Obviously this latest reef research shows he was right to be concerned about quality assurance at JCU. One JCU researcher, Oona Lönnstedt, had already been caught fabricating data in Sweden, and yet JCU “investigated” and sacked Ridd faster than it investigated her suspicious lionfish shots. Indeed, two years on, JCU has not even officially appointed the committee to investigate her potentially fraudulent work. It seems JCU would rather employ untrustworthy scientists than honest ones."

Jan 12, 2020 at 5:12 PM Radical Rodent

It is time that the English speaking World imposed a new "Unprecedented" tax to help subsidise oil exploration. This tax would be for the unnecessary and downright deceitful use of the word "Unprecedented" by those on taxpayer dependent salaries. This would include Climate Scientists, politicians and broadcasters amongst others, and should be based on a month's salary per use.

12 million plus acres burned this year (2-1-2020) 

No, it's circa 26 million acres. You may be confusing acres with hectare?

The number(s) for 1974 and the Northern Territories should be treated with caution.. Also, when comparing areas burned it is important to separate out savanna burning, which regularly consumes about 40m hectare annually and is rarely catastrophic, from forest burns. It seems this is not being done systematically is some lists. Wiki editors are discussing this:

Every year there are large fires in the tropical savanna in NT, WA, Qld. These should be kept distinct from forest fire data. In 1969, for example, there was also a 45 M ha fire in NT. This is rightly not in the Wiki table. The seasonal fires average 40 M ha/year, so there would be an entry for every year.

In 1974 there was a wet winter, with growth that in dry areas burnt off next summer. This enhanced the savanna fires. It also made unusual fires in the arid west of NSW. This was the only newsworthy event; some houses were destroyed and people killed. But still, it was not a forest fire.

Wiki's peculiar treatment of 1974/5 can be traced to an accident where an entry in the Commonwealth Yearbook 1995 cited the 1974/5 savanna fires just as an example of the discrepancy in size. This got picked up and preserved in various official docs, and so to Wiki. Other years did not.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Bushfires_in_Australia#1974-75_NT_fires

The point regarding "unprecedented" damage to property is an interesting one. It is probably tree that more people now live in areas likely to be affected by bushfires than in the past. I've tried to do some digging, but have struggled to come up with anything definite.

The population of Australia has grown fairly rapidly in recent decades.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demography_of_Australia

This suggests its current population is 25, 581,000. This compares to just over 14M in 1976 and just over 13M in 1971, so the population has broadly doubled in about the last 50 years.

Against that, Australia is a largely urban country (paradoxically for a country with so much land) in terms of where its population lives. It also seems that over roughly the last 10 years the proportion of the population living in rural areas has declined from just over 15% to just under 14%:

https://tradingeconomics.com/australia/rural-population-percent-of-total-population-wb-data.html

Against that, over the 10 years from 2006 to 2016, the population as a whole increased by more than 3.5M people, so a change in proportions living in rural/urban areas of just over 1% probably means that although the trend to urbanisation continues, the rural population will actually have increased in recent years, and quite substantially at that.

This is the most recent info I found from the Australian government:

https://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departments/Parliamentary_Library/pubs/BriefingBook43p/regionalpopulation

It isn't up to date, but it doesn't imply a reduction in rural populations.

"Of the ten areas recording the largest declines in population:

five are in western New South Wales
none had a population loss over the five year period of more than 800, and
at June 2009 their populations ranged between 3000 and 31 000.
Other data show that the ten most rapidly growing areas between 2004 and 2009 recorded average annual growth rates of between 85 and 17 per cent. However five of these are in the newer but relatively small suburbs of the ACT and NT and none currently exceed 5000 people. Four of the other ‘top ten’ fastest expanding regions are in south-east Qld with rates between 27 and 17 per cent, and two already exceed 15 000 people.

For areas with at least 1000 people, the ten fastest dwindling populations are all small communities. All except one had less than 2000 people in June 2009. Four of these were in inland WA north and east of Perth and recorded average annual rates of population decrease of between 3 and 2 per cent. Also in this group are Coober Pedy and the surrounding Far North of South Australia where rates of population decrease were about 2.5 per cent. Three regions in central and southern Qld declined at just under 2 per cent annually. Nationally, a further eight areas with between 500 and 1000 people experienced average annual rates of decline of 1.5 per cent or more."

Not sure how much that contributes to the discussion, but it's better than discussing things without much concrete information (on either side). ;-)

Phil, thanks for the Buzzfeed link (if anyone takes comments on Facebook seriously, they want their heads examining). I note that Buzzfeed provide evidence that many claims on both sides of the arguments are false, but that this one is true:

"A local Facebook page for the ABC in Gippsland posted about a group of a dozen residents of Nowa Nowa, a small town in Australia’s southeast, protesting a planned burn of about 900 acres on Sept. 5, 2019.

Claims circulating on social media that the ABC deleted this post are true. An ABC spokesperson told BuzzFeed News that the post was deleted because “we are unable to properly moderate comments on the Facebook post at this time”."