Discussion > Criticisms and Defence of Australia's BoM
Mark, I still maintain that there will be very few who can appreciate the difference between the two estimates of the areas burnt. Unless you have a source of comparison, like Wales or the Isle of Wight, the figures quoted might as well be 50% or more inaccurate. It doesn't matter whether this season's burn is the most extensive or not. The present burn is extensive and devastating, as were burns in the past. It seems clear that there is no trend and, even if it were to be proven that climate change has affected the aerial extent of burns, the effect would be miniscule and easily outweighed by other factors.
Can you recall, not so long ago, that many British heathlands were burning and the increased areas affected were being blamed on climate change. " the more things change, the more they stay the same"
Easy to say, difficult to do. I fear I'm no more successful at it than anyone else.
Jan 13, 2020 at 2:09 PM Mark Hodgson
Climate Science starts with the assumption that everything bad is down to man-made CO2 and presumes guilt on this assumption. Science doesn't work like that, and Law is not judged on that assumption either (despite Climate Science's efforts to redefine Law)
My limited experience with my California garden is that mature eucalyptus trees are super-efficient at stripping soils of their contained moisture and so prevent growth of other plants beneath their canopies. Some species literally bury other plants beneath a cover of unrotted leaf and bark debris, preventing access of the saplings to light.
Very good points, Mr Hodgson, and I do try to ameliorate what confirmation bias I am subject to (with probably the same effect as most others – though there are exceptions of people who will not – or, possibly, cannot – accept anything other than full confirmation who I have encountered in the big, wide world of the interweb thingy).
Mr Clarke, when will you accept that “climate change” has nothing, whatsoever, to do with Australian bush fires – even the IPCC admits that there is no event that can categorically be blamed on climate change; what change there might have been in the climate of the eucalypt forest really has had no effect on what happens there, almost every single year; the climate of that area is one that favours these events to happen. My link to Jo Nova was NOT just the initial reference to her “banging on” about rainfall, or recent lack of (which is a significant factor, surely, in the conditions favourable for fire), but to her general blog, which has recently had numerous articles about these fires (understandably, as she is Australian, so has a certain, more local interest in them), reporting and investigating the many aspects of it which are being discussed. As I have stated, she does back up many of her claims with numerous links, not just relying upon linking to a few graphs of dubious origin. Anyway, you continue to do exactly as I predicted, so, thank you for upholding my prescience at or close to 💯%.
Like I said, Minty…. hostile… 🤬
Some species literally bury other plants beneath a cover of unrotted leaf and bark debris,
Jan 13, 2020 at 3:21 PM AK
Ah! They shed bark, not just leaves! They are very well adapted to aid and survive fire, then multiply thereafter
"Can you recall, not so long ago, that many British heathlands were burning and the increased areas affected were being blamed on climate change. " the more things change, the more they stay the same"
Jan 13, 2020 at 3:08 PM AK"
Burning grouse moors was standard practice to rejuvenate the Heather, not to cook the grouse.
I do remember the genuine fear of fire during 1976, before the end of the summer term, because the school was 100-200yds from Forestry Commission densely planted conifers. The fuel load was there, consisting of broken twigs and lower branches accumulated over time (20?years since planting) and very dry bracken.
Many years later I understood that an emergency plan had been sketched out consisting of men with chainsaws and the hedging and trees between school and wood.
So average temperature goes up by circa 1C but this has no effect whatsoever on the severity of bushfires?
That's um, a minority viewpoint, putting it politely.
A 2007 study projected that under the amount of warming we've seen, by 2020 the number of days with very Fire Danger Risk of 'Very High' would increase by 10-30% and days with FDR of 'extreme' by 15-65%.
The Garnaut report referenced the study and stated:
fire seasons will start earlier, end slightly later, and generally be more intense"This effect increases over time, but should be directly observable by 2020."
The official Aussie fire season starts in October. The 2019/2020 fires started a month early. It is risky to draw conclusions from a single season, however observations are in line with Lucas's projections, with consequences only too obvious.
"Australia fires: Misleading maps and pictures go viral"
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-trending-51020564#
"Maps and pictures of Australia's unprecedented bushfires have spread widely on social media.
Users are posting them to raise awareness of the devastating fires, but some of the viral maps are misleading, spreading disinformation about the crisis."
So average temperature goes up by circa 1C but this has no effect whatsoever on the severity of bushfires?What average temperatures, and over what period? (Also, but I won’t harp on too much about it, this is half of the original 2°C you mentioned, earlier (Jan 13, 2020 at 10:52 AM), from “the turn of the century” – though which century is not obvious – which can only make me wonder: why?)
A 2007 study projected that under the amount of warming we've seen, by 2020 the number of days with very Fire Danger Risk of 'Very High' would increase by 10-30% and days with FDR of 'extreme' by 15-65%.And what if these days of “high temperatures” also happen to coincide with days of wet weather, which is what is forecast with the activities of the Indian Ocean Madden-Julian Oscillation?
As for your Garnaut report, it would appear that not everyone is as enamoured with it as you are. Never mind – another post you will dismiss because… well… because.
Anyhoo… here is some raw temperature data for you to consider.
What average temperatures, and over what period? (Also, but I won’t harp on too much about it, this is half of the original 2°C you mentioned, earlier (Jan 13, 2020 at 10:52 AM), from “the turn of the century” – though which century is not obvious – which can only make me wonder: why?)
The 2C is the amount by which 2019 temperatures were higher relative to 1990 (if memory serves), however that includes some natural variability, which will even out over time, according to the models around 1C of the overall long term warming is attributable to AGW.
And what if these days of “high temperatures” also happen to coincide with days of wet weather, which is what is forecast with the activities of the Indian Ocean Madden-Julian Oscillation?
Fire Danger Risk is a measure of, um the risk of fire. It is based on the McArthur forest fire danger index (usually FFDI), it is a multi factor index, the factors include fuel dryness, wind speed, temperature, humidity and rainfall.
My second link was to a study showing how FFDI has trended since 1950.
Long-term changes in FFDI values are apparent, with
substantial increases in recent years in the frequency of
dangerous fire weather conditions particularly during
spring and summer in southern Australia. It was found
that these increases in southern Australia are pre-
dominantly due to an increased frequency of occurrence
of the higher FFDI values in recent decades, including
numerous examples since the year 2000 that are higher
than anything recorded previously
As for your Garnaut report, it would appear that not everyone is as enamoured with it as you are. Never mind – another post you will dismiss because… well… because.
No need. A post by Jo Nova discussing the Daily Mail is pretty much self-dismissing ;-)
This is getting embarrassing, Mr Clarke. I have always appreciated a challenge, but with you, this is getting too much like shooting fish in a barrel. I shall leave you in your little world.
Bye! Enjoy Joanne ;-)
The Green Blob conspired to increase the accumulated Fire Load, knowing that the risk of fire was increased, because Garnaut had predicted it.
Phil Clarke supplies the evidence.
A little world of ad hominems and not much else – certainly not science. You must be very lonely.
"Climate change: Australia fires will be 'normal' in warmer world
By Matt McGrath
Environment correspondent"
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-51094919
"UK scientists say the recent fires in Australia are a taste of what the world will experience as temperatures rise. Professor Richard Betts from the Met Office Hadley Centre said we are "seeing a sign of what would be normal conditions under a future warming world of 3C". While natural weather patterns have driven recent fires, researchers said it's "common sense" that human-induced heating is playing a role. Matt McGrath is the BBC's Environment correspondent."
Did I read that right? "...natural weather patterns have driven recent fires...". You wouldn't think so from the BBC coverage of the events.
"Blue Mountains resident fought for permission to hazard reduction burn for two and a half years"
https://www.9news.com.au/national/nsw-fires-blue-mountains-resident-fought-to-back-burn-property-for-two-years/3a406031-5c14-47f9-b5aa-722872fae145?fbclid=IwAR2R2oIWu01sbasnZrHCS8Q80G_F8uPk85b7XMOA5Y3e0lQpbtWGnPWg8jk
Climate change: Australia fires will be 'normal' in warmer worldA bit of a laugh, when they are already normal in this world…
Jan 14, 2020 at 9:08 AM Mark Hodgson
Richard Betts has posted AND engaged in debate at Bishop Hill. Not recently though.
I think there is a degree of common sense being introduced, as opposed to alarmism, but ask any country bumpkin anywhere in the world, dry plants burn better than wet ones. Piling up years of dead plants, waiting for them to dry and be set alight is not rocket science, Girl Guides and Boy Scouts have been taught it for 100 years, indigenous people for rather longer.
Climate Scientists claim to have predictive skill???!!!
A "very active early bushfire season" ended fire mitigation operations early in 2018, says Queensland Fire and Emergency Services Minister Craig Crawford.
More than 350 planned hazard reduction burns were not completed in the years from 2016 to 2019, Mr Crawford said in response to a written parliamentary question.
Jan 14, 2020 at 9:14 AM Mark Hodgson"
No explanations, but I think some Local Authority paper records may become vulnerable to spontaneous combustion, along with catastrophic failure of hard drives.
https://www.thegwpf.com/i-cheered-when-the-bushfire-came/
Some criticism of the Australian Green Blob
http://joannenova.com.au/2020/01/climate-change-is-the-excuse-to-hide-an-inferno-of-incompetence-heads-must-roll-for-the-billion-dollar-bushfire-mistakes/
Ah, Joanne again.
The pool is shrinking.
Great link, Phil (not). I think you'll have to try harder - by something like actually responding to her arguments.
Anyhoo… there are other sites available with plenty of references to back the narrative up, which dispute your claims;
That's just Jo Nova banging on about rainfall, carefully saying nothing about temperatures. I've said nothing about rainfall, which indeed shows no significant trend in Australia.