US Presidential Election 2020 (& Politics) :)

vandyman

Getting comfortable
Joined
Jul 24, 2018
Messages
189
Reaction score
320
Location
US
It is possible to have both
1) Arsonists
2) Extremely dry conditions due to climate changes

The data on the extreme dry conditions right now in the Western USA is clear, the entire region is a massive tinder box.
I can't buy into the climate change. I have been around a long time too see what is really going on.
Living in SNJ, I remember in the mid 90s there was a drought so bad, that they banned car washing for the summer and there were fires everywhere. Now for the past few years years it has been raining a lot. The water tables have been average for many years now.
 

eeeeesh

BIT Beta Team
Joined
Jan 5, 2017
Messages
209
Reaction score
268
It is possible to have both
1) Arsonists
2) Extremely dry conditions due to climate changes

The data on the extreme dry conditions right now in the Western USA is clear, the entire region is a massive tinder box.
You seemed to overlook the elephant in the room

3) Decades of environmental mismanagement that has created a tinderbox of unharvested timber, dead trees, and thick underbrush

Wildfires Caused By Bad Environmental Policy
 

Armed&Overclocked

Pulling my weight
Joined
Dec 18, 2019
Messages
95
Reaction score
132
Location
Virginia
so reading through that forbes article it points out that underbrush and fallen trees appear to not get cleaned up regularly, which can lead to added fuel. But he also appears to be saying that trees being allowed to just grow is also an issue, and i have a problem with that logic. Trees being allowed to grow isn't a fire hazard, and is better for the environment overall.

with all this said forrest fires have been regularly occurring on the west coast for centuries, long before the clovis indians moved in even. Its why that one species of tree (cant remember the name) doesnt have its seeds open until it has gone through a fire. The fires are nature's way of cleaning up the build up.

Since we arent allowing the fires to occur, there needs to be a concerted effort to remove the fuel for said fires. i dont know if california still practices controlled burns, but if not they really need to in my opinion. I do wonder what the professional opinion on this topic is though. Not some media pundit, but someone with the forrestry service that has experience in these matters.
 

Parley

Known around here
Joined
Dec 19, 2015
Messages
2,130
Reaction score
2,894
Location
Cypress, California
I can't buy into the climate change. I have been around a long time too see what is really going on.
Living in SNJ, I remember in the mid 90s there was a drought so bad, that they banned car washing for the summer and there were fires everywhere. Now for the past few years years it has been raining a lot. The water tables have been average for many years now.
I can buy into naturally occurring climate change. Right now we are coming out of the last Ice Age which ended around 12,000 years ago. Everything is cyclical including the Sun.
 

eeeeesh

BIT Beta Team
Joined
Jan 5, 2017
Messages
209
Reaction score
268
so reading through that forbes article it points out that underbrush and fallen trees appear to not get cleaned up regularly, which can lead to added fuel. But he also appears to be saying that trees being allowed to just grow is also an issue, and i have a problem with that logic. Trees being allowed to grow isn't a fire hazard, and is better for the environment overall.

with all this said forrest fires have been regularly occurring on the west coast for centuries, long before the clovis indians moved in even. Its why that one species of tree (cant remember the name) doesnt have its seeds open until it has gone through a fire. The fires are nature's way of cleaning up the build up.

Since we arent allowing the fires to occur, there needs to be a concerted effort to remove the fuel for said fires. i dont know if california still practices controlled burns, but if not they really need to in my opinion. I do wonder what the professional opinion on this topic is though. Not some media pundit, but someone with the forrestry service that has experience in these matters.
Some of the worst fires in California where from downed power lines
"Pacific Gas & Electric Co. power lines have caused more than 1,500 California wildfires in the past six years, including the deadliest blaze in the state's history"

Is it really rocket science to keep foliage away from high energy power lines?


But yet you a have a number of articles like this one:
SoCal Edison Is Cutting Your Trees And There's Not Much You Can Do About It
 

DsineR

Pulling my weight
Joined
Mar 25, 2018
Messages
198
Reaction score
184
Location
CA
Can't argue with science - 1st time ever Scientific American backs a US Presidential Candidate - Biden.
Siting a few of Trumps BS quotes: 'climate change is not real', 'it will get cooler soon', 'there will be enough tests for everyone', 'this is like the flu', cut billions from healthcare, well documented rejection of science, etc.
Build a wall, that will protect us :thumbdown:
 

BobRegnar

Getting comfortable
Joined
Aug 1, 2018
Messages
131
Reaction score
547
Location
Pineland
Siting a few of Trumps BS quotes: ... 'this is like the flu',
The Dems and Fauci started this one, along with, "Trump is just fear mongering", "come to Chinatown and celebrate" and "it won't disrupt your normal life."

It is hilarious when the professional liars start calling out others as if they resent being mislead by politcal word twisting.
 

eeeeesh

BIT Beta Team
Joined
Jan 5, 2017
Messages
209
Reaction score
268
Can't argue with science - 1st time ever Scientific American backs a US Presidential Candidate - Biden.
Siting a few of Trumps BS quotes: 'climate change is not real', 'it will get cooler soon', 'there will be enough tests for everyone', 'this is like the flu', cut billions from healthcare, well documented rejection of science, etc.
Build a wall, that will protect us :thumbdown:
Are they actually backing Biden or is it a Harris Administration Together With Joe Biden?
What about all those BLM and similar 'peaceful protests' where no one wore masks or practiced social distancing?
Why did Obama buy a $12 million dollar waterfront property if the water level is rising?
And speaking of former Vice Presidents, wasn't it Al Gore that predicted in 2009 that the Polar Ice Cap would be gone in 5 to 7 years?
 
Last edited:

beepsilver

Getting comfortable
Joined
Mar 9, 2014
Messages
660
Reaction score
445
Location
Nebraska
Can't argue with science - 1st time ever Scientific American backs a US Presidential Candidate - Biden.
Siting a few of Trumps BS quotes: 'climate change is not real', 'it will get cooler soon', 'there will be enough tests for everyone', 'this is like the flu', cut billions from healthcare, well documented rejection of science, etc.
Build a wall, that will protect us :thumbdown:
Oh good grief, not another one of these guys.
 

BobRegnar

Getting comfortable
Joined
Aug 1, 2018
Messages
131
Reaction score
547
Location
Pineland

eeeeesh

BIT Beta Team
Joined
Jan 5, 2017
Messages
209
Reaction score
268

Armed&Overclocked

Pulling my weight
Joined
Dec 18, 2019
Messages
95
Reaction score
132
Location
Virginia
Some of the worst fires in California where from downed power lines
"Pacific Gas & Electric Co. power lines have caused more than 1,500 California wildfires in the past six years, including the deadliest blaze in the state's history"

Is it really rocket science to keep foliage away from high energy power lines?


But yet you a have a number of articles like this one:
SoCal Edison Is Cutting Your Trees And There's Not Much You Can Do About It
i dont live in Cali, but here in Virginia Dominion energy will regularly inspect trees near power lines and trim them back. i dont know if its a company policy or a state requirement, but its a regular occurrence as falling limbs are a major contributor to power outages, especially during a hurricane.
 

beepsilver

Getting comfortable
Joined
Mar 9, 2014
Messages
660
Reaction score
445
Location
Nebraska
Science is fact - not political, not racist. Read the article.
That's not an article, that's an opinion, which is not science. Do a google search of the politicization of science and you should be done reading by the end of the year. Just because you hate Trump doesn't mean all the "opinion science" you find online is fact. What about the scientists that refute the liberal talking points related to science? Is it invalid? Why? Because it doesn't support your beliefs or because it corroborates Trump? You owe yourself some intellectual integrity.
 
Top