1974 Fires Burned 15% Of Australia

At the peak of the global cooling scare in 1974, Australian fires burned eleven times as much acreage as this year’s fires.

Australian bushfires: Why 2019 fire season is different from others

Darwin was destroyed by Cyclone Tracy that year.

Northeast Australia turned into an inland sea due to record rainfall and flooding.

28 Jan 1974, Page 12 – The Cincinnati Enquirer at Newspapers.com

The US had its worst tornado outbreak on record.

List of tornadoes in the 1974 Super Outbreak – Wikipedia

Phoenix had their worst heatwave.

30 Jun 1974, Page 31 – Arizona Republic at Newspapers.com

TIME Magazine Archive Article — Another Ice Age? — Jun. 24, 1974

29 Jan 1974, 5 – The Guardian at Newspapers.com

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

9 Responses to 1974 Fires Burned 15% Of Australia

  1. Aussie says:

    Tony
    Thanks for your post here. Its interesting that the press continue to scream “unprecedented” whenever the fires are mentioned. I posted against a ridiculous article from a Sydney Uni professor on LinkedIn that was full of inaccuracy and parroting of the usual “climate change” falsehoods about the latest fires being the worst ever. Should have had this one to add , as I knew about the 1974 fires but not the extent.

    I was wondering if you could look at this dud post from Mallen Baker who you have found deficient in the past. Would appreciate others comments too.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WVc-Y-mJ_uY&feature=youtu.be

    Starts off seeming to stick to the science but suddenly veers off, and starts saying that Co2 in the upper atmosphere is causing all the heating up. He shows two papers, but no real detail, claiming that a study looked up in the atmosphere on an annual basis at the same spot and miraculously the radiation coming back was in lock step with the rising CO2.

    Would appreciate your thoughts but to me this is dud science in the extreme. The atmosphere when clear is highly variable with small changes in humidity and particulates significantly altering radiation penetration and reflecting back. And I seriously doubt the relationship his pet paper purports…

    And the upper atmosphere , say above 10km is less than 20% of atmospheric volume. Nearly all the green house effect will occur below this level?

    Keep up the great work!

  2. D Boss says:

    Aussie:

    Don’t bother with “Mallen” – he spouts gibberish.

    Here is a most interesting, non formal paper:

    https://watervaporandwarming.blogspot.com/2019/11/abstract-during-time-periodwhen-water.html

    Shows water vapor [increase] is most of the reason for minor increase in global temps. And it IS human caused. Most of it from irrigation!

    His conclusion: “Humanity’s contribution to planet warming is from increased atmospheric water vapor resulting nearly all from increased irrigation. The increased CO2 has negligible effect on warming. Climate Sensitivity, the temperature increase from doubling CO2, is not significantly different from zero.”

    Cheers

  3. Thomas Heath says:

    So Mickey Mann is currently on a six month “sabbatical” Down Under. I recall him saying “we’ve lost Australia – for now.” when the government was elected.

    I have to wonder if Mickey Mann is leading the arsonist brigade, as well as coordinating the “media” from his vacation spot.

    • Robertv says:

      You just wonder if this crook is capable of doing such a thing?

      • Disillusioned says:

        I wouldn’t put anything past him. He sold his soul for tree rings and disappeared the MWP and LIA. Mama Gaia is not cooperating and skeptics are getting louder calling this bluff.

        These catastrophists make up temps on the computer to make it all fit, and call ordinary fluctuations, which have occurred many times in the past, “unprecedented.” There is no telling to what depths they will go in order to keep the deluded public believing this fraud.

  4. Gerald Machnee says:

    I was in Australia in March, 1974 after the rains flooded the east. As we approached Brisbane the bus driver pointed to the grass on the electric wires above us and said that is where the water was. I had to fly to Alice Springs as the road west had not been repaired yet. Around Alice Springs there were flowers growing that had not been seen in a while. On the way to Ayers Rock we drove through water on the road (actually trail lower than the surface). Overnight at Alice Springs it rained enough that there was several inches of water on the ground. We took off our shoes and walked in the water from the bar to the bus.

    • Rosco says:

      And despite all the rain and 21 cyclones in NE Australia during the 1974/75 season the inland still managed to burn 10 times the area of the current fires.

      When I said this on another site some idiot sprouted that the 74/75 fires were in areas where no-one lived but that was only because the areas burning today were either flooded or too wet then and are burning now because the tropical monsoon hasn’t descended into Australia’s north yet.

      The current fires are all about green policies. I was an Environmental Health Officer for more than 21 years and I know how these activists infiltrate local government as elected Councillors and infiltrate state governments as public servants.

      Delayed wet season, green policies preventing hazard reduction and arsonists have a lot to answer for.

      At least the backlash against the greens has shut them up for the time being – none of them would have the courage to venture into fire ravaged places at present for fear they’d be strung up.

      • WXcycles says:

        There were a total of 36 cyclones from the beginning of the summer, at the end of 1972, until early may 1976. Lots of major cyclones during it too.

  5. Jeremy McManus says:

    Goodness, what a lot of work you put into this website. I just wonder though whether it’s really worth all the effort when commenters like, say, Potholer54 on Youtube so often show (or do I mean ‘suggests’?) you to be completely wrong nearly all the time? I suppose you just have the ability to brush that sort of fact-based BS aside, do you? Amazing.

    Anyway, Mr Potholer has uploaded a new video today, and he’s at it again in it quoting from all those bloody peer -reviewed research papers – he seems to have thousands of the things – that always appear to suggest you never know what you’re talking about. It’s incredible: Sometimes one can come away from his videos with the feeling that you’re actually hopelessly out of your depth in matters climatic and that you don’t know one end of a graph from the other. Why can’t he find at least one paper showing you to be right, once in a while, that’s what I’d like to know. Perhaps you can, no?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *