Climate scientists have determined that the fires in Greece this summer were caused by the burning of fossil fuels, rather than the hundreds of arsonists who started the fires.
Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Google Search
-
Recent Posts
- Climate Attribution In Greece
- “Brown: ’50 days to save world'”
- The Catastrophic Influence of Bovine Methane Emissions on Extraterrestrial Climate Patterns
- Posting On X
- Seventeen Years Of Fun
- The Importance Of Good Tools
- Temperature Shifts At Blue Hill, MA
- CO2²
- Time Of Observation Bias
- Climate Scamming For Profit
- Climate Scamming For Profit
- Back To The Future
- “records going back to 1961”
- Analyzing Rainfall At Asheville
- Historical Weather Analysis With Visitech
- “American Summers Are Starting to Feel Like Winter”
- Joker And Midnight Toker
- Cheering Crowds
- Understanding Flood Mechanisms
- Extreme Weather
- 70C At Lisbon
- Grok Defending The Climate Scam
- “Earlier Than Usual”
- Perfect Correlation
- Elon’s Hockey Stick
Recent Comments
- John Francis on “Brown: ’50 days to save world'”
- conrad ziefle on Climate Attribution In Greece
- arn on Climate Attribution In Greece
- conrad ziefle on Climate Attribution In Greece
- Peter Carroll on Climate Attribution In Greece
- Gordon Vigurs on Climate Attribution In Greece
- Bob G on Climate Attribution In Greece
- Gerald Machnee on Climate Attribution In Greece
- Jack the Insider on Climate Attribution In Greece
- Jack the Insider on Climate Attribution In Greece
Nothing unusual to start fires in Greece to geomodify the landscape and free up space for new buildings and resorts – therefore their soft on arson culture.
Besides this cultural arson there is the fairly new political arson (about 200 arsonists were caught during the last great fires in Australia – the same kind of dogooder people who get paid to protest for anything pro -green,woke,EU etc) to show the peasants how dangerous AGW really is.
But the most interesting thing is: How is it even possible to determine a 10 fold increase within such a short timeframe?
The data simply is not there.
And all reaiable longterm data we have from the USA show such a massive decrease in wildfires,
that the Biden proxy regime had to hide the massive decrease of 80 %+ of wildfires during the last 100 years on governmental websites and only showed data that goes back to the 1980ies (actually 90%, but deliberate missmanagement and Newsomesque policies have lead to an increase during the last 2 decades)
And how can a lousy (even if we pretend it is real) increase of 1.3 degrees increasethe number of wildfires by 1000% ?
This would also mean that any region like greece , that is 1.3 degrees hotter
gets 10* more of such historical wildfires – and that’s not true.
And does this mean that a 1.3 degree decrease during the ice age scare reduced wildfires by 90%?
I also highly doubt that there is a scientific way to prove that the fires were 22%
more intense as result of(never forget to mention it to imply guilt) HUMAN CAUSED climate change.
The masses of gum trees (eucalypts) in Greece is our gift from Aussie to them. Especially during summer.
And here I thought that Eucalyptus was as greece as owls and
Sirtaki 🙂
I’d guess that those trees have caused more wildfire problems
than any warming can do.
Maybe importing firecrackers from China would have been a better idea.
But maybe your claim is wrong.
Trees from Australia would grow upside down and look like a Baobab with a dropbear on top.
We have a lot of those trees in California, and particularly, in my neighborhood park. I fear walking near them in even moderate wind. And wind and rain together is particularly bad, and they are huge, even a branch is the size of a normal tree.
In Aus they are called widow makers as their branches can snap off and fall without warning, with or without fire burning.
Eucalyptus trees are to be found all over Israel, courtesy of Australia. But even with mortar, rocket and deliberate arson attacks from Hamas, Israel hasn’t suffered “more intense” fires because of climate change.
In a way, they are right about attributing the fires to the use of fossil fuels. Without using them, the arsonists would not be alive to set the fires. Or they would have to work 18 hours a day to keep from starving and have no time to play the criminal.
Good point.
wasn’t there a novel called Fahrenheit 451… named after what temperature wood, and paper has to reach before it spontaneously combusts? 451 is a lot higher than 80 or 90 or the 100° that we see on some summer days, (actually seldom of them in the upper Midwest over the past 30 years). Just a few weeks ago we saw a story on how at least 30 Canadian fires were started by arson. just wondering if Al Gore has an alibi for those days? lol
“In addition to automotive fluids, another potential fuel in post-collision vehicle fires is grass, leaves, or other vegetation. Studies of hot surface ignition of dried vegetation have found that ignition depends on the type of vegetation, surface temperature, duration of contact, and ambient conditions such as temperature and wind speed.
Ignition can occur at surface temperatures as low as 300 °C, if the vegetation is in contact with the surface for 10 minutes or longer. At surface temperatures of 400 °C, ignition can occur in 3 minutes, and at surface temperatures of 500 °C, ignition can occur in a few seconds”
“Surface” refers to the surfaces of a vehicle exhaust system, particularly catalytic converters
https://www.sae.org/publications/technical-papers/content/2017-01-1354/
I just googled what 300 C is in Fahrenheit. 572.
I’ve seen it happen to a work car at a mine site in Australia. Brand new Ford sedan went slightly off track got bogged in loose sent and went up like a roman candle from the dry grass igniting underneath. The whole car was completely destroyed. And no i was not the driver lol.
^loose sand
In Fahrenheit 451 all books were burned because there was a chance somebody might find them offensive. Now, where have I heard that justification for suppressing information before?
I didn’t realize that. WOW, fiction predicts fact.
The book describes a bread and circus society, where the inane prattle is eventually interrupted by a nuclear attack.
Apparently climate change has arrived. it’s getting cooler. https://www.zerohedge.com/weather/latest-stories-freezing-climate-crisis-hysteria
Apparently, the methods and models of the World Weather Attribute are peer reviewed by other questionable researchers, but not actually validated against real world data.
WWA’s work is adolescent. They would fail middle school science fair.
They should stick to making model volcanoes.
They cannot prove it with science so they invented “Attribution”. They have done it with floods as well.
The “peer reviewed” is a joke as well. Mann’s friends did “peer review”. It was properly dubbed “pal review”.
By the way, I have asked people for a video of “climate change” starting a fire.
Still waiting…………………………………
it’s called arson. lol. not a chance of that working in late summer 2025 in South Central Minnesota. everything is green and the crops could not be better. expect record crop yields in South Central Minnesota and Northern Iowa.
I’m watching that Amanda Knox series on Hulu. Sounds like experts are like the Italian Justice System: Blame everything on the defenseless scapegoat, in this case, climate change. Meanwhile, the Greek Government has arrested 300 potential murderers. Fire is a horrible way to die. Any arsonist found guilty should face the death penalty.
Why do they call them climate scientists? They are simply graduates from a multitude of climate schools, developed by universities to capitalize on the demand to be a social justice warrior which was created in the publicly run Marxist style propaganda camps known as the public school systems. I wonder what portion of their training involves rigorous science training and what portion centers on acceptance of political rhetoric as truth.
How does one measure the “intensity” of a bushfire, or bushfires? Particularly ones that happened over two hundred years ago, in “pre-industrial” times?
This is on a par with the comment about Australia’s bushfires being “hotter”, because of climate change.
There isn’t an increase in temperature, only in the stupidity of the authors of this BS.
I suppose thermodynamically, if the fuel were a bit hotter to start with, then the total energy in the combustion would be a nano fraction more than if it were cold to start with. I say in theory, maybe, because I’m not about to try to calculate it, but it would be extremely tiny, if it were. Then there is the issue of how hot the weather was that day and on the day of other fires in the past, and I imagine that no one knows.
The bushfires should be less intense compared to 100 years ago.
Less bushes as result of better forest management.
Less bushes as result of less bushes as result of roads,buildings etc.
Less bushes as result of global warming.
More warming,more droughts,less rain = less vegetation = less burnable stuff.
Deserts don’t burn that much.
Yet for some reason
such things absolutely don’t matter.
Not even those that are part of their narrative.
These people who write these stories remind me of psychopathic religious fanatics. Everything they see has religious meaning and they turn it into religion affirming care.