kurtster wrote:
 
 

The shift in the earth's magnetic field has nothing to do with global warming. Nor does any change in its field strength. There is no physical mechanism where the level of change would cause the level of climate effect. And if it did, it would be in addition to the anthropogenic change.

Burning hydrocarbons releases CO2. The increase in CO2 in the atmosphere has been measured for decades and is consistent with the amount of CO2 released from burning. CO2 has a known, measured effect on trapping solar radiation and leads to an increase in temperature consistent with theory. Until, you come up with a mechanism that would explain how CO2 could not be causing global warming, you are just blowing smoke out your butt.

 

I know people who hunt feral pigs but I don't think they trust the meat enough to eat them. Goat tacos sound good.

 ScottFromWyoming wrote:
 
It's a challenge to keep up with the needed fuel suppression burns. With climate change, the planned burn season is pretty much continuous with the unplanned burn season here. That, and people need to accept the risk of a burn getting out of control. And boy, there is nothing like having your house burn to turn someone anti-government. 

Feral goats are a pain. 

I know people who hunt feral pigs but I don't think they trust the meat enough to eat them. Goat tacos sound good.

 ScottFromWyoming wrote:
 
It's a challenge to keep up with the needed fuel suppression burns. With climate change, the planned burn season is pretty much continuous with the unplanned burn season here. That, and people need to accept the risk of a burn getting out of control. And boy, there is nothing like having your house burn to turn someone anti-government. 

Feral goats are a pain. 

 miamizsun wrote:
 
I think they're starting to get it. We get it here; we hate the smoke but love the fire (most times). Those "sensitive areas" need goats. And lots of 'em.

California’s Must Choose Between Uncontrolled or Controlled Fires

Florida had over 2 million acres of prescribed (aka controlled) burns in 2017 and California had 87,000 acres of controlled burns in 2018.

Georgia has 1.25 million acres of controlled burns and Alabama had 944,000 acres of controlled burns.

California had 1.9 million acres of forests burned from wildfires in 2018 against the 87,000 acres burned in controlled fires.


UC Berkeley fire ecologist Brandon Collins brought me here to show me the consequence of decades of fire suppression combined with climate change. This forest would usually burn nine times over the course of 100 years, but no fire had blazed here since at least 1908. “Without fire, you’re going to have these dense stands no matter what,” Collins says.
In 2014, the King Fire hit this unnaturally overgrown forest, leaping into the canopy and racing across a vast landscape. Limited patches of high-intensity fire would be natural in these forests. But in 47 percent of the 97,717 acres burned in the King Fire, the blaze was so hot that it killed nearly all of the trees.

About 18.6 million trees died in 2018, mainly the result of dehydration and beetle infestation, according to new estimates from the U.S. Forest Service. That pushes the total number of dead since 2010, shortly before the five-year drought began, to 147 million.


California needs to burn 2-5 million acres a year. This should be controlled burns instead of wildfires.

This level of burning needs to be near the historic levels. Almost the entire 33 million acres of forests needs to be burned every 10-20 years. More sensitive areas near populations need to be thinned and managed without fire.