Deaths from climate change

[AnalogPackrat]

Here’s other ideas of what these fires in Canada might be from. Should we consider these too?:
https://www.rollingstone.com/cultur...wildfires-conspiracy-theories-1234766037/amp/

Association fallacy. Strawman. There is ample evidence that 20 to 30 or more of the fires were started by arsonists.

 

[user 41968]

Do I need to post "Content Warnings" for snowflakes?

 

[JohnRoberts]

I don't need the snowflake warning, I don't watch stuff like that.

JR

 

[user 41968]

Arson Driven Wildfires Being Used As Catylyst For Canadian FEMA

Content warning: This is a Greg Reese report. Suitable for underage children but not some adults.



“I look to a day when people will not be judged by the source of their information, but by its factuality.”

 

[user 37518]

What are you talking about? My whole objection started with InfoWars. To tell me anything like “facts are a bitch” and peddle a big-player of InfoWars at the same time is absolutely ludicrous.

You are using a strawman, by publishing that UFO thing, which is completely out of topic by the way. And an ad hominem attack at InfoWars as if that discredits all the rest of the sources, so yes, your arguments are irrelevant.

 

[Recording Engineer]

Keep digging your hole deeper.

My hole continues to remain the same. This still applies:

It certainly is possible specific fires in Canada were started by arsonists, just like anywhere else; be them political-extremists from either side, just plain mentally crazed, or any other type of arsonist.

My argument never denied that happening, even though I haven’t heard about that from anywhere but here. That’s nothing new. There’s plenty I haven’t heard about every day! Of course arsons, people being lone idiots, and whole groups of people of various sizes being idiots happens all the time and I never necessarily hear about it.

This also still applies:

However, to sit here and say it’s the main cause of the fire problems in Canada is just being disingenuous without at least a couple commonly-known journalistic-sources that may lean one way or the other

Still haven’t seen anything.

 

[Recording Engineer]

You are using a strawman, by publishing that UFO thing, which is completely out of topic by the way. And an ad hominem attack at InfoWars as if that discredits all the rest of the sources, so yes, your arguments are irrelevant.

I never once discredited any of his other sources. You can check that again if you’d like.

How is the UFO thing or any other theory in that article published June 7th off-topic? We should trust InfoWars’ theories more than other wacko theories? That was the point I was making.

I continue to wait to be shown that the current Canadian fire problem is mostly from a whole bunch of climate-change-pushing idiot arsonists. I will gladly concede… But that’ll never happen with the now continued source of an InfoWars guy. I can’t take that seriously. I can’t believe anyone can, but know some do. Keep giving them full-trusting credit and support I suppose.

 

[user 37518]

I never once discredited any of his other sources. You can check that again if you’d like.

How is the UFO thing or any other theory in that article published June 7th off-topic?

We should trust InfoWars’ theories more than other wacko theories?

I continue to wait to be shown that the current Canadian fire problem is mostly from a whole bunch of climate-change-pushing idiot arsonists. I will gladly concede… But that’ll never happen with the now continued source of an InfoWars guy.

That UFO thing is from Rolling Stone magazine, if you wanted to refute InfoWars, why did you use a story from Rolling Stone? You provided an irrelevant example. As AnalogPackrat said, you are doing an association fallacy, strawman, and ad hominem. You seem to constantly try to refute arguments of which, either you have no idea what you are talking about (and this has been stated by yourself, not my words), or your argumentation seems to be predicated on logical fallacies.

 

[JohnRoberts]

In my judgement the wild fires problem in Canada are jointly ignited by natural origin (lightning) and some undisciplined campers. Arson may be a lesser factor. Wildfires have always happened and probably always will. Forest management properly done can minimize the harm from wild fires by controlled burns and proper logging practices. Canada has a history of inadequate forest mismanagement on public lands. So does CA and we may see the fires there start up again after the dampness from an unusually rainy spring dries out (while el nino may bring more rain to socal).

It looks like we are officially in another "el nino" ocean warming southern oscillation cycle... This ocean warming cycle oscillates back and forth (search el nino and la nina). This not climate change.

JR

 

[Recording Engineer]

That UFO thing is from Rolling Stone magazine, if you wanted to refute InfoWars, why did you use a story from Rolling Stone? You provided an irrelevant example. As AnalogPackrat said, you are doing an association fallacy, strawman, and ad hominem. You seem to constantly try to refute arguments of which, either you have no idea what you are talking about (and this has been stated by yourself, not my words), or your argumentation seems to be predicated on logical fallacies.

We should trust InfoWars’ theories more than other wacko theories? That was the point I was making. Keep giving all of them full-trusting credit and support I suppose.

 

[Recording Engineer]

In my judgement the wild fires problem in Canada are jointly ignited by natural origin (lightning) and some undisciplined campers. Arson may be a lesser factor. Wildfires have always happened and probably always will. Forest management properly done can minimize the harm from wild fires by controlled burns and proper logging practices. Canada has a history of inadequate forest mismanagement on public lands. So does CA and we may see the fires there start up again after the dampness from an unusually rainy spring dries out (while el nino may bring more rain to socal).

It looks like we are officially in another "el nino" ocean warming southern oscillation cycle... This ocean warming cycle oscillates back and forth (search el nino and la nina). This not climate change.

JR

Ah… A voice of reason, like a breath of fresh air.

 

[user 41968]

Satellite images show that the fires in southern Quebec started almost-simultaneously, hundreds of miles apart, under clear sunny skies. I'm very familiar with dry lightning but there were also no recorded lightning strikes at that time. I've never experienced dry lightning under clear skies but whatever.

Can any of you geniuses explain the likelihood that this was caused by campers at the exact same hour or near-simultaneous lightning strikes hundreds of miles apart under clear skies? What are the odds?

 

[Matador]

It was probably Fauci who started all those fires, right?

 

[user 37518]

It was probably Fauci who started all those fires, right?

No, but it is definitely you who wants to start one in this thread with that pointless provocation.

 

[user 37518]

We should trust InfoWars’ theories more than other wacko theories? That was the point I was making. Keep giving all of them full-trusting credit and support I suppose.

Do not deviate, the topic is the Canadian fires and the fact that you keep trying to use an irrelevant argument such as InfoWars to disprove them.

 

[Matador]

No, but it is definitely you who wants to start one in this thread with that pointless provocation.

#mindreading

 

[user 37518]

#mindreading

What you did in your previous post, and in this one, is a clear provocation; one doesn't have to read minds.

 

[Matador]

What you did in your previous post, and in this one, is a clear provocation; one doesn't have to read minds.

Ok fine. Fauci likely wasn't involved...

Much more likely it was started by a diesel generator on one of those infernal wind turbines....

 

[user 37518]

Ok fine. Fauci likely wasn't involved...

Much more likely it was started by a diesel generator on one of those infernal wind turbines....

"When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the losers." – Socrates (attributed to..., but still true...)

 

[user 37518]

A Tesla denier!

 

[Recording Engineer]

Do not deviate, the topic is the Canadian fires and the fact that you keep trying to use an irrelevant argument such as InfoWars to disprove them.

No no no no no. An InfoWars guy has been brought up twice now, by 57sputnik, about the Canadian fires. How much more relevant can I get? Are we reading the same thread?

 

[user 37518]

No no no no no. An InfoWars guy has been brought up twice now, by 57sputnik, about the Canadian fires. How much more relevant can I get? Are we reading the same thread?

InfoWars was not quoted in that last post. If he did in the past for something elese, it is irrelevant for this post, you don't seem to get that.

 

[Recording Engineer]

InfoWars was not quoted in that last post. If he did in the past for something elese, it is irrelevant for this post, you don't seem to get that.

You’re right. You and I keep talking about it because you keep bizarrely grilling me on it. He and I haven’t continued talking on it. I’ve been responding to you, not him. Honestly, this is getting weird.

 

[user 37518]

You’re right. You and I keep talking about it because you keep bizarrely grilling me on it. He and I haven’t. I’ve been responding to you, not him. Honestly, this is getting weird.

Go ahead, respond to him then....

 

[Recording Engineer]

Satellite images show that the fires in southern Quebec started almost-simultaneously, hundreds of miles apart, under clear sunny skies. I'm very familiar with dry lightning but there were also no recorded lightning strikes at that time. I've never experienced dry lightning under clear skies but whatever.

Can any of you geniuses explain the likelihood that this was caused by campers at the exact same hour or near-simultaneous lightning strikes hundreds of miles apart under clear skies? What are the odds?

Satellite images? What satellite images? From where did you see them? Share? From where did you find out that all these fires started within one hour of each other and from hundreds of miles away from each other, and all under clear skies? Share?

 

[user 41968]

Satellite images? What satellite images? From where did you see them? Share? From where did you find out that all these fires started within one hour of each other and from hundreds of miles away from each other, and all under clear skies? Share?

I did. Where in the hell were you?
It was in the videos you refuse to look at and available from multiple sources beyond those.
I'm not going to extract a gif of it in isolation to placate you.
Please don't embarrass yourself any further.

 

[Recording Engineer]

I did. Where in the hell were you?
It was in the videos you refuse to look at and available from multiple sources beyond those.
I'm not going to extract a gif of it in isolation to placate you.
Please don't embarrass yourself any further.

So the InfoWars guy. Surprise!

Exactly what I expected. 3Xs a charm, user 37518. He was repeating the InfoWars guy. I hope this ends your bizarre ranting of me being obsessed with talking about InfoWars; as if that’s not what he was talking about. Keep entertaining InfoWars stuff as legit. I never will and will never understand why anyone would. Talk about people embarrassing themselves…

 

[user 41968]

You seem unwilling or unable to grasp that Greg Reese was citing the source above.

I hope this ends your bizarre ranting of me being obsessed with talking about InfoWars

No, its your behavior that seems off. It's starting to appear somewhat pathetic.
Please watch the video above and comment, but if you chose not to that's fine. If the later choice please do yourself and all of us a favor and STFU.

 

[Matador]

What you did in your previous post, and in this one, is a clear provocation; one doesn't have to read minds.

If 'clear provocation' is now the bar, then half of Brewery posts will be disqualified.