Trump has blamed State governors for fires on federal land for 3 1/2 years+ but has done nothing to solve the problems on land he controls.

The failure has been in the making longer than that, try since the industrial revolution. I live in a rain forest starting it's third decade of drought. It's a major climate shift. The science is settled, not in question for decades.

No, he needs to listen to the professional forest managers already there instead of ignoring them because he knows more about everything than anyone. See his recent meeting with California's forest managers for examples of his stupidity, his plan is just like for Covid, do nothing, blame others, deny there's a problem, claim it will just go away, blame others again, pat himself on the back for a job perfectly done.

His idea, rake the forests, is just dumb and impossible. Only a complete moron believes you can rake up 33 million acres of mountainous forests, including removing all forest litter which is necessary habitat for many forest creatures and downed trees like redwoods that are useless as lumber. Only a stupid ignoramus believes that's a solution.

Let's say it costs about $1000 per acre, a vast underestimation, that's an extra $330 billion per year for raking California's forests alone. Is Trump offering to fund that, or is he cutting funding instead? (Hint, he cut funding)

Much of the mismanagement is from fighting fires. For decades the plan was don't let any fire burn, that's left forests with 2-5 times the fuel it would naturally have. The last decade that's been realised and when possible fires are allowed to burn. It's too little too late.

Trump's idea of draining the swamp has been plugging the outlets and pumping millions of gallons of sewage into it. That means removing career civil servants and selling positions to friends and contributors with no experience and massive conflicts of interests. Trump's is the most criminal administration ever, with more convictions than any other including Nixon. Politics are incredibly more swampy than before Trump, and the state of the union is crumbling and poised to dissolve into another civil war.

🤦‍♂️

My point was that everything he uses on a day to day basis is a product of civilization. Has he given up some aspects of civilization, the internet, cell phones, TV? Sure but people in the middle of cities do the same. Water supply grid? I don't live on the water supply grid. Living off of rainwater isn't easy in some places? What has that got to do with this video. The man lives in a temperate rain forest surrounded by glacier topped mountains. So everything he needs or requires is more difficult to get or to get to. That doesn't mean that he's living some kind of noble "off the grid life style"

We need manure to feed the world. Anything else will pollute earth and water even more.
Rain forest is also destroyed to make room for "bio" fuel plantations and other monocultures.
Maybe we find a way to collect sheep farts and use them, like here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LqL4DRZ2EkA

@coolhund @JustSaying

Not just CO2 production. Also use of fresh water resources. Polluted water from feces collection (and yes, conventional agriculture is polluting water with chemical runoff.) In places, the cutting down of rain forest to create areas for beef production. The huge overhang of methane over New Zealand from all the farting sheep (that would be part of the CO2 mentioned. But I can't pass up the opportunity to actually type "farting sheep.")

"Beautiful creatures" are in danger. Not just these.

And I do eat meat. And drive my car. And am a hypocrite.

The simplest counter argument to your catastrophic prediction is the stability of the paleo-temperature record. If there has been a methane 'time-bomb' just sitting there waiting to be set off anytime the temperature got an extra degree warmer then temperatures wouldn't be stable as they have been over the last millenia. The gradual shifts from ice-age to global rain forests wouldn't have been gradual at all, and likely wouldn't have been reversible either.

The more likely answer is our understanding of climate functions and things like just how much methane is likely to escape in a certain time frame is incomplete.

I'm impressed you have been there. Fraser Island is an incredible natural wonder, worlds largest sand island, has accessible fresh water, lovely white beaches, very tall sand dunes, even rain forests. I hope it gets preserved forever.

Check out some photos:
https://www.google.com/search?q=fraser+island&tbm=isch&tbo=u

Want want want want want......WANT!

I really wish they would make a version with a roof so it could be used in the rain. I'm just nuts enough to want one as a daily driver, but since I live in what's technically a 'rain forest' (one where it's not raining much lately, but that's besides the point) a car with no roof or windows doesn't cut it.

Well, that's bad and is only getting worse, but they are FAR from alone.
For instance, while the reservoir they showed looked to be about 40-50ft below full, I recently drove over Lake Shasta in N California, and it looks to be 200-250ft low! This is also due to 'climate change', which is turning what has historically been a wet rain forest into a desert.
We are already having water wars in our state. They WILL become violent eventually. Our dwindling sources of water in the North are being diverted to the far south...and somehow they pay less for our water than WE do! WTF?!?
And we are quickly draining aquifers nation wide, making it harder and harder to drill a well IF you are allowed to.
And insanely, where fresh water is not becoming scarce, we seem to be intentionally contaminating it so it's unusable, both above and below ground.
Just don't fool yourselves into thinking this is only a third world problem...it is not. First worlders use MORE water than those in the third world.

Very funny. Its always "scientists" who bring that up and who first brought that up. Do you even read those reports? Scientists and their studies (more like very flawed simulations) are always quoted. First they said (Mojib Latif and others) that there wont be any hard winters anymore due to AGW. After it became evident that those utterings were utter bullshit, they said that hard winters will be very often due to AGW (PIK and others) and after we got a normal winter again, they said that this is typical for AGW too (PIK and others again).
If it wasnt for them, this hype wouldnt be nearly where it is.

They just say what is convenient and what fits into their agenda. Its all about money and personal security. Nothing more nothing less, they just think its something different due to their indoctrination. AGW has become a huge self-sustaining (thanks to those corrupt "scientists") economic booster where insurances, scientists, politicians and many many companies (even oil companies - yes, check the global warming lobby) and their lobbies are benefiting from. Its simply not possible to talk about it objectively anymore. And if you try, people like you will come up and defend it like a religion, and prove this fact very quickly. Just look at "bio" fuels. Its a HUGE part of economy already, but it simply isnt eco-friendly at all. Instead people are starving because mono cultures are used instead of different plants for food, so much water is used for producing bio fuels that people have to suffer. The rain forest and others are cleared to be able to put more mono cultures up. Companies like Monsanto are becoming more and more powerful because of it and studies that bio fuels are bad for lots of engines are being censored or simply not funded since even car manufacturers profit from it when engines blow up sooner.

More extreme weather? Bullshit aswell. Thats simply not true, as quite a few (ignored by the "consensus") studies have shown. Its just the reports about even the tiniest things that have bloated up in the globalized and interconnected world of today and untold truths that are fooling you and of course the agendas that need to be kept upright with even the tiniest happenings that fit into it. Next time when you see a report, ask yourself if something like that would have been mentioned globally 20 or 30 years ago.

Take the flood in Pakistan for example. Oh, it was soooo bad and soooo AGW caused, oh the horror, we will all see the same thing and worse in our own countries if we continue to sin in the face of our go-- err scientists!
No, it wasnt. It was as normal as all the very common floods there before. It just wasnt mentioned that since the 70s Pakistans population has tripled and the vast majority of those people have settled down on the fertile lands around the (straightened!!!) rivers.

If that wasnt enough, people like you even completely ignore the fact, even if all their claims were true, that warm periods were ALWAYS much much better for this planet and its inhabitants than cold ones and colder ones than we have right now (we live in an ice age after all) were always bad, if not catastrophic.

And because of that fact I wont be that stupid and waste my time here with more replies, since you guys have made it very obvious already where you are coming from.

Just one little thing to think about for you guys (yeah I still have hope, though its prolly not very realistic), since the rest of my posts will get marginalized by your ignorance anyway:
Just because most scientists are pro-AGW doesnt prove crap. It was always only very few if not only a single scientist who tried to prove many other scientists wrong in their assumptions and most scientists were wrong and very arrogant, especially if they formed something like a society. But like before, there are thankfully still a few of them left who treat science as science and not as their religion or extension of their ego.

Good, solid, clap of thunder causes the vapour to massively condense.

Anyone who's lived on the prairies during thunderstorm season has seen this. This just was caught on film.

I also live up here in the Sub-Arctic Rain Forest, and while I too have yet to see it happen locally, I can't tell you how many times I've had a sticky, humid but dry, hot day with monster thunderheads only to have a 10 minute deluge shortly after a decent, loud thunder clap.

It's like shaking a small tree after a rain.

It's all down to personal preference. If you want to be greeted by the Sasquatch down there that's your prerogative. Personally, I go for the clean shaved/waxed around the important area, and neatly trimmed for a "map of Tasmania" effect above. If she doesn't want to do that, I'm cool. Just don't let it become a rain forest, please.

Also, this doesn't just apply to women. Lads, it doesn't hurt to keep it groomed down there (well, it could if you try it drunk).

When I have a great idea, I also happen to discuss it with Sting of the Rain Forest, who then demands to know why I haven't done it. Sting is the ultimate anti-procrastinator.

like solar powered landmine boas?

>> ^bmacs27:

Good idea, but it's sort of specific to deserts unfortunately. If only there was something like this for the rain forest.

Good idea, but it's sort of specific to deserts unfortunately. If only there was something like this for the rain forest.

I don't know if we'll ever get to an "I told you so" on the anthropogenic cause, but within 10 years or so I think even the hardest of hard core Fox News watchers will have to stop denying that climate change is happening. At that point they will still deny that giant multi-billion dollar corporations and massive farming of the rain forests have anything to do with it, they'll stick to their "it is a natural" cycle, feedback loops be damned, and continue saying "follow the money" when they point to who is saying it is man made, while ignoring their own advice and following the money to who is saying it isn't man made. Even if they do believe it man made, they'll say it won't matter as a large number of the deniers are evangelicals who say Jesus is coming again soon and he'll whisk them away before it gets too bad. I know because I've heard them say this very line, they use this line to say it doesn't matter who somebody votes for as well, though they still follow Fox and vote as the Republican right tells them to vote... Anyhow I think part of the problem is a lack of basic understanding of science, not understanding what a theory is and how it comes about, and the fact it got politicized (and unfortunately for those of us who accept the scientific facts, Gore may have done more harm than good by being a bit more alarmist in some areas and mis-representing some facts for the deniers to point to and say see the whole thing is false). I used to be a skeptic, but then I followed the research trail back on both sides, saw who was saying what exactly, and it became clear that we are screwed...

TLDR: They may come to accept climate change is happening, but still won't accept that humans have much if anything to do with it.

>> ^alcom:

Superstorm Sandy is another example of society's march past the greenhouse tipping-point like the lemmings that we are. I laid it our in arguments in this video, where I was vehemently opposed by doubt-fuelled, fear monger, climate change deniers:
http://videosift.com/video/Climate-Change-Latest-science-update
We're so close to that "I told you so" moment. By that time unfortunately, the methane feedback loop will probably be well under way.