Bush fires

Discussion in 'Human Science' started by Xelasnave.1947, Nov 17, 2019.

  1. Xelasnave.1947 Valued Senior Member

    All for my benefit I expect certainly not to establish your belief of how facts may suit your proposition, give me a break.

    You can't correct my view of the 1994 fires which is what I covered..my opinion from what I personally experienced.. what I saw and what I experienced is the issue and again why is it so difficult to accept that what I offer is what I personally experienced...why? I expect for no other reason than my real experience just does not meet the picture you want to paint ...

    If you are clever enough to work that out you should be clever enough to work out why...

    I am an easy going chap and all I can suggest is to review your overall approach and ask why you have found me somewhat not so.

    You came in interested in only one issue now you claim to be more or less pissed off because I won't roll over.

    And really there is no need.

    What were you thinking re 1994 fires?
    All you could focus upon was my observation that it was worse for me and somehow got stuck on that forgetting presumably I am talking about my personal experience .the facts you present have absolutely no bearing on my personal experience..try thinking about that for a while.

    I am saying what I experienced in that one (1994) was much worse than the recent one and rather than accept that is my personal experience you think somehow you can diminish what I experienced with facts unrelated to my personal experience.

    Now if you want the worst fire in my life experience it was the fire of 2002 where I lost everything I (we had) had that was stored in a shed while I was fixing the house.

    It burnt the same region as the recent one but it burnt faster covering in one afternoon what the recent one covered in a week ... Now that is a fact and although it won't fit your determination that the fires are getting worse that fact will remain.

    Bells it was really scarry.

    First we evacuated the house and went to the end of our road with the rest of the folk in the road meeting at the fire shed, well the fire caught up in about an hour so we all left and waited at the river but the fire caught up in about an hour and a half, so we set off for the town in convoy, I was the last and my truck stopped no one noticed and I was left alone, but a tourist came by and saved me..the truck did not burn but everything at home did.
    The recent fire took two days to travel the same distance the 2002 covered in little more than an hour and a half.That is a fact.
    Check the facts sure but just remember I am talking about my personal experience which has absolutely nothing to do with any overall observation other than your obsession with climate change...I am suggesting your obsession is clouding your judgement. I was perhaps too polite in my reply where you discovered I was being flippant because you see I had at that point given up on you and in retrospect I should have taken more time to handle your post a little differently.

    I notice on the news there is a team investigating the start of fires so I am somewhat happy about that. Fifty seem suspicious...fifty...and that is a problem .
    Fifty ! Think about that in the context of my op.

    And you mention water bombers. There should be more and they should be on the runway ready to take off and bomb any fire at all ... Any smoke bomb it..it is afterall a total fire ban.

    I remember fifty years ago we had a client who wanted to fight a fine for lighting a cigarette during a total fire ban.
    I wonder if authorities are that tuff these days...
    Last edited: Nov 20, 2019
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  3. Xelasnave.1947 Valued Senior Member

    Why not?
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  5. billvon Valued Senior Member

    Word games noted. I will leave you to them.
    Truck Captain Stumpy likes this.
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  7. Bells Staff Member

    And facts be damned.. You experienced 1994 and others are experiencing even worse now.

    By sheer numbers alone, the 1994 fires pale in comparison to what we are currently experiencing.

    Perhaps you should broaden your views and understand that it's not just about you...? You know, just saying..

    The biggest issue with the 1994 fires is how long they lasted for. The biggest issue with what we are currently experiencing is that it is more ferocious, is burning hotter, it has burnt twice as much in much less time, it is spreading faster, is burning in rainforests because everything is so dry (even the soil is dry in these parts), is being fed by weather conditions that started in winter and made things worse, and there is no end in sight as they are expected to burn well into next year - due to lack of foreseeable rainfall.. Which means we will lose more houses, more bushland, more rainforests and possibly more lives.

    The two are not comparable. Just as no one would compare the current bushfire crisis to the horror that befell Victoria in 2009. Because that fire is in a league of horror of its own and also because the conditions, where the fires burnt, is vastly different to what we are experiencing.

    Do you understand now? You are essentially comparing apples to oranges.

    You are offended that I am daring to look at it from a standpoint that tackling bushfires means and should entail a broad approach, as opposed to yours which is 'people are starting fires, this is bad, what can we do?'...

    I'll put it this way. The crux of your argument has been 'setting fires bad and it is worse than climate change'..

    Ermm okay..?


    I've asked you this before.. And?

    You've stated the obvious, Alex. What now?

    What do you propose be done about it? In QLD, 10 of the fires were lit by kids.. What do you propose be done to those kids? Should the laws be changed to deal with kids who start fires? Should laws be changed for accidental fire starters? How about the guy who did an illegal burnoff on his property to protect his marijuana crop, that went on to become one of the worst fires on the north coast of NSW? What do you propose?

    No. I came in to address an issue I notice you have been repeating a few times across this site. To the one, whining that people are commenting about climate change in the event of catastrophic fires that is catastrophic because of climate change is ironic all on its own.. To the other, you seem to want to pick this fight - given you've repeated the same argument about climate change in at least 3 threads that I have seen so far from you.. It really bothers you, doesn't it?

    But there's one thing that you keep ignoring and what the victims of these fires have been saying.. Starting fires is a major issue. But the conditions make that even worse. And the reason rainforests are burning is because the climate in these parts has changed so drastically. No one is suggesting that the people who start this are not a problem. Everyone who is not a climate change denialist recognises and understands why climate change has made this much worse than it would otherwise be.

    Understand now?

    I am not diminishing what you experienced and went through. Far from it.

    You are talking about your personal experience in your own personal vicinity. I am looking at the entire state. Twice as many houses burnt, twice as many acres burnt and destroyed, more people killed in less time than the 1994 fires. You cannot compare it because the conditions we are experiencing, the areas these fires are burning is in rainforests and sub-tropical rainforests that normally do not burn like they are burning now. Do you understand what I am saying? You are comparing apples to oranges. I'll put it this way. We lost everything, nearly lost our lives in a horror storm that destroyed our house while we were still in it. If there's a cyclone, I'm not going to rock up and go, 'well, what I experienced was much worse, because I lost my house in a few minutes while your house took several hours to be destroyed'.. Apples and oranges. Completely different events that cannot be compared. Your experiences are horrific and awful and I am very sorry you went through that. Just as what we are experiencing up here is horrific in its own very different way.

    These fires are the worst we have seen, and the reason for that is because it's burning in places that should never be burning this ferociously and for this long. I'll give you an example of how bad it is for us up here.. A few days ago, a bushfire started in land that is usually swampland. As in it's a marine reserve and designated as swamp marshland. It's not a gum forest. And there was a bushfire in it. And it wasn't the only one. Another fire, on the same day, in another swampy area less than 20 minutes away.. And that one has been on and off for the past week.

    Well, it used to be swampland. It's bone dry now. Even the soil is dry.

    The same goes for these rainforests. Normally a fire hits the rainforests in these parts, it doesn't penetrate too deeply, because everything is damp, the soil itself is damp, slowing the fire down. Look at Mackay and the rainforests up there that are currently burning.. Climate change meant worse cyclones, which destroyed a lot of the canopy trees, which means the undergrowth dried out and/or died.. No rain for a very long time, even though it's the tropics, they have had no rain.. The bushfires up there are burning in these rainforests.

    So you want to only focus on people who start them. Okay. And? Even if they did not start these fires, even one fire would be devastating - be it lit naturally by dry lightning or accidentally - it would burn just as bad and would be just as problematic.

    If we don't address what's making these fires so bad, then you can get rid of every ability to start fires and bushfires would still be just as bad, because everything here is like a tinderbox now. The soil is bone dry and water resistant. In rainforests.

    And that's why people are focusing on climate change.
    Over policing and draconian laws is not a fix.
  8. Xelasnave.1947 Valued Senior Member

    But I don't ignore climate change you see. I take it as a given.
    I have been into it longer than anyone I know.
    My beef re 11000 scientists is that it's a lie and will be used against climate change and guess what it is a lie and as I said is already damaging the cause.

    Why do you have a problem with calling out liars?

    I dislike the term denier but that does not mean I am in that side.

    My whole life is about conserving energy and trees and based in the belief we each need to do things at a personal level.

    I raise the observation that humans should address energy waste which is obvious but no somehow that is failing to address the problem ... Seems the very place to start in my view...you know while we transition let's do something today...

    I have said all this before so tell me Bells why is it I find I have to repeat myself.

    You are wrong there.
    I opened this thread to discuss the starting of fires ...you started the fight and insist on ignoring that starting fires was the issue in the op.

    I tell you my experience and you don't want to hear about it so you insult me.

    I won't roll over so you talk at me like an angry school teacher.

    You seem to be the aggressive one.

    You strawman me and come in swinging and yelling that it is I that wants a fight???

    Well that is how you make me feel.

    You dismiss my experience as if my opinion does not matter. You just want a fight it seems. You have built a strawman and stuffed me in it...and while you bash away cry that I am bent on starting a fight...perhaps you should read all I say..particularly why I don't like lies and how it damages credibility, and perhaps note by my actions, solar etc, where I stand. It is you who is itching for a fight.

    Of course I do, but your approach Bells is like a school teacher..it is as if you expect me to repeat what you have said to demonstrate that I have heard you, perhaps I should write out one hundred times "climate change is real"...and yet you ignore what I say and you fail to respect my personal experience saying in effect what has happened to me is of no consequence and worse still focus on only the bits you feel are relevant to your hobby horse failing for example to recognise my personal efforts and rather than recognising that lieing does damage to the cause think I am evil for pointing out a problem that needs to be fixed...why do you think folk burr up re climate change when they find out they have been lied to...I guess you just don't understand my point but can't resist jumping up for a fight.

    No but I did want to address that issue hence the op.
    I agree I think I will start a thread so we can discuss that aspect.

    Why do you respond this way to the law?

    What is over policing?

    When he law says something the police are bound to enforce the law...they can not under police or over police.

    Why do you think a total fire ban is draconian? It would seem given current conditions that is a very odd view you present.

  9. sculptor Valued Senior Member

    . ...
  10. Truck Captain Stumpy The Right Honourable Reverend Truck Captain Valued Senior Member

    where, exactly, is this all at, and where can people entering into the conversation read the exchange to comprehend the references you're making regarding the 11,000 scientists and lies, etc?

    Would you mind linking this information, please?
    It keeps popping up ...

    thanks in advance

    answering IMHO: this really depends on the person, their perspectives, their political ideological beliefs (as well as a few other things)... some people advocate for draconian laws that they want because it's forwarding their own cause but resent similar draconian laws that restrict them. They justify their perspective with pieces of information that they consider are more authoritarian or factual on the subject while dismissing any opposition evidence simply because [insert justification here]. This is especially true when the subject is a hot-button topic and elicits emotion (abortion, gun control, prejudice, humour, politics).

    actually, this is wrong. A police officer is oath bound to enforce the law but there are conditions where you can choose to either enforce, warn or ignore a violation, which is where under- and over-policing comes in. This is best demonstrated by your conversation starter example of being able to arrest someone if they have a lighter with your lighter-ban. You can see it in real life with speeding tickets, seat-belt violations, cell phone use while driving and similar violations as well. This can also apply duing an investigation where you can circumstantially prove a crime [y] was committed but have stronger evidence for a different crime [x], so you can choose to prosecute for crime [x] while reserving the crime [y] evidence for a potential later prosecution, giving time for the collection of (more or better) evidence.
  11. Xelasnave.1947 Valued Senior Member

    Truck Captain Stumpy likes this.
  12. Truck Captain Stumpy The Right Honourable Reverend Truck Captain Valued Senior Member

  13. Xelasnave.1947 Valued Senior Member

    There are many levels to this but I will go along with your observation.
    Truck Captain Stumpy likes this.
  14. RainbowSingularity Valued Senior Member


    your soo see through

    Freudian slip ?
    your over all creative writing to sell propoganda to cowboy hicks to get them to vote republican is quite low brow.
    keeping it simple allows you to avoid being caught out in your lies.
    you seem to be playing that card.

    "im just a simple guy who loves my republican simple guys who all think logically and life is entitlest privilege is just hard work and you always get more........ simple n plane white bread for tea"

    sorry doesn't sell to me

    but good luck with that

    your desire to turn discussion into a political parrot speech is getting a bit boring.

    your pretend personal experience comes from 1 single company ?
    where you were a manager ?
    for most of the 25 years ?
    oh but excuses are good when your white n rich
    rich peoples problems etc etc ...
    splain away ... "oh but its real i was there!"
    ive lost interest
    Last edited: Nov 20, 2019
  15. Xelasnave.1947 Valued Senior Member

    Not trying to see who can come up with the best/worst fire but this one was terrible.
    It took my Aunties house, she was 74, and her response was to hop in her 4 cylinder Torana and travel all around Australia she had worked hard to build her place and lossing it really effected her.

  16. billvon Valued Senior Member

    Nope. What didn't you understand there?
    You are a funny guy!
    I don't like republicans in general. Certainly not nowadays. Do you?
    6 companies over the years. An aerospace company, a power supply company, a communications company, a drone company, a solar charger company and a substance-detection company.
    In several places.
    Most of the examples I gave were from people who were not white and rich.
    So stop replying, bury your head in the sand and just keep hating your boss. Problem solved!
  17. RainbowSingularity Valued Senior Member

    humour is a good thing.

    since you wanted to dispute my example of leadership normalcy types...
    dynamic of the cuff, on the run productive leadership thinking
    will you be posting any soon ?
    no hurry

    please feel free to use operational language to avoid corporate advertising speak to make things more concise.

    operationally speaking...
    an example of leaders acting intellectually, off the cuff, in a dynamic manner to a sudden situation that is not pre planned.
    that adds value and creates more productivity than standardly expected
    and provides benefits to brand and community.

    if i want a happy meal with a story i can go to mc donalds
  18. billvon Valued Senior Member

    Examples of what, exactly? I gave you some examples of good managers. Do you want examples of "off the cuff, on the run, productive leadership thinking" now?
    Now it's all that? So let's see. You want an example of leadership that is:
    -off the cuff (i.e. with no planning)
    -on the run (presumably rapid)
    -adds value
    -creates more productivity than standardly (sic) expected
    -provides benefits to brand and community

    OK. I don't think there's one example that will show all that. But I have seen dialogues quite often that go like this:

    Employee - how do I do X?
    Manager - I'm not sure. Here's a list of resources for you. Here's a guy you can talk to. Here's the online course. And you know about our tuition reimbursement program.
    Employee (later) - I'm still not 100% sure. What should I do?
    Manager - go with your best judgment and I will back you up.

    This specific example was used three or four times with a specific engineer who was brilliant but always unsure of herself.
  19. Truck Captain Stumpy The Right Honourable Reverend Truck Captain Valued Senior Member

    I don't know... I've seen a large number of managers like this in Law Enforcement, Fire Departments and Emergency Medical services all over the world.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    If ol' Rainbow is willing to travel to Connecticut I'll set up a meet and greet with a Fire Chief up there I know so he can see an "example of leaders acting intellectually, off the cuff, in a dynamic manner to a sudden situation that is not pre planned. that adds value and creates more productivity than standardly expected and provides benefits to brand and community" [sic]

    [edit: I excluded the military only because you find a broader spectrum of managers unless you want to constrain the search to emergency services]
  20. Xelasnave.1947 Valued Senior Member

    Managers are promoted from the work force generally. Because they have the ability to follow the plan.
    Sometimes the manager is the same guy who provides the capital ...most times not.
    And to generalise is just wrong.
    I have been a manager and frankly I was wonderful and I suspect most managers would be so ... You don't get to be a manager unless you can well...manage.
    Wimpish generalisations are just... ..wimpish generalisation infected with a hatred born in misunderstanding and ignorance reflecting an inadequacy that the owner over compensates for by being a dick...losers lash out in ignorance but being a loser just keep losing.
  21. Bells Staff Member

    You tell me. You declared they are fake and they are not.

    Perhaps you should ask yourself that question.

    And this has nothing to do with the subject at hand.

    That's nice.

    You are the one who brought up climate change and repeated the same statement as you did in another thread in regards to people who are concerned about climate change.

    My point to you was and remains - if you ignore or discount climate change, then even going on and on about the bleeding obvious will still not alleviate the issue of "bushfires". Any fire we have will be worse, because of climate change. Whether it's deliberately lit or lit by nature or accidentally lit.

    Was more in accordance to suggestions we ban lighters or make them as hard to get as guns, for example. That is what I think is draconian.

    You are someone involved in the legal field.. You don't know what over policing is?
  22. Xelasnave.1947 Valued Senior Member

    I agree.
  23. Xelasnave.1947 Valued Senior Member

    I lost one fire pump due to flooding...how things change.

Share This Page