Trump Declares in EO that CO2 Is Not Pollution..

[Schwarzer Ritter]

Originally Posted by rooster

This reply is pure MAGA script and is incredibly naive and simplistic. Volcanic eruptions and wildfires not exacerbated by climate change are unavoidable and generally tolerated by the CO2 cycle in the human era. And while some plants benefit from increased CO2 levels, the effect is not often good. Yields of some food crops can be reduced, and damage from heat stress and the risks of increases in pests and disease are very real.

The problem here is not CO2 from naturally occurring events. It is increased CO2 levels above the normal background caused by human activity that is the problem. It has overloaded the natural carbon cycle.

But I'm sure MAGA says that this is all a lie.

.

Reading and comprehension: never said anything about "climate change" having any effect on volcanoes or wildfires. You think I'm A democrat? What I said was that volcanoes and wildfires affect what you call climate change. The exact opposite. When Pinatubo went up the experts equated the volume of the eruption to 50,000 years of human activity.

[Schwarzer Ritter]

Originally Posted by Turner2099

Humans are also contributing to the loss of natural carbon absorption.

Forests account for about 25% of total C02 absorption. The Amazon accounts for about 25% of that.



The Congo and Indonesia have the second and third largest rainforests. The Congo remains a net carbon sink, but is at risk due to deforestation. Indonesia is now a net carbon emitter due to deforestation.

China and India are helping to increase vegetation that helps offset the loss of forests in the Amazon and Indonesia, but not enough.



https://www.google.com/search?q=how+...hrome&ie=UTF-8
https://www.science.org/content/arti...ioxide-falling

And the ocean is the largest user of CO2.

[Levianon17]

[QUOTE=Turner2099;1064008975]

Originally Posted by Levianon17

The chemicals you referenced aren't being sprayed into the air. Silver iodide is used for cloud seeding to help with rain and it's been used for seven decades. Plenty of time to study for safety. Chemtrails have been widely debunked and you can find much more information showing that they don't exist than they do. Cloud seeding is the closest I saw other than geoengineering, but like I said, that isn't done, yet.




Geoengineering is also referenced in the following, but that's not a thing, yet.

Please take a look at the links in my previous post and if you question any of the data, crosscheck it.

Don't forget that Marjorie Taylor-Greene said space lasers started California wildfires. Misinformation can spread just by having trusted people spread the ideas.

https://legislature.maine.gov/testim...8804207404.pdf

Iam not talking about Cloud seeding. But since you brought it up, if cloud seeding is misused flooding can occur in areas that are not experiencing drought conditions. Of course, the convenient explanation will be "Climate Change".

[Turner2099]

[QUOTE=Levianon17;1064009063]

Originally Posted by Turner2099

Iam not talking about Cloud seeding. But since you brought it up, if cloud seeding is misused flooding can occur in areas that are not experiencing drought conditions. Of course, the convenient explanation will be "Climate Change".

I brought up cloud seeding because it's the closest you're going to get to chemtrails. As far as flooding dangers are concerned, I think after seven decades, the ones doing it have a handle on it.

[rooster]

Originally Posted by Schwarzer Ritter

Reading and comprehension: never said anything about "climate change" having any effect on volcanoes or wildfires. You think I'm A democrat? What I said was that volcanoes and wildfires affect what you call climate change. The exact opposite. When Pinatubo went up the experts equated the volume of the eruption to 50,000 years of human activity.

It's amusing...though not at all surprising... that you had to insult me both directly and by misusing my words. Words which you do not seem to have fully understood.

While I could have phrased my OP more accurately, I believe that you know very well that I was not saying that I thought you believed that climate change affected volcanic eruptions. Playing dumb is not a good technique for insult either.

Wildfires, though? They absolutely ARE affected by climate change. There are major affects, both in frequency and severity. Not to mention the increase in length of "fire season" in many places.

I also did not imply that your statement that volcanoes and wildfires affect climate change was incorrect. Or that you did not understand this. My point was that these effects are mostly tolerated by the mechanisms of the CO2 cycle.

Please notice the use of the word "mostly"in the above sentence (I used the phrase "generally tolerated" in my OP).

Because events like Pinatubo are exceptions. It caused global effects that overloaded the normal carbon cycle for years. And it was a small fart compared to eruptions that have occurred during other eras. Some say that the Yellowstone Caldera could produce an extinction level event at any time. But in general, we've been pretty lucky for the past several thousand years.

Everyone that can discuss climate science coherently knows these things.

Hence, my problem with MAGA logic - too many deniers want to say "hey, volcanoes and wildfires are a bigger problem than we are."

But statistically, over the course of our existence, this is not accurate. And we cannot live with these fatalistic, simplistic ideas. We should be living in the hopes that we continue to be lucky, that we are not destroyed by a massive eruption or other event.

Ut instead, we are adding excessive amounts of carbon to the environment in ways that cannot be processed. We are tipping the balance of a cycle that was mostly in equilibrium.

If you want to discuss this more, you need to up your game a bit. I have understood every point that you have made. You seem to have failed to understand the ones I have made that are beyond them.

.

[Schwarzer Ritter]

Talk about mangling words...some years back I was part of a research group of what I thought were intelligent people. We made a public presentation about our findings on global warming research. We each had a particular area. Mine part was about the ozone hole and atmospheric conditions. You imply that its not a belief but one of those intelligent people launched into a full blown speech about how global warming was a major cause of volcanic eruptions.

There is no direct correlation between climate change, which is changing continuously, and wild fires. There is weather. Droughts happen, wild fires happen. Wildfires are more severe because of forestry practices that prevent the undergrowth from being burned out periodically. The undergrowth builds up creating more fuel for expected fires. In that way there is a man made cause but the frequency is up to nature.

[rooster]

Originally Posted by Schwarzer Ritter

Talk about mangling words...some years back I was part of a research group of what I thought were intelligent people. We made a public presentation about our findings on global warming research. We each had a particular area. Mine part was about the ozone hole and atmospheric conditions. You imply that its not a belief but one of those intelligent people launched into a full blown speech about how global warming was a major cause of volcanic eruptions.

There is no direct correlation between climate change, which is changing continuously, and wild fires. There is weather. Droughts happen, wild fires happen. Wildfires are more severe because of forestry practices that prevent the undergrowth from being burned out periodically. The undergrowth builds up creating more fuel for expected fires. In that way there is a man made cause but the frequency is up to nature.

I'm no longer getting into back and forth arguments like this. The fact that you "know" someone who believed that about eruptions is completely irrelevant. It has nothing to do with me or what I am saying. There is correlation with wild fires, as I have stated above. Forestry management practices have had a much larger effect, I agree. But to deny the effects of climate change is at best a failure to understand. More likely, given history here, I suspect that it is more likely to be...agenda and ideology driven.

But I ain't here to teach you basic climate science. And I damn sure ain't fool enough to try to get you to admit the bias of your politics and ideology. It makes you look far worse than I ever could all by itself.

.

[Schwarzer Ritter]

Sounds like a tactical retreat.

[Jacuzzme]

Looks like global warming profiteers have lots of people snowed (pun intended).

[pxmcc]

not exactly..


1. Anthropogenic Climate Change Increases Wildfire Risk
A. Rising Temperatures Increase Fuel Aridity
Human-caused greenhouse gas emissions—documented by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change—have increased global mean temperatures by ~1.1–1.3°C above pre-industrial levels.

Higher temperatures:

Increase evapotranspiration

Dry out soils and vegetation

Lengthen fire seasons

Increase vapor pressure deficit (VPD)

Warmer air holds more moisture, pulling water from plants and soils, producing drier fuels that ignite more easily and burn more intensely.

Empirical studies in the western United States show that anthropogenic warming has:

More than doubled the cumulative forest fire area since the 1980s

Significantly increased large-fire probability

B. Earlier Snowmelt and Prolonged Drought
In western North America:

Earlier snowpack melt extends dry seasons

Reduced snowpack decreases summer soil moisture

Multi-year droughts become more severe under warming

Climate models assessed in IPCC AR6 attribute increased fire weather in many regions directly to anthropogenic warming.

C. Increased Frequency of Extreme Fire Weather
Climate change increases:

Heat waves

Lightning activity (in some regions)

Compound dry/windy events

Extreme fire weather indices (e.g., Fire Weather Index) show statistically significant upward trends globally.

Regions with especially strong documented correlations include:

Western U.S.

Australia

Mediterranean Basin

Siberia

2. Observed Increases in Fire Frequency and Severity
Examples:

2020 California wildfire season: record-breaking acreage burned and extreme fire behavior

2019–2020 Australian bushfire season: unprecedented intensity and ecological impact

Increasing boreal fires in Siberia and Canada

Across multiple continents, fire seasons are:

Longer

More intense

Producing more megafires (>100,000 acres)

3. The Positive Feedback Loop
Wildfires worsen climate change through several mechanisms.

A. Carbon Release
Forests store vast carbon stocks. When they burn:

CO₂ is released rapidly

Methane (CH₄) and nitrous oxide (N₂O) are emitted

Black carbon (soot) is produced

Large wildfire seasons can emit hundreds of millions of tons of CO₂, sometimes rivaling national fossil fuel emissions.

This converts forests from:

Carbon sinks → Carbon sources

B. Loss of Future Carbon Sequestration
After severe fires:

Tree mortality reduces future carbon uptake

Regeneration may be slow or incomplete

Some ecosystems convert from forest → shrubland/grassland

This long-term vegetation shift reduces carbon storage capacity.

C. Albedo and Cryosphere Effects
Black carbon from fires:

Deposits on Arctic snow and ice

Reduces albedo (reflectivity)

Accelerates melting

This amplifies warming—another positive feedback.

D. Permafrost Feedback (Boreal Fires)
In Arctic and boreal regions:

Fires remove insulating vegetation

Expose permafrost

Increase thaw depth

Release stored methane and CO₂

This links wildfire activity directly to long-term carbon cycle destabilization.

4. The Feedback Loop Structure
The cycle can be conceptualized as:

Anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions ↑

Global temperatures ↑

Drought and fire weather ↑

Wildfire frequency/severity ↑

Carbon emissions from fires ↑

Carbon sinks reduced

Atmospheric greenhouse gases ↑

Further warming

This is a self-reinforcing (positive) feedback loop.

5. Strength of the Correlation
The evidence base includes:

Detection and attribution studies

Climate model simulations with and without anthropogenic forcing

Statistical correlations between VPD and burned area

Longitudinal observational datasets

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change concludes with high confidence that climate change has increased fire weather in many regions and will continue to do so.

While ignition sources (human activity, lightning) and land management practices matter, the climate signal is now clearly detectable in many ecosystems.

6. Important Nuance
To present this rigorously:

Climate change does not cause every individual fire.

Land management, fuel accumulation, and ignition sources are critical mediators.

The relationship is strongest in temperature-limited forests.

Some regions show complex or mixed trends.

But the statistical trend toward more extreme fire weather under anthropogenic warming is robust.

Conclusion
There is substantial empirical and mechanistic evidence that:

Anthropogenic climate change increases the probability, size, and severity of wildfires.

Wildfires release greenhouse gases and reduce carbon sinks.

These effects create reinforcing feedback loops that amplify climate change.

This is not merely theoretical; it is observable in current climate and fire records across multiple continents.

Originally Posted by Schwarzer Ritter

Talk about mangling words...some years back I was part of a research group of what I thought were intelligent people. We made a public presentation about our findings on global warming research. We each had a particular area. Mine part was about the ozone hole and atmospheric conditions. You imply that its not a belief but one of those intelligent people launched into a full blown speech about how global warming was a major cause of volcanic eruptions.

There is no direct correlation between climate change, which is changing continuously, and wild fires. There is weather. Droughts happen, wild fires happen. Wildfires are more severe because of forestry practices that prevent the undergrowth from being burned out periodically. The undergrowth builds up creating more fuel for expected fires. In that way there is a man made cause but the frequency is up to nature.