By Jim Steele
Recently the ambulance-chasing commentator for a DemocracyNow video highlighted the tragic Lahaina fire by opening with “100 deaths and likely far more and linked to the climate crisis” suggesting the fire was was due to climate change drought.
For proof, she interviewed Michael Mann who was a major force in initiating the climate crisis meme decades ago. Accordingly, Michael Mann reinforced her fear mongering link between fires and climate change, stating climate change increased a naturally occurring pressure gradient causing high winds that “interacted with epic drought”. His first big lie was blaming an epic drought. My attached illustrations present data for Maui County from the US Drought Monitor for the recent 8 years. Unlike Mann, Data doesn’t have a biased opinion. An internet link is provided which includes the longer time series showing how Maui’s droughts oscillate every 4 to 6 years.
Please notice Maui‘s droughts are also seasonal. White and yellow spaces represent times of no drought, typically seen during the rainy season from December to February. Extreme and Exceptional droughts (perhaps Mann’s epic drought?) are the dark reds. The website is interactive, allowing you to see exactly what percentage of Maui County was in drought on any day for 23 years. My redlines represent 4 dates linked to the bottom row of four boxes showing the percentages of Maui County with each classification of drought intensity for that day.
My blue box highlights May 10, 2023. Notice there were zero droughts and no abnormally dry conditions. Red boxes represent similar dates as the Lahaina fire on August 8th. Maui’s rainless period typically lasts from about May 25 to end of July, so early August is typically dry. Yet there were no Extreme or Exceptional droughts on August 8, 2023. Only 15.9% of Maui experienced severe drought, while 64% experienced no droughts at all. Hmmmm, so what was Alarmist Mike talking about?
Clearly, Maui droughts are due to localized moisture conditions. Maui County is just 1,161 square miles, about the size of the small state of Rhode Island. When just 185 square miles experienced severe drought, you need to be brainwashed to believe global warming and evaporation caused Mann’s not so epic drought. Furthermore, Lahaina is naturally dry, situated on the leeward side of Maui’s mountains that wring out the moisture carried by the trade winds. Only 15” of rain fall in Lahaina each year compared to 300” on the mountains to the east.
Finally, the invasive grasslands that carried the deadly fire into Lahaina are dead in August and only require a half day of dry conditions to become highly flammable. It’s ridiculous to blame a hundred years of CO2 global warming for the abundance of invasive grasses that dry in one day. But Alarmist Mike never mentioned that fact. Fortunately, several honest research papers have warned Maui residents that they must manage the abandon sugar cane and pineapple fields to eliminate that build-up of fire fuel by invasive grasses. Unfortunately, governments did not act on their science.
Mann’s second big error of omission abused his typical half-truths to suggest the climate crisis caused a bigger pressure gradient that brought abnormally high winds. Being the furthest Hawaiian island to the north, Maui is affected by stronger northern trade winds that intensify as the normal high-pressure system strengthens each summer. Maui’s topography further intensifies those winds through the mountain valleys. Strong downslope wind events reaching 80 to 100 mph every 8-12 years have “demolished buildings, overturned large power transmission line towers, and uprooted trees.” Once or twice a year strong but more moderate winds occur. During the fire, 30 to 40 mph winds with gusts up yo 67 mph fanned the flames. These winds got a special name, the Lahaina Winds. Locals also call them “Lehua winds” after the red blossoms of the ʻōhiʻa lehua tree that shower the landscape during such events. The Lehua winds have been officially reported in the 1995 “A Natural History of the Hawaiian Islands” and in 1985 research reports. Even the http://maui-vacation-expert.com writes about these Violent Winds on Maui.
Ninety-eight percent of Maui’s fires are started by human carelessness. Their extent is fueled by bad landscape management. Nonetheless Mann blames natural climate dynamics for this tragedy. It is like blaming the ocean for a man’s drowning, when his poor seamanship capsized his boat, and he didn’t bring a life jacket. But Mann will keep repeating such climate exaggerations until he gets dumb politicians to only accept his bogus opinions. Beware people!
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
One correction: The sentence “Being the furthest Hawaiian island to the north,” should have read “Being further north than Hawaii (the big island)”
Actually, it should be “farther.” You’ll usually be right if you only use “further” as a verb, such as in “To further their goals.”
Average rainfall in June and July is 5.5 mm (combined) or a fifth of an inch. This is about a tenth of the summer rains in western NSW of Australia and major grass fires happen every year.
I should add that if climate change was 2 degrees cooler since 1950 and 50% wetter globally, a similar weather pattern and human stupidity would have led to this same tragedy.
…future decisions are not within the scope of science.
Mann is not a scientist. He is a politically motivated idiot who peddles both misinformation and disinformation.
Those of us in Australia who heard him say that we will be ”either living in a Water world or a Mad Max” world know this.
Also, I was listening to an Hawaiian environmental scientist last night and despite the BBC’s presenter doing his best to bring up CC, he did not mention it once and talked only about the dry introduced grasses which can grow up to 10 feet high and the changed landscape. Oh, and the fact that there are 900-1000 ignitions (natural and man made) in Maui every year.
Mann, and others like him, are causing America to waste trillions of dollars to fix a problem that is not a problem. They are assisting China and Russia by weakening America. Net-zero CO2 is economically impossible. If we keep wasting money trying to solve a problem that does not exist we will become too weak to hold off totalitarianism. The so-called Inflation Reduction Act is so helpful to China’s long term goals that it’s difficult to imagine that they didn’t help bring it about.
one correction Thomas, we are not ‘wasting” money. The Bureaucrats are “transferring” it. In reality the Elite Ruling Class, for whom our permanent government bureaucrats are operating as agents with supreme regulatory power, are extorting it from the disappearing middle class with all these net-zero boondoggles. In the end elite ruling class dream is to be totalitarian rulers just like the Chinese and Russians and form a new league of Nations run by totalitarian dictate.
I wonder if anyone can find out how much money Maui Electric has invested in strengthening/maintaining transmission lines versus “renewable energy” projects. Just guessing the priority has been wind/solar and transmission has gone begging.
Here’s the Drought Monitor’s 23-year record for Maui’s droughts showing the 4-6 year oscillations
Mann is the perfect Useful Idiot. Third rate academic with pretentions well above his pay grade.
Third rate academic but first class charlatan.
He’s sub-par even for a third rate academic and he’s never been included in the top-tier climate fraudsters team. Frankly he’s just an embarrassment; a self-promoting also-ran with delusions of adequacy and a desperate need for approbation. He’ll say absolutely anything, no matter how stupid or unsupportable, just to get himself in the public eye.
A typical academic: underemployed and overpaid
He’s a classic grifter, on a par with someone like Al Sharpton.
I was just thinking of the same analogy!
Is Steven Guilbeault Michael Mann’s disciple?
To achieve his 2035 Agenda for Canada he wants Alberta to install 6,768 industrial scale wind turbines, 105,055 acres of solar panels and 106 Brazeau sized dams.
Small correction (probably a typo):
Is actually May 16th
IMO not a big deal, but before someone trips over it and tries to beat you with it.
Good piece, thank you!
Yep, Great piece, Jim 🙂
Story Tip.
Great post on NTZ
New Study: People Distressed, Anxious About Climate Have Less ‘Climate-Specific Knowledge’ (notrickszone.com)
“people who are less knowledgeable about the climate and environment are more likely to experience climate change anxiety”
You know, like people that go into an absolute tizzy of apoplectic panic about a tiny fraction of a degree of warming. 😉
Many years ago, before the BBC banned skeptics, I listened to a phone in on BBC Radio.
I still remember a panic stricken young person almost in tears saying we had to do something now as it was almost too late to save the world from disaster.
That person must be well into his 40s now. I often wonder when I see today’s version what he’s doing now. Probably walking slowly somewhere in London still convinced he’ll die in a burning planet a week on Tuesday I suppose
LOL…
UK HEAT HEALTH ALERT PANIC as forecast hits 28ºC !
Yet Another Heat Alert! | NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT (wordpress.com)
ps.. this is the same MetOrifice that did this.
Tampering With CET • Watts Up With That?
The forecast was 28C and the actual real reality?
19C – and it is close to 11:30 AM
Grey, cloudy and… raining.
Oopps! Missed that one, didn’t they. 🙂
““people who are less knowledgeable about the climate and environment are more likely to experience climate change anxiety””
No, I disagree. This has been pumped into small schoolchildren all the way through to university.
The media blasts it and there is no escape. They have been indoctrinated.
Thing is, that basically everything they have been indoctrinated with is WRONG
Their actual real knowledge is very limited. (as the likes of FN keep showing)
When they said “less knowledgeable,” that wasn’t reference to being exposed to all the latest hype and tripe about “climate change,” it means actually being “knowledgeable” about it.
I can’t even have a discussion with the average true believer in the teachings of the climate religion, but I guarantee that if they would engage beyond what they THINK is “scientific certainty,” they probably can’t answer the most basic questions about the current vs. historical atmospheric CO2 levels, what portion of annual CO2 “emissions” come from human fossil fuel use vs. “natural” sources, etc.
A couple of weeks ago my (20 ish old) Barber mentioned CC of which he appeared to be worried about! I asked him if he had any idea of what percentage CO2 made up the atmosphere. He had absolutely ‘no idea’. So I tried to make it easy for him; was it 50%, 25%, 10% or less than 0.5%. Without hesitation he answered “it’s got to be 50%”!! Since then I have asked six more friends and every single one had no idea, and, like my young Barber, they all went for 50%!
The theoretic effect of an increasing atmospheric concentration of CO2 is to increase temperature (+1C per doubling) I’m not sure increasing atmospheric dryness is a corollary, I thought it was the opposite.
Anyway according to the US Historical Climate Network (HCN) the temperature trend at the Mauna Loa Observatory shows no net warming in 40 years, in fact a declining trend.
According to UAH MSU satellite data there has been a mere 0C – 0.2C warming in the lower troposphere above Hawaii since 1979.
I can hear Mann’s reputational finger nails scraping as he slides over the cliff edge into obscurity
We can only wish.
I dunno, maybe better that he’s long remembered for what he’s done.
Yes, as part of the group that will go down in history as ” The Lysenkos of the West.”
Mickey Mann won’t go that easily. He’ll have to be bodily picked up and thrown out with the rest of the rubbish!
I respectfully disagree. After all, we all remember the late Trofim Lysenko.
I’ll file this under “great minds think alike” (hadn’t gotten this far when I posted a similar sentiment).
A disgrace to the profession….
The street hoe profession has better repute.
I wonder who Mickey Mann’s pimp is !
Michael is a spoiled and entitled child who is used to getting what he wants.
The one thing he has down pat…
is TANTRUMS. !
How do you know you’re over the target?
“-1”
+42
+42*42^42
Direct hit: “-3”
Maybe it’s Robert L. Peters, aka Joe Bribem.
“Carlos Danger” was already taken.
Joe had a couple of other fake names, too.
Joe is a busy guy. A corrupt, rich guy. Corrupt, rich guys need fake names to hide things.
https://nypost.com/2016/01/25/a-long-hard-look-into-anthony-weiners-downfall/
Fascinating that they cc’d Crackhunter (on the Burisma board at the time) in an email to Robert L. Peters (aka The Big Guy 10% Joe “Biden Brand” Brandon) reminding the VP of a meeting to discuss strategy for an upcoming talk with the Ukraine’s President.
His pimp is likely the U.S. Government, in the form of grants.
I suspect you meant that in jest. However, it just might be a legitimate question.
And unlike Michael Mann, they actually do something useful!
Have the book, worth purchasing to see how many people despise him in some way.
Yes, read Mark Steyn’s book “A Disgrace to the Profession” which compiles the opinions of Mann’s work and strident advocacy by his scientific peers.
This charlatan gives himself away every time; the camera does not lie and the picture above of him with eyebrows higher than an elephant’s eye is a psychologist’s dream – I am sure this is the equivalent of him scratching his nose when speaking and looking “up and left” …….
Famous liars all have these tells. John Kerry has his lip licking. Karine Jean-Pierre bats her eyelids like a humming bird. Al Gore moves his lips.
“Al Gore moves his lips.”
Good one! 🙂
Yippeee! A Mikie Mann-bashing thread!!!!
Regards,
Bob
“-1″
Complete with outraged snowflakes.
Where? Where? Ooh – they’re hiding, those sneaky little sod’s!
The only thing missing are tree-ring thermometers!
What kind of ‘scientist’ describes the ‘Climate science debate’ as a ‘War’? His lack of suitably moderate language is only exceeded by his enormous lack of scientific gravitas.
Don’t like high gasoline prices and high electricity prices? You can blame Michael Mann CO2/Climate Change lies for a lot of that.
And gasoline prices and electricity prices are going higher even now, because of lies like the ones Michael Mann tells about CO2 and the Earth’s climate.
As far as I’m concerned, Michael Mann and his ilk have committed crimes against humanity and should be looked at as such. I don’t think they are just mistaken, I think they are deliberately lying to promote their agenda.
From the article: “For proof, she interviewed Michael Mann who was a major force in initiating the climate crisis meme decades ago. Accordingly, Michael Mann reinforced her fear mongering link between fires and climate change, stating climate change increased a naturally occurring pressure gradient causing high winds that “interacted with epic drought”. His first big lie was blaming an epic drought.”
Mann’s first big lie is claiming CO2 somehow “increased a naturally occurring pressure gradient causing high winds”.
There is no way Michael Mann could establish or prove this claim. He has no mechanism that would connect CO2 to increasing a pressure gradient in the atmosphere over Hawaii. This is pure speculation being passed off as fact.
The high winds were caused by a low-pressure hurricane moving south of Hawaii, and a high-pressure system to the north of Hawaii, which, when combined, produced very high winds over Hawaii. No CO2 required.
Michael Mann is a bald-faced liar. He has been lying about CO2 and the Earth’s temperatures for decades. His lies have caused tremendous damage to the Western world, and he’s not finished yet.
Michael Mann is definitely a disgrace, not only to the profession, but to humanity itself. He proves it again with these current lies about Hawaii.
He didn’t get his PhD in geology and geophysics [note: no formal academic background in climatology] until 1998 and become an AGU Fellow until 2012. He just barely qualified for the plural of “decade.”
Temperatures in Maui have risen by nearly 2 degrees in the past 70 years:
The number of hot days has also risen, dramatically in the past few years:
There has also been a pronounced negative trend in precipitation during this period:
There is no question whatsoever that climate change is contributing to conditions that facilitate large wildfire events. I don’t know that this singular event can be definitively attributed to climate change, but there is little doubt that conditions that lead to events like this will become more and more frequent in the region.
Not another hockey stick!
Were domed.
Did you even read what Jim wrote?
This is what you call “science”?
Maui is becoming hotter and drier, hotter and drier means a higher likelihood of significant wildfire events. That is indisputable. The recent fires were a disaster caused by a number of converging factors, including the spread of invasive grasses, and attribution of singular events to climate change is extremely difficult, but there is little doubt that ongoing climate change in the region is shifting the probability distribution for these kinds of events.
You are reacting to my comment emotionally instead of rationally.
Drought Monitor data disagrees with Alan’s dishonest narratives.
Drought in Hawaii is variable and heavily influenced by ENSO, making it valuable to expand the timeframe of analysis beyond two decades. This is what the last century of drought has looked like in the state:
Source: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/19/12023
Alan you keep attempting to divert attention away from Mann’s dishonest climate crisis claims. The headlines are blaming climate change linked to drought for this tragedy, when Lahaina wasn’t experiencing a drought at all. But you want to obscure reality even further with a century statistic. You are worse than Mann! Clearly you are not being honest about the issue at hand in order to protect the bogus crisis meme!
On the contrary, you and other commenters are attempting to divert attention from the arguments I’m actually making and turn the thread into a debate over things I’ve never actually said.
Whatever the headlines you reference are saying, I am not saying that climate change is solely to blame for the recent fires. I am saying climate change is driving an increase in the conditions that are conducive to wildfires on the island. You need to respond pointedly and specifically to things I’m actually saying, and not things you want me to be saying because you’re personally angry about them.
And for reference, swaths of the island were and are under severe drought conditions. 36% of Maui County is experiencing drought, 16% of the county experiencing severe drought. I’m not sure why you’re choosing to take the tack that drought was unrelated to the severity of the fires. That’s quite silly. It’s also absurd that you’re arguing that more data is somehow “obscuring reality.”
Alan, why re you repeating what my article said? Yes 16% of Maui was in severe drought, but you forgot to repeat to me there was 0% in extreme or exceptional drought. So the issue at hand I need you to answer, do you believe Mann was being honest by claiming an epic drought contributed to the August 8th fire?
And regards how averaging obscures reality, what is the average weight of an American 3 person family consisting of a 210 lb dad, 120 lb mom and 30 lb toddler?.
If you are good with averaging, you’d say 120 lbs. And if you want to obscure reality you could then argue Americans are causing their children to be grossly obese because the average toddler weighs 120lbs. LOL That’s how you obscure reality!
Do you believe that the drought contributed to the destructiveness of the fires? Be honest. It sounds like you’re taking issue with Mann’s use of the word “epic” here. I don’t think you actually disagree that drought played a role.
I’m not talking about averaging, I’m talking about viewing more years of data.
Well your reply proves you are just a worthless troll as you have avoided every relevant question and engage in constant diversions. Mann would be proud of your attempts to protect the crisis meme with dishonesty!
How dry does something have to be before it will burn? Can increasing urban temperatures drive the moisture content of rural senescent grasses below zero?
Heavier and longer drought means more stuff is ready to ignite. I’m sure that at some point desiccation will be absolute, but it is not a binary.
You are joking, right?
Where I come from, not much grows during a drought, and you certainly won’t get annuals growing to maturity..
Annual grasses hay off, well, annually – if they’ve had enough rain at the right time to grow in the first place.
-1?
Bonus, we have an agronomy denier.
You have avoided the CONTENT of Steels article because you can’t address it.
No, you have NOT made a case to show it would make a difference because it is well known that the grass can dry out in a single afternoon under a warm sunny dry wind it is already DEAD you dummy!
According to Alan the region has to be warmer to make the grass be so much drier than dry despite that it takes just a few hours to dry out a dead plant in a SINGLE warm dry wind day which means the region doesn’t need to be warmer on average to make the grass any worse, that is how dumb he is.
I’m guessing based on the ignorance of your comments that you have never been in a region experiencing drought before, but it does not happen over half a day. Ground water levels don’t drop drastically in a couple of hours, soil desiccation isn’t immediate. The longer drought conditions persist the drier everything becomes. You seem to be saying that the island was just as dry hours after the last rainfall as it was weeks into the drought, which is so asinine I’m not sure how to respond to it.
LOL Typical troll tactic Alan. You fabricate a narrative with ” You seem to be saying” then shoot down just what you created. The more you comment the clearer it becomes you are also a dishonest POS like your hero Mann!
Set the record straight then by clearly stating your position. You’ve implied two incongruous positions between the post and your comments:
The island was experiencing severe drought at the time of the fireThe drought did not influence the fire whatsoever.
How do you reconcile those positions?
You distort and lie a lot that is why so many people have developed a low opinion of your dishonest replies.
AlanJ you must be very dependent on maintaining climate crisis funding or just stupid for you to keep pushing your same dishonest questions and distortions, in hopes of diverting attention from Mann’s dishonest fear-mongering. And like Mann you lie again with “The island was experiencing severe drought at the time of the fire”
Nearly all of the island was experiencing abnormally dry conditions, 36% moderate drought, and 16% severe drought. Do you believe that this drought contributed nothing to the severity of the fires? Simple question. Try, if you can, giving a direct answer for once in the thread. I’m not asking if the fire was ignited by the drought, I’m asking if the fire contributed to the severity of the fire. Mann in the interview does not say the drought started the fire, he says it was one of several factors making the fire as destructive as it was. You’re denying that, so, defend your position.
No one but you is ranting about drought, and your rant seems centered around the fact that you don’t like Mann’s use of the word “epic” because you’re trying to suggest that by “epic” he meant “extreme” under the drought classification.
Is AlanJ both a Mann acolyte and Maui official trying to cover his butt for his incompetence?
Here is another example of AlanJ’s dishonest attempts to support Mann’s climate crisis fear mongering. Alan has latched on to the fact that 16% of Maui County was experiencing severe drought as if those severe drought conditions were affecting Lahaina.
For those of us who value more honest evaluations, the next step is to identify where in Maui Aug 10 2023 that 16% drought occurred, because clearly it was a very local drought, NOT due to global warming as Mann pushed!
According to the National Weather Service: “severe drought, or the D2 category, over the region covering Ukumehame to Kaupo, expanded northward into the central valley and upslope into the Upcountry region of Haleakala.”
Thus as the map shows, the area of severe drought was south east of Lahaina and had no impact on the Lahaina fire as the troll Alan keeps pushing.The data again shows how Alanj and Micheal Mann distort the science.
On August 8, severe drought conditions persisted up much of the coastline and moderate drought conditions were presents throughout Lahaina:
The entire island was experiencing abnormally dry conditions.
Keep denying if you must, Jim, it just makes you look more and more desperate. The drought exacerbated the conditions leading to the destructiveness of the fires, and this fact is not in question.
There was NO EPIC DROUGHT no matter how Alanj and Mann want to spin it. It had NOTHING TO DO WITH MANN”S CLIMATE CRISIS.
Those facts are not in question.
Goofy, dishonest climate alarmists simply ignore the key factor of invasive grasslands that are highly flammable in hours.
Alanj and Mann’s advice to reduce fossil fuels would never have prevented the tragic Lahaina fire. ONLY proper management of the invasive grasslands could have presented such tragic loss of life. Those pushers of a climate crisis have only caused stupid politicians to seek bad and worthless remedies at the expense of real preventive solutions. Shame on Alanj ! Shame on Mann!
As drought.gov states:
“Drought is a natural, frequent occurrence in Hawai’i with impacts on all islands. Droughts are often associated with El Niño events, which are part of a natural climate cycle in the Pacific Ocean. “
Lahaina’s moderate summer drought was natural. Fear mongerers calling it an “epic drought” was totally dishonest. Defending the description of it as an “epic drought” to promote a climate crisis is both dishonest and disgusting.
It had nothing to do with a climate crisis that disgusting fear mongerers like Mann and Alanj try to beat into the public’s consciousness. Shame!
No one has ever said that the drought was not natural, those are words you’ve put in other people’s mouths. It again seems that your whole dispute comes down to Mann’s use of the word “epic,” an informal term that was not intended as a scientific classification of the drought conditions.
I think we’ve reached the end of any hope of productive discussion. There is no question that drought conditions were present on Maui at the time of the fires, and there is no question that these drought conditions exacerbated the severity of the fires. There is also no question whatsoever that the islands are becoming hotter and drier, so conditions like the ones that led to the recent fires will become more and more common.
You are such a dishonest lackey for Mann. Mann very explicitly blamed the drought on a climate crisis. Those words came directly from his mouth. So you have tried every which way to counter his bullshit and make him look innocent. Such a disgusting dishonest troll you are!
He said the drought was “part of the climate [change] story,” not that the drought was not natural, or that the drought would not have occurred without climate change. And it is true – climate change is unquestionably influencing drought, rainfall, temperatures, and storm systems around the islands.
We can’t say, “this weather disaster would not have occurred without climate change,” what we can say is, “climate change is increasing the likelihood of this type of catastrophe by exacerbating the conditions that can lead to it.”
ALAN, how do you look in the mirror and not gag in disgust at your total dishonesty? You keep dishonestly trying to modify his fear-mongering despite his very words that everyone can see for themselves, and I quote “we cant tell this story without talking about the climate crisis”
And then what you grifters always say even when the catastrophe is never linked to climate change at all, is your (all alarmists stock memorized propaganda BS statement” “we can say is, “climate change is increasing the likelihood of this type of catastrophe by exacerbating the conditions that can lead to it.”
Climate change did NOT cause invasive grasses. Climate change did NOT cause the normal summer drought.
Climate change can’t typically be said to “cause” individual weather events. What it does, as I said in my first comments, is shift the probability distribution. If I have three cups in front of me, with a ball under one of them, you have a one in three chance of finding the ball by lifting a cup at random. If I add a second ball, you have a two in three chance. If you then lift a cup and find a ball, it is not correct to say you found the ball because I added a second one (you might have still found the same ball with just one), but it is absolutely correct to say that adding the second ball increased the likelihood of the event.
That’s what I’m talking about, that is what Mann is talking about. Climate change is driving a shift towards hotter, drier, conditions on the islands, and those conditions make fires like the recent one morel likely. That does not mean the fire would not have happened without climate change, but it does mean we can’t ignore climate change when talking about the fire.
Alanj blathers “it is absolutely correct to say that adding the second ball increased the likelihood of the event.” ROTFLMAO
Typical alarmist blather!
It is also absolutely correct to say blaming CO2 for fire intensifying dynamics that have nothing to do with CO2, is just another case of dishonest fear mongering! Alanj can add as many balls under the cup as he wants to make a bogus statistical argument. The truth is there were no “CO2 balls” under any cups. Alanj is just an adherent of Lies, damn lies and Statistics and an obedient non-critical thinking Michael Mann lackey!!
It means, due to the other factors, the catastrophic fire would have happened no matter what the level of CO2. Our existential crisis is how dishonest alarmists try to dupe the public with statistical bullsh*te! Only proper management of the invasive grasslands could have prevented Lahaina’s death and destruction. And the mis-direction by climate alarmism , like Alanj pushes, only delayed the best life-saving remedies.
What we know about the wildfires in Hawaii
Wildfires were once rare on the Hawaiian Islands, largely ignited by volcanic eruptions and dry lightning strikes, but human activity in recent decades has made them more common and extreme. The average area burned each year in wildfires, which tend to start in grasslands, has increased roughly 400 percent in the last century, according to the Hawaii Wildfire Management Organization, a nonprofit group.
BWAHAHAHAHAHA!!!
I live in Eastern Washington where droughty climate is the norm and that I see my clothes fully dry in just 15-30 minutes from wet to dry on the outdoor clothesline I built.
The soils in my area dries out very fast in just a days’ time because it is DRY heat when Temperature is 95-105 F everyday with Humidity below 20% values sometimes as low as 10%.
Meanwhile this feeble thinker quickly forgets what I wrote right above his reply:
DEAD plants dry out rapidly especially in dry heat and wind.
I have been in this region since 1964 seeing this reality over and over, have learned to build gardens that reduces the dry heat and dry effects of the climate as I grow wide 2′ wide beds to grow beans, Peas and other “small bushy” plants like grass to help shade the ground and to keep the airflow up around them.
Why were the plants dead Jim.
DAMN You are a stupid troll!
Another evasion. Disappointing, but expected. I’ll answer for you: they were all dead because of the drought.
Maui Knew Dangerous Wildfires Had Become Inevitable. It Still Wasn’t Ready.
NY Times. It was the firestorm that wildfire experts and residents on Maui had warned about for years — a blaze fueled by hurricane winds roaring through untamed grasses and into a 13,000-person coastal town with few ways in or out. Local officials had released plan after plan acknowledging that wildfire was all but certain.
Alan is Desperately Dishonest for a climate change narrative. As the Drought Monitor shows, ZERO drought anywhere through end of May, Normal dryness during the naturally rainless June and July, condions the grasses are well adapted to.
Oh, but Jim, the fire started in August, not in May. In August, when the fire started, drought conditions were present over about half of the island, with 16% of the island under severe drought conditions. And the dryness was abnormal, not normal, as shown by the data you presented in your article, and that abnormal dryness was present over 80%+ of the island.
Being a contrarian is not working out well for you, here, perhaps some intellectual honesty would serve you better.
LOL Alan you like playing with words to make irrelevant climate change arguments and obscure the really important dynamics.
Hawaii and California both get most of their rainfall in the winter followed by very normal dry seasons, dry seasons referred to as summer drought. Serious droughts are caused by the lack of winter rains, but that was not the case for Maui.
Only dishonest grifters like you and Mann would ever push above average winter rains and normal summer droughts as an “epic droughts caused by a climate crisis”. But you are such a desperate little troll, totally devoid of intellectual honesty!
Of course I never said the drought was directly caused by climate change, I said that climate change is leading to longer and more severe droughts on the island, which is unquestionably true. And the drought was not typical – conditions were severe drought to abnormally dry across the entire island at the time of the fires. Would you mind defining “abnormally dry” for the class?
Does the word “annual” suggest anything to you?
Another -1.
The agronomy denier strikes again 🙂
LOL Alanj, you are the only one evading discussing all the factors involved in the Lahaina fire. You keep pushing the small region of Maui experiencing severe drought, but as the NWS reports, the regions experience severe drought were not in the Lahaina surroundings.
Instead you want obscure reality by discussing 100 years of data, which is a whole another discussion, and has absolutely no bearing on the causes of the Lahaina fire tragedy, and then accuse me of evasion because I refuse to follow your attempts at misdirection. Such a stupid little troll!
I’m not evading that at all, my second comment in this thread said “The recent fires were a disaster caused by a number of converging factors, including the spread of invasive grasses, and attribution of singular events to climate change is extremely difficult, but there is little doubt that ongoing climate change in the region is shifting the probability distribution for these kinds of events.”
Again, as I’ve pointed out numerous times, you desperately want me to be saying something I’m not, because you want to be outraged about the thing you want me to be saying. You need a bad guy, and I’ll do. Your lust for outrage is driving you to argue against claims I’ve never made. You are being emotional instead of rational, incapable or stepping back and actually evaluating what is being said to you.
Does the word “annual” suggest anything?
Where is your evidence this was caused by CO2?
“heavily influenced by ENSO”
Ahh… so totally natural
Thanks !
FACT that you continue to ignore.
There have been many extreme droughts in the past in Maui.
There was NOT one that the time of the fire.
First your data is not for all of Maui, but from Kahului whose population jumped from about 4000 in 1960 to 28,000 in 2020. Such a rise in UHI will not effect wildfires as much as you try to make it so. There is “little doubt that ongoing” UHI and not climate change is affecting alarmists’ perceptions.
The data is for all of the Hawaiian islands, and they all show the same long term trend.
Comparing leeward climates with windward climates, and rural with UHI-influenced cities is not a good way to understand the fire problem.
He has made it clear he will ignore the actual weather pattern as pointed out in the article he didn’t read that made this fire significant.
“The data is for all of the Hawaiian islands”
So not Maui. Ok !!
Show us location and pictures of where this data was measured in 1970 and now.
Otherwise you have not got a scientific argument to stand on.
And all your comments are just AGW cult-mantra nonsense.
“and they all show the same long term trend.”
LOL..
… and further down you say they have been “homogenised”
You are a clown !!
Far from it. Jim did a good job of anticipating your claims when he said, “…, the invasive grasslands that carried the deadly fire into Lahaina are dead in August and only require a half day of dry conditions to become highly flammable.” And, “Ninety-eight percent of Maui’s fires are started by human carelessness.”
Do you bother to read the articles before commenting?
Your own graph shows zero long-term precipitation changes.
As for the cause, try this:
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2023/08/16/the-real-cause-of-the-maui-wildfire-disaster/
“but there is little doubt that ongoing climate change in the region is shifting the probability distribution for these kinds of events.”
Nostradumbass strikes again !
No question? All other spurious correlations aside, if you want to make any claim linking this to climate change then you MUST establish a causative link. Prove that climate change exists and then prove that it caused this event as so far you have done neither except throw up a couple of unrelated and unremarkable correlations. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof – I’ll wait.
Notice that he didn’t bother to source any of his scary-looking graphs?
Data source is in the image urls, but apologies for not providing it more directly:
https://statesummaries.ncics.org/chapter/hi/
Data from NOAA.
I wonder how much it has been “ADJUSTED™” 😉
Nor did he mention that all of the Hawaiian weather stations are in the middle of urban areas or at airports, etc. All are subject to several degrees of UHI effect and cannot be taken at face value – about as effective as the Kauai Marriott coconut weather station and nowhere near as amusing.
Nobody is taking them at face value, the stations are homogenized to remove spurious local effects.
Homogenizing UHI is compounding the errors. I like this post of yours because it proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that you are pushing a blatant lie.
That’s a rather bold statement without a single ounce of substantiation. But of course if you want to argue that humans are altering the climate of the Hawaiian Islands through land use changes, I am not going to push back. I’m sure urban development is wreaking havoc on the local ecosystems.
The last place one should be homogenizing temperature data is over steep, windy terrain where the lapse rate is being disturbed by turbulence in the trade winds, and using UHI-influenced weather stations to estimate rural areas.
Those are all perfect reasons to homogenize station data when using it to construct a regional index. I am not sure you intended to play devil’s advocate here, but well done.
Homogenizing temperature data == fraud.
Mickey Mann should be proud of his disciple.
Yep, that way you can use all the urban warming from greatly expanded towns and cities to make sure everything follows your agenda.
“reasons to homogenize station data when using it to construct a regional index”
Yep, NOAA wants to make sure they catch all the urban warming signature and smear it over the whole region, so they can claim CO2 warming.
NOAA homogenization nearly ALWAYS adds spurious warming. !
By design.
Take the urban warming, and spread it to all local sites.
The AGW way. !
The adjustments reduce the warming trend in the global dataset:
Eager to hear how you reconcile that with your statement above.
Do you mean the slightly flatter slope of GISS v4 vs Uncorrected during the 1880 – 2020 period or the much steeper slope of the 1945 – 2020 period?
Yep, massively adjusted, and from urban and aircraft sites that are constantly changing.
What Zeke calls “uncorrected raw data” is not even remotely “uncorrected raw data”.
It is a FAKED, mal-adjusted fabrication graph using data from sites that are totally unfit for purpose. Even that data has been mal-adjusted before use, then cludged together to make it do whatever the scammer/con-artist wants it to do.
Real data from all over the world shows the 1930s, 40s not dissimilar from now.
The fact the Zeke is involves proves that it is part of the scam.
Only the most gullible of agw cult zealots would fall for that little piece of anti-science propaganda.
Also show us where temperature where measure in the oceans before 2004..
Or aren’t you aware that basically all that data is FAKE. !
They really did everything little bit of fakery they could think of the remove the steep warming from 1900 – 1940, didn’t they
Then the strong cooling from 1940-mid 1970s.
And of course, the graph after 1980 that bears absolutely no resemblance to reality.
“The adjustments reduce the warming trend in the global dataset:”
But increases the trend since the 1970s. Exactly as “required”
Another of Zeke’s LYING sleight of hand tricks.
Even you must realise it is all FAKE. !
I’ve already proved that the climate of the Hawaiian Islands is changing, see my comment above. That the direction of that change is toward conditions more conducive to large wildfire events is indisputable (unless you think colder and wetter is more conducive to fire). I am not making any claim that climate change was the sole, direct cause of the recent Maui wildfire, but pointing out that climate change is producing an environment where these kinds of events can become more frequent.
Nope and nope – swing and a miss both times. You have proven absolutely nothing. Colder would equate to drier as warmer air carries more water – but neither are significant in this case as only a few hours without rain would be enough to dry these dead grasses out enough to burn. You used an entirely spurious correlation between warmer weather and fires commonly used by the more stupid of the climate enthusiasts but which proves precisely nothing whatsoever.
That isn’t what is happening in Hawaii, the islands are experiencing more hot days and less rainfall. Do you agree that those conditions are more conducive to wildfire events than the opposite?
I’ve lived both in an arid, hot region and in a humid, mild region, and I can tell you in which place wildfires were more common.
All your charts ‘prove’ is that there has been a big increase in urban activity across the Hawaiian islands, nothing but nothing aside from that. As to the occurrence of wildfires – this has zero relationship to mild or warm weather – 80-90% (even higher rates in some areas) of all wildfires correlate with human activity. That is, wildfires are far more likely in areas where there are more people as they are caused intentionally or unintentionally by people. If you want a cause, try putting up a graph of the population in those areas, it makes far more sense.
The charts prove that the islands are getting warmer and drier. You can say that’s entirely and exclusively because of urban activity if you want, but the fact that the islands are getting warmer and drier is true irrespective of what you think the underlying cause is. Warmer and drier means better conditions for wildfires to spread. More humans mean more fires will be started. These facts are not mutually exclusive.
Damn Alan you dont quit. Just admit that it wasn’t drier due to a climate crisis when the fires started. The downslope winds were dry enough adiabatically to help burn the dead grasses that dried in a few hours of sunshine.
Why are you so obsessed with protecting Mann’s dishonesty with your diversions? Are you connected?
Interestingly, to this point I have not uttered Mann’s name once in this thread nor made reference to his comments from the video. I made a general comment about the role of climate change in increasing the conditions for severe weather events. I would say my position is quite consistent with Mann’s, but I am not offering a defense of his comments.
LOL No has ever accused you of uttering Mann’s name, nor would we expect a seasoned troll to ever do so. What has been obvious from your very first post is that your position and beliefs are “consistent with Mann’s” so you intended to offer up every diversion and every irrelevant factoid to protect your bogus beliefs and Mann’s, without ever mentioning his name. Duh! So transparently dishonest!
He keeps ignoring this fact that dead grasses dry out very fast he is ignoring that reality because he is so invested in his global warming mantra which is why he uses bogus arguments while ignoring regional weather patterns with invasive flammable dried out grasses that burns rapidly.
I don’t think that you understand what proof it. Your charts may suggest it, but there are confounding factors that you have ignored.
“The charts prove that the islands are getting warmer”
NOPE.
They prove the urban areas are expanding and affecting urban temperature readings…. As shown by the population growth.
It has more to do with fuel load and firebreaks than anything else.
That is anecdotal. Do you have any graphs to share that show the relationship between fires and hot days? Most of the fires burning in the Boreal Forests started before the high Summer temperatures. The flammable ground cover is only going to get so dry before it will burn easily. Getting any drier will have a negligible effect on flammability. Thus, I would expect a curve demonstrating an abrupt change into a region of diminishing returns.
What is indisputable is you can use averages to obscure reality. It is also indisputable that dryness raises temperatures and El Nino increases dryness on Maui. Natural changes alongside UHI changes. You most likely have cause and effect backwards!
Furthermore to divert attention from the fact that Lahaina was not experiencing a drought in 2023, so that drought has nothing to do with that fire, you keep inserting irrelevant averages to the issue at hand. Suspicious.
The way you argue, you could be Mann’s twin, Indeed warmer and drier is more conducive for fires.So to weaponize weather, you use that half truth to insert climate change as the driver into the discussion just to blind people to the truth that there are many other factors that explain extreme weather and fires. Many other factors that need to be and can be addressed to prevent such tragedies. Lowering CO2 is a useless and wasteful endeavor to prevent these fires but that’s what Mann pushes to save his climate crisis meme. Et tu?
Just to make sure I am clear, you are stating that the island is not and has not been experiencing drought conditions in recent weeks?
I’ve not inserted climate change as the driver, you have done that on my behalf, and then held a one-sided argument with yourself about it, expressing outrage over things I’ve not said and forwarding counterarguments to claims I’ve not made.
Just to be clear the article states and you have repeated the answer to your own question. You’re losing what shred of respect you may have had.
So again, the issue at hand you keep avoiding but I need you to answer, do you believe Mann was being honest by claiming an epic drought contributed to the August 8th fire?
I absolutely believe that persisting drought contributed to the destructiveness of the August 8th fire. That is not in doubt.
Your belief was clear from the get go, despite the fact there was no drought in the springtime, nor one for about a year. But when you are a dedicated pimp for Mann’s climate crisis BS, it is expected that you would believe in non-existent droughts! LOL
Can you confirm whether you believe that the drought conditions present during the time of the fires contributed to the severity of the fire?
You are really slow on the uptake, troll. Please read my article. It answered you question. And there was no “epic drought”!
Your article shows drought conditions present on the island at the time of the fire. What you seem to now be trying to argue is that drought played no role in the fires. I’m trying to get you to reconcile these two seemingly conflicting positions.
There was never an epic drought in 2023, no matter how much BS you sling Alan!
Besides, what has also been stated is drought conditions were not a pre-requisite for the fire. The invasive grasslands become flammable in just hours of dry conditions. The downslope winds were also dry enough. Climate change was not a factor no matter how much BS you sling!
Mann, and you as his lackey, keep pushing attribution on a global climate crisis to blame for the fires. But no such thing was involved. Alarmists like you are a despicable example of how science has been denigrated!
What is an epic drought? I don’t see that definition in the graphic from the US Drought Monitor. It sounds like an informal way of saying “there was bad drought.” There was moderate to severe drought over half of the island and abnormally dry conditions over nearly all of it. You’re implying in your comments that this drought had nothing to do with the fire.
No one said drought was a prerequisite for the fire, that’s a straw-man you’re attacking, we have said the drought played a role.
Such a desperate little troll.You need to ask Mann that question that you are now trying to downgrade. Using the word ‘epic” in today’s vernacular implies an event that humongous and monumental. Epic is not a scientific term but hyperbole to sway people’s understanding. That’s what Mann does.
And it interesting that to desperately downplay Mann’s dishonesty you downgade his misinforming hyperbole now to “we have said the drought played a role.”
“We” you say. You and Mikey are a team, eh? LOL Who would haver ever guessed that from all your diversions and distortions!!
Great, we found a point of agreement. “Epic” was not a scientific classification, just an informal descriptor. Mann does not anywhere in the video say anything more than that the drought contributed to the severity of the fire. “High winds interacted with epic drought.” Those were the words he used. We agree that drought conditions were prevalent on Maui in the days leading up to the fire, the day of, and the days following. Do you believe those conditions interacted with the high winds to produce a highly destructive fire? Or do you believe the persistent drought had nothing to do with it? Try being rational and honest for a moment instead of being emotional and reactive.
As you keep defending Mann, you keep revealing your total disgusting dishonesty. You again lie by omission saying “Mann does not anywhere in the video say anything more than that the drought contributed to the severity of the fire.”
Bullsh*te!
Mann blames a climate crisis for “less rainfall” and more drought, despite the data showing there was ample rainfall in the rainy season and the normal rainless 2 months leading into August.
And like you, Mann lies by omission never mentioning that invasive grasses dont need drought, they’re are highly flammable in half a day, no climate crisis needed. You and Mann are such miserable dishonest POS bent on deceiving the public!
I provided data showing that this is unquestionably true. Climate change is shifting the islands toward a drier and hotter state. That is what the data shows.
The grasses had drought, that kept them extremely dry and ready to ignite. Saying they don’t “need” drought is just ignoring the actual reality.
minor drought conditions
Not extreme drought conditions
CLIMATE NORMAL, not climate change.
I don’t think I have used the word “extreme” to describe the drought conditions on Maui at the time of the fire. There were severe drought conditions over about 16% of the island, and moderate drought conditions over about 36%, with another 80%+ experiencing abnormally dry conditions. Jim is trying to say this drought had nothing to do with the fire, and I’m disputing that.
Alan is really good at beating up on strawmen.
He already addressed that in detail in the article you didn’t read and his comments in reply to you.
You a poor reader.
Belief based on NOTHING REAL.
“Belief” is not science… its religion.
That is the AGW meme, isn’t it. !
“I absolutely believe.. blah.. blah “
I’ve no doubt that you absolutely “believe” (gullible cultist as you are….
But that is totally irrelevant to reality and facts.
Now you are lying and backpedaling:
“There is no question whatsoever that climate change is contributing to conditions that facilitate large wildfire events.”—AlanJ
That is the exact position I have consistently maintained through this discussion, yes, good job.
“There is no question whatsoever that climate change is contributing to conditions that facilitate large wildfire events”
Except there is no proof that it did.
It is just a mantra-based opinion for a rabid AGW zealot.
He is misleading everything because he is making false claims against a specific region by including the rest of the region and past history that doesn’t have the pattern that made the fire so bad.
He is clearly not a smart man.
“experiencing drought conditions in recent weeks”
Has had much more extreme droughts in the past.
This is CLIMATE NORMAL, not climate change.
He is that way because he is a programmed useful idiot for the CO2 propaganda ignoring the reasonable presentation you made by throwing up a bunch of secondary information (Misleading Charts and lies) up on the wall hoping his deflecting diversions will work on some of us, but it is clear he has no supporters in the thread at all because he is misleadingly dishonest.
Well no, you haven’t.
You have shown that it is “highly likely” that the weather stations have been greatly over-run by urban development.
Just like they have in many other parts of the world.
The fact that Honolulu is warming faster than some other places is a sure sign of urban contamination of the temperature data.
No, YOU ignored the presentation on what cause the fire to be so significant you haven’t addressed it at all.
The grass dries very fast under hot drying downhill winds that takes very little time to dry up after it was already dead and be naturally highly flammable which doesn’t give a dam if the air temperature has been 90F or 95F or even 80F in previous weeks it is still going to just as dry and flammable as it is because of the drying winds and dry part of the year.
I hang up my sopping wet T – shirt on the outdoor clothesline which dries up in just 30-45 minutes in 95F light winds, you can be sure that DEAD flammable grasses won’t take long to dry up by dry hot downslope wind.
You are stumbling all over the place against reality.
“I’ve already proved that the climate of the Hawaiian Islands is changing”
NOPE.
You have shown a classic example of urban warming being smeared over the whole region.
Urban warming does NOT cause bushfire.
This fire did not start in an urban area.
So your comment is basically just nonsense.
Is urban warming responsible for the decrease in rainfall over the islands and increase in length and intensity of drought?
UHI is responsible for warmer temperatures. El Nino and positive PDO are responsible for the precipitation drought. But you already knew all this. You are such a despicable troll Alan.
What is responsible for the long term trends in drought and rainfall over the islands? That’s the question I am asking you. Please stop trying to evade. For someone accusing another of trolling you certainly seem keen on avoiding any actual substantive engagement with anything I’m saying. Pretty trollish behavior.
LOL Typical troll double-speak! It is only you who has avoided substantive engagement.
Diversions to hundred year dryness trends, obscures the 2023 conditions during the fire.
So stop trolling and address my very substantive points!
First like Mann you lie again with “The island was experiencing severe drought at the time of the fire”
What is hilarious is how alarmist like to post that useless “number of hot days” graph as if it proves a CO2 climate crisis. For 50 years there was no trend despite rising CO2. Then suddenly in the last decade the numbers jumped from an all time low in 2010 to increase 3x to 5x the past decades number. Clearly something happened differently, but wasn’t CO2’s doing. No alarmist’s model would even suggest that.
I would love to see where they were actually measured.
See what development happened around the sites.
Installation of a solar industrial estate for eg?
Certainly the population growth in Hawaii has been quick rapid.
Maui itself has probably 3 to 4 times the population it had in 1970.
So the red thumb nonce doesn’t want to verify that these data are worth using.
That is quite understandable.
Maybe they don’t understand things like urban warming?
Ignorance is rife in AGW scammers.
And, the size of the cities has grown dramatically in the last 70 years, with the associated Urban Heat Island effect, in the cities, having similarly grown. Do you have any rural weather stations to compare?
Show us location and pictures of the Maui weather station now and in say 1970.
Show us where this data was measured.
Anyone that thinks there hasn’t been massive urban changes over that time is an idiot.
The population of Maui more than doubled from 1970-2010, so would probably be around 3 or 4 times the 1970 population now.
Maui Population Figures – Maui Tomorrow Foundation (maui-tomorrow.org)
I wonder what was installed next to the weather station around 2015.
“but there is little doubt that conditions that lead to events like this will become more and more frequent in the region.”
Which of your crystal balls did you use to come up with that nonsense?
Do you think you are Nostradumbass?
Meanwhile ZERO counterpoint to Steels post.
Jack Smith needs to get on this!
Clearly Mikey is conspiring with others to broadcast an opinion which could be false.
(He may even have caused someone to book a conference room or even ask for a politician’s phone number.)
Reserve a cell for him right next to the one they have already prepared for DJT!
One of my rules of life is – if someone is lying to me about one thing, assume they are probably lying to me about pretty much everything. Mann oh Mann, is he ever a liar.
Where I live in central Washington State, the invasive grass is called “Cheat” (Bromus tectorum). I have not seen where anyone names the problem grasses in Hawaii.
There may be several. Perhaps, Medusahead (Taeniatherum caput-medusae).
Only 15” of rain fall in Lahaina each year:
Locally, annual precipitation is 9 inches; east and southeast of me it is 5 inches.
This has been so for a few thousand years. As has fire, but the Cheat is new arrived.
Fountain grass and Feathertop grass are 2 of the more common invasive grass species across the Hawaiian islands, both are perennial clump grasses. I’m not sure if these are the specific types that caused the problems though.
Thanks for the pointer.
https://dlnr.hawaii.gov/hisc/info/invasive-species-profiles/fountain-grass/
Looking further at that list of invasive species is illuminating. Maui seems to have got rid of most of the fountain grass there but has had a huge problem with pampas grass, which seems to be as much of a fire hazard. All decorative garden plants that have spread out of control.
Those make kerosene grass look like a fire retardant.
Yeah, it is also called Downy Brome a nice attractive early spring grass that cows love that quickly dries up into a tasteless seedy mess cows now avoid by June 1 into the flammable mess when summer heat hasn’t arrived yet.
The big Fire by Loomis 3 years ago was mostly on Downy brome that burned trees and other things as it went towards the tiny town.
The flammable grass in Maui does similar that it dries up by the time summer arrives on the Islands where temperature month by month changes over the year is small, but the flow of precipitation varies significantly through the year and have wet areas and dry areas depending on the airflow patterns.
Mann-made ‘global warming’, creator of the infamous hockey stick nonsense, total grifter
With the weight of evidence that these climate alarming scientists are over hyping, misleading and misinforming, why doesn’t someone, some group, a group of groups, take them to an independent judicial review, where the long held and proven empirical data & facts can be tested against their wild, computer modelled, inaccurate bilge?
Show their rantings as nothing more than a consensus (opinion) of a few, overly biased / benefitting types, whose predictions (over decades) have amounted to zero effect on the climate / planet
There are more than enough realist academics, scientists and Engineers, with proper climate related topic expertise, to give proper balance to the climate alarmist, nut zero conology, that even a group of judges ought to be able to see rational common sense and reasonableness and also ask what all the doomsday hyperbole is about
It’s being reported that a director for water resource management, initially refused West Maui Land Co.’s requests for additional water to help prevent fires from spreading to properties managed by the company. He eventually released water but not until after the fire had run its course.
M. Kaleo Manuel, a Native Hawaiian cultural practitioner and DLNR’s deputy director for water resource management, initially balked at West Maui Land Co.’s requests for additional water to help prevent the fire from spreading to properties managed by the company. A Hawaiian Studies major, Kaleo prefers a traditional, holistic “One Water” approach where water is revered, not used.
if true, Mann’s climate change narrative is his usual hogwash.
https://www.zerohedge.com/political/woke-hawaiian-official-stalled-release-revered-water-until-it-was-too-late-save-maui
But whether or not it would have saved the town is not known.
It would not have hurt. Should have been done.
I doubt it would have saved the town but it would have delayed the spread and, in all likelihood, saved lives.
I guess Mann skipped class when his teacher was teaching that the Earth goes through a 12 year cycle of cooling then heating then cooling then heating and has been since God created this beautiful big blue marble. twelve years ago we had a drought far worse than this one in SE Texas. my pastures were burnt slap up and I kept my herd alive and healthy by feeding range cubes and mineral/molasses tubs and my 11ft deep stock tank was almost dry. Guess. Now, the same phenomena happened about 12 years before that. So where do I send my money to end this disastrous weather?
Oh. and on the flooding, Houston flooded worse in the 1800s and early 1900s than it does at present with all the concrete. 1935 yielded 2 floods. Danged old Tin Lizzy’s!
Mikey Mann right there with Paul Erlich and Krugman. Always wrong, never in doubt, but beloved by the libtards.
Dr. Mann creates a bunch of baloney about Hurricane Harvey with his usual lies and stupid claims that CC made it that way when several Meteorologists actually PREDICTED the stalling a couple days before the landfall due to several pressure systems north of the area that prevented the Hurricane from moving inland for a time, but the slime ignored all that to push his lies about the storm.
His “Hockey Stick” paper is mendacious garbage so is his claims of getting the individual Nobel peace prize which he had to withdraw after being exposed as a liar the same slimeball who after losing his lawsuit with Dr. Ball refused to accept the Judges Judgement against him and avoided paying the damage awards as required for losing the lawsuit.
He is pure slime the scum of the earth.
Michael Mann is a problem, who got where he is by ability to play office politics on a large scale and not by being a good scientist. Even his hockey stick is only half true. But, one indicator of part of the problem is that his main critics mostly criticize the wrong part of the hockey stick, the blade, which is correct (based on an older version of HadCRUT no newer than HadCRUT2, and JRA-55, ERA-interin and ERA5 show HadCRUT did not start overreporting warming until HadCRUT5). What’s wrong with Mann’s hockey stick is the straightness of the handle.
Michael Mann is criticized mainly by rightwingers who get lots of things wrong, and not by most scientists who are afraid of admitting that generally anti-scientist rightwingers are correct about something.