In short, we aren’t on track to an apocalyptic extinction, and the new head is concerned that rhetoric that we are is making people apathetic and paralyzes them from making beneficial actions.

He makes it clear too that this doesn’t mean things are perfectly fine. The world is becoming and will be more dangerous with respect to climate. We’re going to still have serious problems to deal with. The problems just aren’t insurmountable and extinction level.

        • @Shard@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          511 months ago

          Its missing the forest for the trees. A bit like saying the main cause of shooting deaths in the US is due to bullets hitting people.

          Lets assume that most wildfires are indeed caused by arson/accident. But first the environmental conditions must allow such activities to have the impacts they have. i.e. higher temperatures and drier dry-seasons caused by climate change, resulting in a more combustible environment.

          • @heeplr@feddit.de
            link
            fedilink
            English
            -111 months ago

            But first the environmental conditions must allow such activities to have the impacts they have.

            Exactly. There might even be the same amount of arsonists/stupid people as in the 80s but it just burns better now. Incidents were no fire developed in the 80s can now spread to huge wildfires with a much higher chance.

            Still the claim is true and probably has consequences for hikers, people who live in the woods, settlements near to forrests etc.

        • Tarquinn2049
          cake
          link
          fedilink
          English
          111 months ago

          So your opinion is that as it gets warmer and drier, more people choose to set fires? And not that the same number of people behave in the same way, but the conditions changing is what makes the fires worse?

          • @bigkix@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            -211 months ago

            There are no upticks in number of fires, only percentage of acres they consume. US data, for example (below). Now, you can ignore the data and continue drumming that climate change is causing more fires, but that is not a fact.

            • Tarquinn2049
              cake
              link
              fedilink
              English
              1
              edit-2
              11 months ago

              I don’t think you actually read what I said. You are arguing a completely different thing. And your data is supporting my point, not yours. I was specifically saying that it isn’t more fires. That each fire is just worse because the conditions are worse. It’s drier and warmer causing the fires to spread faster. Global warming is indeed the cause of that.

    • @angryzor@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      0
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      I’m not sure what kind of point you’re trying to make here. Obviously every wildfire ultimately originates from an ignition source, be that a human made fire, some glass focusing the sunlight, a cigarette or whatever other source you can think of. They don’t spawn into existence.

      Drought caused by extreme heat makes it much easier for these small fires to spread into an actual wildfire though. It’s not mutually exclusive.

      • @bigkix@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        -311 months ago

        The point that we are not fucked as there is no significant increase in numbers of wildfires and most of them are not caused by climate change.

        • @TheDoozer@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          211 months ago

          If there is one fire that set the entire Amazon on fire, that wouldn’t be a big deal because it’s only one fire?

          The whole point is the severity of fires due to climate change has made it so we’re fucked. As you’ve said, the same number of fires are occurring, they are just significantly worse. I would argue that 3 small fires in a fairly wet forest that goes out relatively quickly is favorable to 3 enormous fires that burn a significant percentage of a forest over several weeks due to that forest being dried out (caused by climate change). Your position seems to be “well, it’s the same amount of fires, so it’s not climate change.” It doesn’t make any sense.