Hmm i see a pattern forming

@Ozuye502 Yes, the United States is burning down some cities in a targeted manner.

@Ozuye502 Climate change is certainly a major contributor to those fires and other natural disasters we are seeing more frequently. The tropical storm hitting SoCal today is another one.

Enjoy what we have wrought.

@windinhishair im saying bad forest husbandry and maintaining infrastructure is the major contributing factor. (See thats where incompetence comes into play)
+ some have been caused by arson by those who are for climate change legislation. Im sure all that carbon ash and smoke did wonders in cutting pollution. (And thats where the planned part comes into play)
But when people aren't allowed to help and there is a pattern of these places meeting with big tech and others to be the new model cityscape with AI tech and all of sudden they go up in flames something is adding up and its not good.

And since you brought it up since 1850 something around 10 tropical cyclones have hit California.
Is it rare absolutely but being it has happened before. So what it happens once ever 80 years when the conditions are right. Weather happens im pretty sure some of fresh bodies of water could use it.

I have zero issues with helping the environment be cleaner i hunt and fish so i have a vested interest in that. However, if you want innovation in that area you don't get it through governmental regulations. You get innovation when government gets out of the way.

@Ozuye502 I would like to see your evidence of arsonists specifically setting fires to promote climate change legislation. I very much doubt that is the case.

While you can't make the case that any particular storm of severe weather event is conclusively due to climate change, the huge increase in these events points directly to climate change as an overall cause.

Government should have a role in climate change and environmental regulations. You weren't around prior to the Clean Water Act, Clean Air Act, NEPA, RCRA, OSHA, and other environmental regulations. But I can assure you that a cleaner environment supporting fishing and hunting would not have occurred without them.

@windinhishair https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2021-12-31/is-wildfire-arson-getting-worse-in-california
https://www.hcn.org/articles/climate-desk-wildfire-how-arson-factors-into-californias-wildfires
25-30% of wildfires are caused by arson
They are accelerated by poor forest husbandry and poor infrastructure (power lines particularly which is what caused the fires Lahaina)

As for stom intensity and activity maybe but is it really 100% man made im still on the fence about because the earth's climate has been changing since the dinosaurs. Can it be mildly effected by polution eh maybe

Yes government has done some ok things but they are holding back on things like nuclear power hydrogen vehicles and other things that could advance humanity to a cleaner environment. Nuclear fuel can be recycled and used safely. Hydrogen vehicles produce water and oxygen as exhaust. Alternative fuel sources such as cleaner propane clean coal and so on lay untapped because of governmental interference. Thats what i mean not ditching protective measures but get out of the way of ground breaking innovation. Keep and expand the protections but dont get in the way of innovation. Is what im saying.

I think we agree on that along with providing better infrastructure and taking better care of our forested lands. What im saying is something most people who have 3 brain cells not fighting over a crack rock would agree with.

@Ozuye502 Obviously there are fires caused by arson. Your claim was that the arsonists were committing arson to further climate change legislation. Where is that evidence?

Since there have always been storms, hurricanes, fires, floods, etc., no one is saying that all of these events are 100% caused by man. They aren't. But the frequency and intensity has increased as a result of man's activities. And the earth is warmer now than it has been in the past 700,000 years. We are only beginning to experience the impacts that we are already committed to as a result of the greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. It is becoming increasingly clear that we are never going back to the climate patterns we had 20 or 30 years ago. Even if we make drastic changes now, long-term impacts are already baked in (pun intended).

I think we agree on many things, including that innovation is desirable and needs to be supported. That may not be possible in the US in the near term due to political differences, but it is possible in the EU and in other countries. Green subsidies would produce a better result than subsidies to companies for oil and gas production. The Inflation Reduction Act has some pretty good programs that are just getting rolling in the US. Hopefully those will be fully embraced.

@windinhishair i know Steven Crowder has documented it somewhere unfortunately a lot of his videos were removed due to Google sensorship practices.

All im asking is show me the raw unadulterated data proving it because everything i find is contradictory.

Inflation reduction and government spending more money on that are counter-intuitive. Something the politicians dont understand because well they are in it for themselves rather than the American people and oath of office (which is why i support individuals like Brandon Herrera for congress and Vivek) i dont necessarily agree with everything vivek wants but he has some good and valid arguments. But thats going off in a tangent here.

@Ozuye502 Are you really asking me to prove that arsonists who have started fires are not climate change activists? You made the claim they were. You need to prove it.

If you need basic information on global climate change, read the latest IPCC report. There are detailed appendices that will give you what you need.

It is possible to spend money while reducing inflation. They are not mutually exclusive.

@windinhishair
Louder with crowder requires a subscription service to view Google sensored deleted content providing you a link to it will would be useless im going to try and see if i can track it down on rumble.

A meteorologist run organization yea they can be wrong 70% of the time and still have a job.

Not while sending trillions of dollars overseas.

@Ozuye502 Crowder isn't a credible source. Neither is Rumble Do you have a real source with real data instead of random internet folks?

The IPCC is the most credible source there is. It is not all "meteorologists". You literally read crap on Rumble and listen to a lying racist homophobe in Crowder and believe that instead of the well-researched and documented work of thousands of people contributing to the IPCC. No wonder you are so wrong and misled.

Every president has to make choices on where to spend our tax dollars. Sending a small amount overseas does not necessarily drive inflation.