Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

French firefighters face 'pyrocumulonimbus' for first time

france24.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–320 of 394 posts

Re: French firefighters face 'pyrocumulonimbus' for first time

#311

Post by OJFord »

Loquebantur wrote: post #301
OJFord wrote: post #297

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And global warming reached a critical point of worseness specifically in Landes & Médoc?

The human induced climate catastrophe has reached unprecedented levels because of humanity's continued failure to correctly integrate that reality into their decisions and the resulting inaction. Landes & Médoc serve as an immediate example of the consequences of that catastrophe being left to unfold unabated. Using diminutive terms to describe causalities that currently escalate beyond human control and ultimately l…

You misunderstand. Dibby053 provided interesting context for why specifically that region is so badly affected right now, on a background of global climate catastrophe. Rico98gg is derailing what could have been a more interesting thread with 'no, it's global warming', which is obvious and irrelevant.

Re: French firefighters face 'pyrocumulonimbus' for first time

#312

Post by hdgvhicv »

watwut wrote: post #211
baxtr wrote: post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You’re both right. However OPs post is more useful than yours. By now, everyone knows about climate change. But I assume most didn’t know the fact about the pine trees in this area. Nowadays it’s much more about how we deal with climate change and not so much about the fact that there is human made climate change.

> By now, everyone knows about climate change. Not true, I have seen people deny it on HN recently. And looking at other debates, yes it is necessary to reiterate the primary cause. Because centrists will absolutely use the lack of that reiteration to do the "well actually it is the pine trees" in two days.

Some people will deny water is wet. Reiterating

“Centrists” (whatever that means) aren’t denying climate change.

Even if 99% of America accepts climate change that’s still 350,000 that don’t, and there’s a good chance many deniers are just doing it for the lolz.

The world was unwilling to enact the changes that were required. The mitigations of the damage to both the human and natural world are required now, and there’s lots of discussion about that. Not least what happens when a nuclear power of 1.5 billion people reaches a wet bulb temperature high enough to start killing tens of millions.

Re: French firefighters face 'pyrocumulonimbus' for first time

#313

Post by Loquebantur »

dzink wrote: post #303
mctaylor wrote: post #227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I love how four comments down there is someone posting: "You’re both right. However OPs post is more useful than yours. By now, everyone knows about climate change. But I assume most didn’t know the fact about the pine trees in this area. Nowadays it’s much more about how we deal with climate change and not so much about the fact that there is human made climate change" Thank you for proving that there are, in fact,…

The dark ages and the plague saw a lot of belief in religion and rejection of science that lead to excessive deaths all over europe. Medicine was studied and practiced in the arab world and jewish doctors were the only ones allowed to bring some of those practices to Europe. Religion was preventing tested and verified approaches to treatment. Today Europe needs to stop repeating that practice. Believing in human caus…

There is no dichotomy between preparing for the inevitable and preventing the preventable.

Painting the actions of people on the other side of the planet as "out of anybody's control" is hubris though. Humanity very well is capable of organizing on that scale and has done so regularly for a long time already.

The actual problem is the disconnect between the interests of those in charge of such organization and the well-being of the public.

Re: French firefighters face 'pyrocumulonimbus' for first time

#314

Post by Loquebantur »

mytailorisrich wrote: post #307
Loquebantur wrote: post #305

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A rational approach to existential threats is indeed good advice, but to surrender in the face of complexity is not. The human induced climate catastrophe is due to a systemic failure and consequentially needs to be addressed on a systemic level. The economic system and policies need to be adapted, even against the implied subjective interests of the biggest holders of capital and assets. They like to paint that as "…

Thanks for illustrating my point...

Well, actually, you're exemplifying mine.

Being trapped in an Overton window selected for you by those invested in upholding the status quo is what leads to your emotional stress.

The fundamental disconnect between the existential threat of climate catastrophe and the official un-reaction to it is what leaves you unable to cope with actually very much white-washed reporting on the topic.

Re: French firefighters face 'pyrocumulonimbus' for first time

#315

Post by jobigoud »

ButlerianJihad wrote: post #65

Google Maps provides overlays for wildfires and air quality. I can watch Western Europe from here.

Just a point about precision, Google Maps fire overlay is based on NASA Firms + some processing, and it's not perfectly accurate.

It is currently marking my little town as under fire / burned down, but it's not and hasn't been so far. (north west front of the fire, next to the lake). It looks like their contouring algorithm is very greedy and any hot spot marked in the past few days has become part of their fire perimeter.

The massive fire clouds probably contribute to the difficulty of measuring ground temperature from satellite.

Re: French firefighters face 'pyrocumulonimbus' for first time

#316

Post by Loquebantur »

baxtr wrote: post #248
pepperoni_pizza wrote: post #234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is centrists and deniers who are stopping us in implementing effective measures that would fight for human lives.

You will not convince them by saying things over and over again. It’s not like they haven’t heard the facts. It might have even have the opposite effect, increasing their unwillingness to believe it’s more than just a hoax. Ask yourself: when was the last time vigorous repetition of a position has convinced you personally? You will convince them by showing them how to do it properly. Show them the way and they might…

You're very wrong.

The propaganda practice of incessant repetition being effective even in face of blatantly obvious contradicting facts is well established.

The reason climate catastrophe deniers incessantly repeat their nonsense isn't because they like to hear themselves talk, it's because it works.

The majority of people are never convinced by rational arguments or facts, they act solely on subjectively perceived personal outcomes. Facing social opposition and loss of face very well can sway them.

Re: French firefighters face 'pyrocumulonimbus' for first time

#317

Post by cassepipe »

bluebarbet wrote: post #272
mctaylor wrote: post #227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I love how four comments down there is someone posting: "You’re both right. However OPs post is more useful than yours. By now, everyone knows about climate change. But I assume most didn’t know the fact about the pine trees in this area. Nowadays it’s much more about how we deal with climate change and not so much about the fact that there is human made climate change" Thank you for proving that there are, in fact,…

These factual corrections are warranted. But IMO the accusations of dog-whistling and wrongthink are unnecessary and counterproductive. Again: I agree with you on the substance! And this probably is a climate denier. But (1) that's not very interesting in itself, and (2) by adopting an accusatory tone we're just going to push them and their sympathizers into a posture of defensiveness and victimhood which will only w…

On the one hand I agree with you, on the other hand I think this is highly idealistic: Most people would have a hard time debating a flat-earther since it's their hobby and they master all the talking points whereas you spent maximum one hour even thinking about it in the last 10 years. They will get you in a dark forest of details you don't know how to navigate and win the argument.

I am so sorry for the one in a million crackpot-sounding genius that will get hurt in the process but social shunning is just so so much more effective. No wonder the crackpots and grifters are back and running the show nowadays

I think a better approach is to ask people who have contrarian/non-consensual opinions to show that they know that they are crackpots out and to distance themselves from them:

"I know some people come up with conspiracy theories that says climate is a hoax designed to control populations because they don't want to change anything in their way of life but that's not what I am. I just care about the science and I think I found a real flaw in the leading explanation of climate change. I'd love for someone with knowledge about to discuss it with me to see if they took X into account" etc.

This above is what I expect but if you quack like a quack, you're probably a quack and you'll get the social shunning treatment

Re: French firefighters face 'pyrocumulonimbus' for first time

#318

Post by Galanwe »

Loquebantur wrote: post #309
wosk wrote: post #180

Le Monde, very reputed French newspaper (NYtimes equivalent for France perhaps) says that it’s not the first time this cloud is seen in France [1]: (translation mine) > “What is happening right now is extremely, extremely unusual. Seeing a cloud this massive and reaching such an altitude above a wildfire is exceptionally rare,” the researcher explains. “During the Pedrógão fire [which claimed around 60 lives in Portu…

What is indicative of escalating climate catastrophe is indeed the intensity and frequency of those firestorms, not any lack of precedent for a cloud shape. But the really salient observation is how people individually and their social system as a whole react (or not). Debating the shapes of clouds points to a fundamental dysfunctional disconnect on multiple levels.

> What is indicative of escalating climate catastrophe is indeed the intensity and frequency of those firestorms

I don't think we have the data that proves this theory (which of course doesn't mean that the theory is wrong), because the vast majority of these fires are man-made, not natural disasters.

This year's Fontainebleau wildfires were caused by 1) a deranged person ligthning bushes and drenching them with fuel 2) a simple minded person throwing a cigaret but in bushes during a heat wave...

The huge wildfire in the south some years ago was caused by a similarly simple minded dude that caried his alight barbecue from one place to another on the back of his pickup truck (creating a dozen wildfires in the process along the road).

Re: French firefighters face 'pyrocumulonimbus' for first time

#319

Post by x______________ »

Galanwe wrote: post #318
Loquebantur wrote: post #309

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is indicative of escalating climate catastrophe is indeed the intensity and frequency of those firestorms, not any lack of precedent for a cloud shape. But the really salient observation is how people individually and their social system as a whole react (or not). Debating the shapes of clouds points to a fundamental dysfunctional disconnect on multiple levels.

> What is indicative of escalating climate catastrophe is indeed the intensity and frequency of those firestorms I don't think we have the data that proves this theory (which of course doesn't mean that the theory is wrong), because the vast majority of these fires are man-made, not natural disasters. This year's Fontainebleau wildfires were caused by 1) a deranged person ligthning bushes and drenching them with fuel…

Might I add that the possibility of the country going up in flames is magnified by the climate change that allows everything to be so dry and volatile, regardless of the cause of the fires that occurred.

Re: French firefighters face 'pyrocumulonimbus' for first time

#320

Post by Loquebantur »

Galanwe wrote: post #318
Loquebantur wrote: post #309

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is indicative of escalating climate catastrophe is indeed the intensity and frequency of those firestorms, not any lack of precedent for a cloud shape. But the really salient observation is how people individually and their social system as a whole react (or not). Debating the shapes of clouds points to a fundamental dysfunctional disconnect on multiple levels.

> What is indicative of escalating climate catastrophe is indeed the intensity and frequency of those firestorms I don't think we have the data that proves this theory (which of course doesn't mean that the theory is wrong), because the vast majority of these fires are man-made, not natural disasters. This year's Fontainebleau wildfires were caused by 1) a deranged person ligthning bushes and drenching them with fuel…

You're conceptually wrong about "the theory" and factually about the majority of fires.

The fundamental connection increase of CO2 => increase in mean temperature => increase in frequency of high-energy atmospheric events is entirely obvious and well established.

CO2 traps heat and heat is energy. Firestorms are an immediate consequence of that and accordingly rise in frequency as well.

The idea, such fires would be "preventable, since due to individual human action" is patently absurd even in principle. You cannot easily ignite a forest that isn't dried out. An easily ignitable forest on the other hand just waits for the first spark, no matter the source. The hotter climate provides more sparks in the form of lightning. At some point, ignition is virtually guaranteed. And that point is reached already.

Post reply on HN