With these fires set to get worse year by year, it won’t be long before the current summer infernos will be viewed as an “exceptionally mild” fire season. In regard to human habitation, the toxic smoke appears to be the worst aspect, with major population centres increasingly choked with smoke for weeks or months on end.

Far from being “a great place to raise kids”, enduring smoke-choked summers from infancy onwards can be expected to lead to truncated lifespans. Before long doctors will be urging families with young children to emigrate, and many of those who can afford it will presumably be doing so, while others will be seeking asylum in healthier countries willing to accept Oz refugees.

With the population depleted of people able to run an economy and fight the fires, it’s not hard to imagine the nation grinding to halt, and indeed coming largely to an end as a place fit for human habitation.

Is it possible this country will simply burn itself to death?

Bubblecar said:

With these fires set to get worse year by year, it won’t be long before the current summer infernos will be viewed as an “exceptionally mild” fire season. In regard to human habitation, the toxic smoke appears to be the worst aspect, with major population centres increasingly choked with smoke for weeks or months on end.

Far from being “a great place to raise kids”, enduring smoke-choked summers from infancy onwards can be expected to lead to truncated lifespans. Before long doctors will be urging families with young children to emigrate, and many of those who can afford it will presumably be doing so, while others will be seeking asylum in healthier countries willing to accept Oz refugees.

With the population depleted of people able to run an economy and fight the fires, it’s not hard to imagine the nation grinding to halt, and indeed coming largely to an end as a place fit for human habitation.

Is it possible this country will simply burn itself to death?

Seems very unlikely.

The fires are a result of a combination of warming climate with cyclical drought conditions, so not likely to get worse year by year.

An extension of the desert zones is probable though, I guess.

Plenty of experts seem to think this is the new normal:

>Sarah Perkins-Kirkpatrick, from the University of New South Wales’ climate change research centre, says studies by the CSIRO and others have found the fire season has got longer, particularly in eastern Australia, where it is starting earlier. This is expected to continue until 2050 at least.

“We know that catastrophic conditions are now more likely to occur, and into spring as well,” she says.

https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2019/nov/22/australia-bushfires-factcheck-are-this-years-fires-unprecedented

Well sure… but with the fuel gone from this season, surely next season can’t be as bad.

Bubblecar said:

Is it possible this country will simply burn itself to death?

The place will still have a future, under its new owners.

Those Chinese are a hardy people.

Bubblecar said:

Plenty of experts seem to think this is the new normal:

>Sarah Perkins-Kirkpatrick, from the University of New South Wales’ climate change research centre, says studies by the CSIRO and others have found the fire season has got longer, particularly in eastern Australia, where it is starting earlier. This is expected to continue until 2050 at least.

“We know that catastrophic conditions are now more likely to occur, and into spring as well,” she says.

https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2019/nov/22/australia-bushfires-factcheck-are-this-years-fires-unprecedented

Yes, but that doesn’t mean the fires get worse every year, it means the cyclical worst conditions every 20 years or so get progressively worse.

Also if fires become sufficiently frequent there will be less left to burn.

Bubblecar said:

With these fires set to get worse year by year, it won’t be long before the current summer infernos will be viewed as an “exceptionally mild” fire season. In regard to human habitation, the toxic smoke appears to be the worst aspect, with major population centres increasingly choked with smoke for weeks or months on end.

Far from being “a great place to raise kids”, enduring smoke-choked summers from infancy onwards can be expected to lead to truncated lifespans. Before long doctors will be urging families with young children to emigrate, and many of those who can afford it will presumably be doing so, while others will be seeking asylum in healthier countries willing to accept Oz refugees.

With the population depleted of people able to run an economy and fight the fires, it’s not hard to imagine the nation grinding to halt, and indeed coming largely to an end as a place fit for human habitation.

Is it possible this country will simply burn itself to death?

I think you are catastrophizing.

Well all be rooned said Hanrahan

Well let the canefields burn, let the flames rise
Let the politicians and the bankers in the city look up
In wonder at the glow at in the sky.
Let the canefield burn, let me feel no pain
When I drown my soul in whisky, and dance in the flames.

https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/science-minister-says-climate-denial-a-waste-of-time-in-wake-of-fires-20200114-p53rev.html

jockeying for a position at the next election…

Peak Warming Man said:

Well let the canefields burn, let the flames rise
Let the politicians and the bankers in the city look up
In wonder at the glow at in the sky.
Let the canefield burn, let me feel no pain
When I drown my soul in whisky, and dance in the flames.

Let the Canefields Burn

Woodie said:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OA_CndlBu0g

ChrispenEvan said:

https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/science-minister-says-climate-denial-a-waste-of-time-in-wake-of-fires-20200114-p53rev.html

jockeying for a position at the next election…

Well at least she’s talking about it, but:

“Ms Andrews will convene a roundtable meeting of top scientists on Wednesday to kickstart work in response to the “devastating and surprising” bushfires this summer.”

Surprising?

The Rev Dodgson said:

ChrispenEvan said:

https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/science-minister-says-climate-denial-a-waste-of-time-in-wake-of-fires-20200114-p53rev.html

jockeying for a position at the next election…

Well at least she’s talking about it, but:

“Ms Andrews will convene a roundtable meeting of top scientists on Wednesday to kickstart work in response to the “devastating and surprising” bushfires this summer.”

Surprising?

thought the same.

ChrispenEvan said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

ChrispenEvan said:

https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/science-minister-says-climate-denial-a-waste-of-time-in-wake-of-fires-20200114-p53rev.html

jockeying for a position at the next election…

Well at least she’s talking about it, but:

“Ms Andrews will convene a roundtable meeting of top scientists on Wednesday to kickstart work in response to the “devastating and surprising” bushfires this summer.”

Surprising?

thought the same.

I suppose she doesn’t read stuff from lefties like Garnaut:

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-01-08/economic-bushfires-billions-ross-garnaut-climate-change/11848388

Woodie said:

LOLOLOLOL

Bubblecar said:

With these fires set to get worse year by year, it won’t be long before the current summer infernos will be viewed as an “exceptionally mild” fire season. In regard to human habitation, the toxic smoke appears to be the worst aspect, with major population centres increasingly choked with smoke for weeks or months on end.

Far from being “a great place to raise kids”, enduring smoke-choked summers from infancy onwards can be expected to lead to truncated lifespans. Before long doctors will be urging families with young children to emigrate, and many of those who can afford it will presumably be doing so, while others will be seeking asylum in healthier countries willing to accept Oz refugees.

With the population depleted of people able to run an economy and fight the fires, it’s not hard to imagine the nation grinding to halt, and indeed coming largely to an end as a place fit for human habitation.

Is it possible this country will simply burn itself to death?

We could just remove all remaining bush and leave everything dead and barren
But yes it could be a recurring event we have little control over

Fortunately, smoke is a huge particle, and easy to filter out with cheap and widely-available technologies. The potential effects on health should be easy to mitigate.

Domes

dv said:

Domes

Bit surprised nobody’s invented implantable nasal filters.

Rule 303 said:

dv said:

Domes

Bit surprised nobody’s invented implantable nasal filters.

Like ear plugs?

Rule 303 said:

dv said:

Domes

Bit surprised nobody’s invented implantable nasal filters.

Would the filters needed cleaning too often to be practical perhaps, could be disposable I suppose

• Bit surprised nobody’s invented implantable nasal filters.

They have, I read it in a book. Though it might have been a sci fi story…

furious said:

• Bit surprised nobody’s invented implantable nasal filters.

They have, I read it in a book. Though it might have been a sci fi story…

Dune had something like that as part of the Still Suits to minimise water loss.

furious said:

• Bit surprised nobody’s invented implantable nasal filters.

They have, I read it in a book. Though it might have been a sci fi story…

Looks like someone has, went to go find where I had read it but instead came up with a product:

Personal Nasal Filter

furious said:

furious said:

• Bit surprised nobody’s invented implantable nasal filters.

They have, I read it in a book. Though it might have been a sci fi story…

Looks like someone has, went to go find where I had read it but instead came up with a product:

Personal Nasal Filter

1 micron filtration!

The United Kingdom bans the use of credit cards to make bets both for online and offline gambling, including the purchase of lottery tickets. The Gambling Commission says the ban will come into effect on April 14.

Credit card gambling you could get yourself into financial trouble easily and its not even your money

Cymek said:

The United Kingdom bans the use of credit cards to make bets both for online and offline gambling, including the purchase of lottery tickets. The Gambling Commission says the ban will come into effect on April 14.

Credit card gambling you could get yourself into financial trouble easily and its not even your money

So debit cards would be fine?

Michael V said:

Rule 303 said:

dv said:

Domes

Bit surprised nobody’s invented implantable nasal filters.

Like ear plugs?

Not much. They get annoying after a while.

Peak Warming Man said:

Cymek said:

The United Kingdom bans the use of credit cards to make bets both for online and offline gambling, including the purchase of lottery tickets. The Gambling Commission says the ban will come into effect on April 14.

Credit card gambling you could get yourself into financial trouble easily and its not even your money

So debit cards would be fine?

It’s a start I suppose

furious said:

furious said:

• Bit surprised nobody’s invented implantable nasal filters.

They have, I read it in a book. Though it might have been a sci fi story…

Looks like someone has, went to go find where I had read it but instead came up with a product:

Personal Nasal Filter

Heh. That’s cool. And they’re re-usable!

Amazon have them – $75 for a ten-pack, delivered to Australia.

• Not much. They get annoying after a while.

How long is “a while”?

furious said:

• Not much. They get annoying after a while.

How long is “a while”?

About half way between ‘a jiffy’ and ‘an age’.

Bubblecar said:

With these fires set to get worse year by year, it won’t be long before the current summer infernos will be viewed as an “exceptionally mild” fire season. In regard to human habitation, the toxic smoke appears to be the worst aspect, with major population centres increasingly choked with smoke for weeks or months on end.

Far from being “a great place to raise kids”, enduring smoke-choked summers from infancy onwards can be expected to lead to truncated lifespans. Before long doctors will be urging families with young children to emigrate, and many of those who can afford it will presumably be doing so, while others will be seeking asylum in healthier countries willing to accept Oz refugees.

With the population depleted of people able to run an economy and fight the fires, it’s not hard to imagine the nation grinding to halt, and indeed coming largely to an end as a place fit for human habitation.

Is it possible this country will simply burn itself to death?

Only if the Greens have their way. ie. suppressing fuel-reduction burnings.

This could indeed be considered an exceptionally mild fire season in future, because it was not accompanied by extreme winds. If you combine extreme winds with bushfires then that would make things much worse. By extreme winds I mean wind speeds in excess of 145 km/hr – everywhere.

Michael V said:

furious said:

furious said:

• Bit surprised nobody’s invented implantable nasal filters.

They have, I read it in a book. Though it might have been a sci fi story…

Looks like someone has, went to go find where I had read it but instead came up with a product:

Personal Nasal Filter

1 micron filtration!

The ‘N95’ designation means they will trap at least 95% of particles down to 0.3μm.

Rule 303 said:

Michael V said:

furious said:

Looks like someone has, went to go find where I had read it but instead came up with a product:

Personal Nasal Filter

1 micron filtration!

The ‘N95’ designation means they will trap at least 95% of particles down to 0.3μm.

Bloody good, then.

Michael V said:

Rule 303 said:

Michael V said:

1 micron filtration!

The ‘N95’ designation means they will trap at least 95% of particles down to 0.3μm.

Bloody good, then.

How easy will it be to breathe through?

doesn’t take much rain to stop a fire, and prevent fires, so i’d guess there’s a good chance rains will come, and quite rapidly things turn around, the fires will fade from your mind, news headlines will change, then winter will return eventually and the cold will feature most prominently in peoples’ minds

bushfires are better seen as being part of a weather event

mollwollfumble said:

Bubblecar said:

With these fires set to get worse year by year, it won’t be long before the current summer infernos will be viewed as an “exceptionally mild” fire season. In regard to human habitation, the toxic smoke appears to be the worst aspect, with major population centres increasingly choked with smoke for weeks or months on end.

Far from being “a great place to raise kids”, enduring smoke-choked summers from infancy onwards can be expected to lead to truncated lifespans. Before long doctors will be urging families with young children to emigrate, and many of those who can afford it will presumably be doing so, while others will be seeking asylum in healthier countries willing to accept Oz refugees.

With the population depleted of people able to run an economy and fight the fires, it’s not hard to imagine the nation grinding to halt, and indeed coming largely to an end as a place fit for human habitation.

Is it possible this country will simply burn itself to death?

Only if the Greens have their way. ie. suppressing fuel-reduction burnings.

This could indeed be considered an exceptionally mild fire season in future, because it was not accompanied by extreme winds. If you combine extreme winds with bushfires then that would make things much worse. By extreme winds I mean wind speeds in excess of 145 km/hr – everywhere.

Which Greens are these?

The Rev Dodgson said:

mollwollfumble said:

Bubblecar said:

With these fires set to get worse year by year, it won’t be long before the current summer infernos will be viewed as an “exceptionally mild” fire season. In regard to human habitation, the toxic smoke appears to be the worst aspect, with major population centres increasingly choked with smoke for weeks or months on end.

Far from being “a great place to raise kids”, enduring smoke-choked summers from infancy onwards can be expected to lead to truncated lifespans. Before long doctors will be urging families with young children to emigrate, and many of those who can afford it will presumably be doing so, while others will be seeking asylum in healthier countries willing to accept Oz refugees.

With the population depleted of people able to run an economy and fight the fires, it’s not hard to imagine the nation grinding to halt, and indeed coming largely to an end as a place fit for human habitation.

Is it possible this country will simply burn itself to death?

Only if the Greens have their way. ie. suppressing fuel-reduction burnings.

This could indeed be considered an exceptionally mild fire season in future, because it was not accompanied by extreme winds. If you combine extreme winds with bushfires then that would make things much worse. By extreme winds I mean wind speeds in excess of 145 km/hr – everywhere.

Which Greens are these?

Outerspace greens

Cymek said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

mollwollfumble said:

Only if the Greens have their way. ie. suppressing fuel-reduction burnings.

This could indeed be considered an exceptionally mild fire season in future, because it was not accompanied by extreme winds. If you combine extreme winds with bushfires then that would make things much worse. By extreme winds I mean wind speeds in excess of 145 km/hr – everywhere.

Which Greens are these?

Outerspace greens

The ones who don’t know the difference between fuel reduction burns & backburns.

The Rev Dodgson said:

mollwollfumble said:

Bubblecar said:

With these fires set to get worse year by year, it won’t be long before the current summer infernos will be viewed as an “exceptionally mild” fire season. In regard to human habitation, the toxic smoke appears to be the worst aspect, with major population centres increasingly choked with smoke for weeks or months on end.

Far from being “a great place to raise kids”, enduring smoke-choked summers from infancy onwards can be expected to lead to truncated lifespans. Before long doctors will be urging families with young children to emigrate, and many of those who can afford it will presumably be doing so, while others will be seeking asylum in healthier countries willing to accept Oz refugees.

With the population depleted of people able to run an economy and fight the fires, it’s not hard to imagine the nation grinding to halt, and indeed coming largely to an end as a place fit for human habitation.

Is it possible this country will simply burn itself to death?

Only if the Greens have their way. ie. suppressing fuel-reduction burnings.

This could indeed be considered an exceptionally mild fire season in future, because it was not accompanied by extreme winds. If you combine extreme winds with bushfires then that would make things much worse. By extreme winds I mean wind speeds in excess of 145 km/hr – everywhere.

Which Greens are these?

yeah doubt’t has anything to do with the greens, though the greening may tend more people not to consider having highly flammable (native) vegetation up very near their abodes, which on a typical year may not be much of a threat, but if you get a fifty or hundred year extended dry event, anyway their way of seeing it doesn’t flip to that’s really dangerous, may as well be a couple thousand litres of petrol

transition said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

mollwollfumble said:

Only if the Greens have their way. ie. suppressing fuel-reduction burnings.

This could indeed be considered an exceptionally mild fire season in future, because it was not accompanied by extreme winds. If you combine extreme winds with bushfires then that would make things much worse. By extreme winds I mean wind speeds in excess of 145 km/hr – everywhere.

Which Greens are these?

yeah doubt’t has anything to do with the greens, though the greening may tend more people not to consider having highly flammable (native) vegetation up very near their abodes, which on a typical year may not be much of a threat, but if you get a fifty or hundred year extended dry event, anyway their way of seeing it doesn’t flip to that’s really dangerous, may as well be a couple thousand litres of petrol

I’ve been to fires where people have had vegetation hard up against the back of their houses. Impossible to defend.

• Which Greens are these?

Brussel sprouts and broccoli. We don’t like their kind around here…

furious said:

• Which Greens are these?

Brussel sprouts and broccoli. We don’t like their kind around here…

And kale either. Furrin muck.

Tamb said:

I’ve been to fires where people have had vegetation hard up against the back of their houses. Impossible to defend.

My dad (NSWVFB) had much to say about such residences.

I was in the Navy, and i never heard comparable swearing.

engineering solution: we need some heavy firefighting aircraft.

It is quite easy to see where Australia is heading. The fires are a byproduct to the fact that Australia is drying out and will become more arid. The biota that cannot adapt will die out unless they can find a refuge and those that can accommodate the hotter conditions will carry on. It just depends on where global warming will stabilise that will determine the extent of how many species survive, but regardless there will be many going extinct. This is not the time for us to procrastinate.

It concerns me a bit that, just as some corners of the political spectrum mistake weather for climate, people might be mistaking a bad fire season for global warming.

Rule 303 said:

It concerns me a bit that, just as some corners of the political spectrum mistake weather for climate, people might be mistaking a bad fire season for global warming.

Too late for that. Recent fires are not only a result of global warming there is an identified arsonist.

Rule 303 said:

It concerns me a bit that, just as some corners of the political spectrum mistake weather for climate, people might be mistaking a bad fire season for global warming.

Exactly, global warming is a myth

The-Spectator said:

Rule 303 said:

It concerns me a bit that, just as some corners of the political spectrum mistake weather for climate, people might be mistaking a bad fire season for global warming.

Exactly, global warming is a myth

Thought you had died Observer; what a pity.

• Recent fires are not only a result of global warming there is an identified arsonist.

All done by Big Train using exploding smart meters and sharks with lasers…

Rule 303 said:

It concerns me a bit that, just as some corners of the political spectrum mistake weather for climate, people might be mistaking a bad fire season for global warming.

Not sure about “people”, but the scientists are telling us that bad fire seasons will become more frequent.

AwesomeO said:

Rule 303 said:

It concerns me a bit that, just as some corners of the political spectrum mistake weather for climate, people might be mistaking a bad fire season for global warming.

Too late for that. Recent fires are not only a result of global warming there is an identified arsonist.

If only the didn’t let people play with matches.

buffy said:

Bubblecar said:

With these fires set to get worse year by year, it won’t be long before the current summer infernos will be viewed as an “exceptionally mild” fire season. In regard to human habitation, the toxic smoke appears to be the worst aspect, with major population centres increasingly choked with smoke for weeks or months on end.

Far from being “a great place to raise kids”, enduring smoke-choked summers from infancy onwards can be expected to lead to truncated lifespans. Before long doctors will be urging families with young children to emigrate, and many of those who can afford it will presumably be doing so, while others will be seeking asylum in healthier countries willing to accept Oz refugees.

With the population depleted of people able to run an economy and fight the fires, it’s not hard to imagine the nation grinding to halt, and indeed coming largely to an end as a place fit for human habitation.

Is it possible this country will simply burn itself to death?

I think you are catastrophizing.

This.

Woodie said:

AwesomeO said:

Rule 303 said:

It concerns me a bit that, just as some corners of the political spectrum mistake weather for climate, people might be mistaking a bad fire season for global warming.

Too late for that. Recent fires are not only a result of global warming there is an identified arsonist.

If only the didn’t let people play with matches.

…or lumps of coal.

roughbarked said:

buffy said:

Bubblecar said:

With these fires set to get worse year by year, it won’t be long before the current summer infernos will be viewed as an “exceptionally mild” fire season. In regard to human habitation, the toxic smoke appears to be the worst aspect, with major population centres increasingly choked with smoke for weeks or months on end.

Far from being “a great place to raise kids”, enduring smoke-choked summers from infancy onwards can be expected to lead to truncated lifespans. Before long doctors will be urging families with young children to emigrate, and many of those who can afford it will presumably be doing so, while others will be seeking asylum in healthier countries willing to accept Oz refugees.

With the population depleted of people able to run an economy and fight the fires, it’s not hard to imagine the nation grinding to halt, and indeed coming largely to an end as a place fit for human habitation.

Is it possible this country will simply burn itself to death?

I think you are catastrophizing.

This.

It’s worst case scenario stuff. But that may prove to be normal stuff.

mollwollfumble said:

Bubblecar said:

With these fires set to get worse year by year, it won’t be long before the current summer infernos will be viewed as an “exceptionally mild” fire season. In regard to human habitation, the toxic smoke appears to be the worst aspect, with major population centres increasingly choked with smoke for weeks or months on end.

Far from being “a great place to raise kids”, enduring smoke-choked summers from infancy onwards can be expected to lead to truncated lifespans. Before long doctors will be urging families with young children to emigrate, and many of those who can afford it will presumably be doing so, while others will be seeking asylum in healthier countries willing to accept Oz refugees.

With the population depleted of people able to run an economy and fight the fires, it’s not hard to imagine the nation grinding to halt, and indeed coming largely to an end as a place fit for human habitation.

Is it possible this country will simply burn itself to death?

Only if the Greens have their way. ie. suppressing fuel-reduction burnings.

This could indeed be considered an exceptionally mild fire season in future, because it was not accompanied by extreme winds. If you combine extreme winds with bushfires then that would make things much worse. By extreme winds I mean wind speeds in excess of 145 km/hr – everywhere.

The worse the fire seasons get like this year when everything is so dry, it is foolhardy to even consider reduction burning.

roughbarked said:

mollwollfumble said:

Bubblecar said:

With these fires set to get worse year by year, it won’t be long before the current summer infernos will be viewed as an “exceptionally mild” fire season. In regard to human habitation, the toxic smoke appears to be the worst aspect, with major population centres increasingly choked with smoke for weeks or months on end.

Far from being “a great place to raise kids”, enduring smoke-choked summers from infancy onwards can be expected to lead to truncated lifespans. Before long doctors will be urging families with young children to emigrate, and many of those who can afford it will presumably be doing so, while others will be seeking asylum in healthier countries willing to accept Oz refugees.

With the population depleted of people able to run an economy and fight the fires, it’s not hard to imagine the nation grinding to halt, and indeed coming largely to an end as a place fit for human habitation.

Is it possible this country will simply burn itself to death?

Only if the Greens have their way. ie. suppressing fuel-reduction burnings.

This could indeed be considered an exceptionally mild fire season in future, because it was not accompanied by extreme winds. If you combine extreme winds with bushfires then that would make things much worse. By extreme winds I mean wind speeds in excess of 145 km/hr – everywhere.

The worse the fire seasons get like this year when everything is so dry, it is foolhardy to even consider reduction burning.

It’s too big a continent to generalise like that.

Its the rapture, why cant all you see it for what it is?
ScoMo will be fine though (and his hillsong mates and their stupid happy clapping children)

Tamb said:

roughbarked said:

mollwollfumble said:

Only if the Greens have their way. ie. suppressing fuel-reduction burnings.

This could indeed be considered an exceptionally mild fire season in future, because it was not accompanied by extreme winds. If you combine extreme winds with bushfires then that would make things much worse. By extreme winds I mean wind speeds in excess of 145 km/hr – everywhere.

The worse the fire seasons get like this year when everything is so dry, it is foolhardy to even consider reduction burning.

It’s too big a continent to generalise like that.

Wasn’t including the tropics at this time.

roughbarked said:

Tamb said:

roughbarked said:

The worse the fire seasons get like this year when everything is so dry, it is foolhardy to even consider reduction burning.

It’s too big a continent to generalise like that.

Wasn’t including the tropics at this time.

OK.

AwesomeO said:

Rule 303 said:

It concerns me a bit that, just as some corners of the political spectrum mistake weather for climate, people might be mistaking a bad fire season for global warming.

Too late for that. Recent fires are not only a result of global warming there is an identified arsonist.

Pretty much. Makes you wonder what all his spin-doctors and media advisers and empathy consultants actually do. They fucked this up big time and now he looks like the villian in the affair.

It was a bit like this in Singapore. People just accepted that there were a few weeks a year where visibility was down around 100m and you couldn’t go out without a face mask because of the burns in Sumatra.

gaghalfrunt said:

Its the rapture, why cant all you see it for what it is?
ScoMo will be fine though (and his hillsong mates and their stupid happy clapping children)

Well then, if ScoMo is gunna be fine, then we must all follow ScoMo’s path to fineness. Then we’ll all be fine. Simple. Dunno why everyone makes things so complicated.

And if his Hillsong mates and them stupid happy clapping children are gunna be fine, well, I’m off to Hillsong to be one of them happy clapping children. Easy peasey.

Do the Greens support hazard reduction burns?

Yes. The Australian Greens support hazard reduction burning (before bushfire season) to reduce the impact of bushfire when guided by the best scientific, ecological and emergency service expertise. Our policy on this is clear and hasn’t changed recently. For more on the Australian Greens’ policy on bushfire management, please refer to Aim 8 of our Environmental Principles. “Problem is it’s drier and hotter. Around here we’ve been trying to do hazard reductions all year.” Blaming “greenies” for stopping these important measures is a familiar, populist, but basically untrue claim.” – Greg Mullins, fmr Fire & Rescue Commissioner

No. The Greens support back burning to reduce the impact of fires.

“It’s very (insulting) to say they haven’t done enough of these burns, but the conditions have to be right to do hazard reductions. It comes down to cuts.”

https://greens.org.au/bushfires
– Nathan Bradshaw, Public Service Association

Woodie said:

gaghalfrunt said:

Its the rapture, why cant all you see it for what it is?
ScoMo will be fine though (and his hillsong mates and their stupid happy clapping children)

Well then, if ScoMo is gunna be fine, then we must all follow ScoMo’s path to fineness. Then we’ll all be fine. Simple. Dunno why everyone makes things so complicated.

And if his Hillsong mates and them stupid happy clapping children are gunna be fine, well, I’m off to Hillsong to be one of them happy clapping children. Easy peasey.

I’m not sure ‘rapture ready’ equates to fine.

That second bit got messed up.

Have Greens policies made it harder for Firies to backburn?

No. The Greens support back burning to reduce the impact of fires. “It’s very (insulting) to say they haven’t done enough of these burns, but the conditions have to be right to do hazard reductions. It comes down to cuts.” – Nathan Bradshaw, Public Service Association

captain_spalding said:

Do the Greens support hazard reduction burns?

Yes. The Australian Greens support hazard reduction burning (before bushfire season) to reduce the impact of bushfire when guided by the best scientific, ecological and emergency service expertise. Our policy on this is clear and hasn’t changed recently. For more on the Australian Greens’ policy on bushfire management, please refer to Aim 8 of our Environmental Principles. “Problem is it’s drier and hotter. Around here we’ve been trying to do hazard reductions all year.” Blaming “greenies” for stopping these important measures is a familiar, populist, but basically untrue claim.” – Greg Mullins, fmr Fire & Rescue Commissioner

No. The Greens support back burning to reduce the impact of fires.

“It’s very (insulting) to say they haven’t done enough of these burns, but the conditions have to be right to do hazard reductions. It comes down to cuts.”

https://greens.org.au/bushfires
– Nathan Bradshaw, Public Service Association

I believe there is no place for politics in fire management. Let the experts decide not a vote seeking pollie.

captain_spalding said:

That second bit got messed up.

Have Greens policies made it harder for Firies to backburn?

No. The Greens support back burning to reduce the impact of fires. “It’s very (insulting) to say they haven’t done enough of these burns, but the conditions have to be right to do hazard reductions. It comes down to cuts.” – Nathan Bradshaw, Public Service Association

Someone is spreading falsehoods because every day I have to stop somebody for blaming the greenies. They don’t even know who the greenies are or what they are suppposed to have done or not done.

Tamb said:

captain_spalding said:

Do the Greens support hazard reduction burns?

Yes. The Australian Greens support hazard reduction burning (before bushfire season) to reduce the impact of bushfire when guided by the best scientific, ecological and emergency service expertise. Our policy on this is clear and hasn’t changed recently. For more on the Australian Greens’ policy on bushfire management, please refer to Aim 8 of our Environmental Principles. “Problem is it’s drier and hotter. Around here we’ve been trying to do hazard reductions all year.” Blaming “greenies” for stopping these important measures is a familiar, populist, but basically untrue claim.” – Greg Mullins, fmr Fire & Rescue Commissioner

No. The Greens support back burning to reduce the impact of fires.

“It’s very (insulting) to say they haven’t done enough of these burns, but the conditions have to be right to do hazard reductions. It comes down to cuts.”

https://greens.org.au/bushfires
– Nathan Bradshaw, Public Service Association

I believe there is no place for politics in fire management. Let the experts decide not a vote seeking pollie.

Yes. There’s pretty much no place for politics anywhere.

party_pants said:

AwesomeO said:

Rule 303 said:

It concerns me a bit that, just as some corners of the political spectrum mistake weather for climate, people might be mistaking a bad fire season for global warming.

Too late for that. Recent fires are not only a result of global warming there is an identified arsonist.

Pretty much. Makes you wonder what all his spin-doctors and media advisers and empathy consultants actually do. They fucked this up big time and now he looks like the villian in the affair.

While this is indeed Scomo’s Summer of Shame, we’ll still be dealing with such summers long after he’s been ousted by Dutton or Göring or Himmler or one of the others.

roughbarked said:

captain_spalding said:

That second bit got messed up.

Have Greens policies made it harder for Firies to backburn?

No. The Greens support back burning to reduce the impact of fires. “It’s very (insulting) to say they haven’t done enough of these burns, but the conditions have to be right to do hazard reductions. It comes down to cuts.” – Nathan Bradshaw, Public Service Association

Someone is spreading falsehoods because every day I have to stop somebody for blaming the greenies. They don’t even know who the greenies are or what they are suppposed to have done or not done.

They also do not realise that the Greens are on the most part state run.

Bubblecar said:

party_pants said:

AwesomeO said:

Too late for that. Recent fires are not only a result of global warming there is an identified arsonist.

Pretty much. Makes you wonder what all his spin-doctors and media advisers and empathy consultants actually do. They fucked this up big time and now he looks like the villian in the affair.

While this is indeed Scomo’s Summer of Shame, we’ll still be dealing with such summers long after he’s been ousted by Dutton or Göring or Himmler or one of the others.

Maybe if we all moved to the desert where there was less trees and more sand.

party_pants said:

Bubblecar said:

party_pants said:

Pretty much. Makes you wonder what all his spin-doctors and media advisers and empathy consultants actually do. They fucked this up big time and now he looks like the villian in the affair.

While this is indeed Scomo’s Summer of Shame, we’ll still be dealing with such summers long after he’s been ousted by Dutton or Göring or Himmler or one of the others.

Maybe if we all moved to the desert where there was less trees and more sand.

Tamb said:

captain_spalding said:

Do the Greens support hazard reduction burns?

Yes. The Australian Greens support hazard reduction burning (before bushfire season) to reduce the impact of bushfire when guided by the best scientific, ecological and emergency service expertise. Our policy on this is clear and hasn’t changed recently. For more on the Australian Greens’ policy on bushfire management, please refer to Aim 8 of our Environmental Principles. “Problem is it’s drier and hotter. Around here we’ve been trying to do hazard reductions all year.” Blaming “greenies” for stopping these important measures is a familiar, populist, but basically untrue claim.” – Greg Mullins, fmr Fire & Rescue Commissioner

No. The Greens support back burning to reduce the impact of fires.

“It’s very (insulting) to say they haven’t done enough of these burns, but the conditions have to be right to do hazard reductions. It comes down to cuts.”

https://greens.org.au/bushfires
– Nathan Bradshaw, Public Service Association

I believe there is no place for politics in fire management. Let the experts decide not a vote seeking pollie.

Nah nah nah nah nah. Bloody experts? Wadda they know. It’s the vox popoli. The man in the street, the barman down the pub, that bloke across the road settin’ fire to his incinerator that pontificate about it all. They all reckon they know how to fix it and what’s best for God, King and country. Let’s have a plebiscite! Just let the plebs vote.

furious said:

party_pants said:

Bubblecar said:

While this is indeed Scomo’s Summer of Shame, we’ll still be dealing with such summers long after he’s been ousted by Dutton or Göring or Himmler or one of the others.

Maybe if we all moved to the desert where there was less trees and more sand.

Coarse.

The sand here is very fine.

Michael V said:

furious said:

party_pants said:

Maybe if we all moved to the desert where there was less trees and more sand.

Coarse.

The sand here is very fine.

Not my spelling! It was the first one that matched my search!

Woodie said:

Tamb said:

captain_spalding said:

Do the Greens support hazard reduction burns?

Yes. The Australian Greens support hazard reduction burning (before bushfire season) to reduce the impact of bushfire when guided by the best scientific, ecological and emergency service expertise. Our policy on this is clear and hasn’t changed recently. For more on the Australian Greens’ policy on bushfire management, please refer to Aim 8 of our Environmental Principles. “Problem is it’s drier and hotter. Around here we’ve been trying to do hazard reductions all year.” Blaming “greenies” for stopping these important measures is a familiar, populist, but basically untrue claim.” – Greg Mullins, fmr Fire & Rescue Commissioner

No. The Greens support back burning to reduce the impact of fires.

“It’s very (insulting) to say they haven’t done enough of these burns, but the conditions have to be right to do hazard reductions. It comes down to cuts.”

https://greens.org.au/bushfires
– Nathan Bradshaw, Public Service Association

I believe there is no place for politics in fire management. Let the experts decide not a vote seeking pollie.

Nah nah nah nah nah. Bloody experts? Wadda they know. It’s the vox popoli. The man in the street, the barman down the pub, that bloke across the road settin’ fire to his incinerator that pontificate about it all. They all reckon they know how to fix it and what’s best for God, King and country. Let’s have a plebiscite! Just let the plebs vote.

The pollies are exactly the same.

roughbarked said:

captain_spalding said:

That second bit got messed up.

Have Greens policies made it harder for Firies to backburn?

No. The Greens support back burning to reduce the impact of fires. “It’s very (insulting) to say they haven’t done enough of these burns, but the conditions have to be right to do hazard reductions. It comes down to cuts.” – Nathan Bradshaw, Public Service Association

Someone is spreading falsehoods because every day I have to stop somebody for blaming the greenies. They don’t even know who the greenies are or what they are suppposed to have done or not done.

The Wikipedia entry on the fires mentions the same thing

Michael V said:

furious said:

party_pants said:

Maybe if we all moved to the desert where there was less trees and more sand.

Coarse.

The sand here is very fine.

That only means that it gets further in.

Michael V said:

furious said:

party_pants said:

Maybe if we all moved to the desert where there was less trees and more sand.

Coarse.

The sand here is very fine.

You’ve done the course and understand the different degree of sand.

party_pants said:

Michael V said:

furious said:

Coarse.

The sand here is very fine.

You’ve done the course and understand the different degree of sand.

that was uncalled for.

I was just thinking this landscape would be less prone to wild fires:

than something like this:

party_pants said:

that was uncalled for.

I was just thinking this landscape would be less prone to wild fires:

than something like this:

Saltbush just doesn’t want to burn. You’ll never boil a billy with it.

This could probably go in this thread

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-01-15/canberra-could-learn-from-victorias-response-to-the-fires/11860122

Bubblecar said:

Rule 303 said:

It concerns me a bit that, just as some corners of the political spectrum mistake weather for climate, people might be mistaking a bad fire season for global warming.

Not sure about “people”, but the scientists are telling us that bad fire seasons will become more frequent.

Of course. More frequent and worse. Doesn’t say anything about this particular bad fire season except that it was more likely to happen.

buffy said:

This could probably go in this thread

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-01-15/canberra-could-learn-from-victorias-response-to-the-fires/11860122

A new TAFE Fire awareness course with Fire hazard reduction training

A Compulsory Fire Course for all farmers

A new fleet of helicopters must be a start, more helicopter water bombing pilots

A new fleet of water bombing planes more water bombing pilots

New water tank trucks

More education for people leaving in wooded areas.

Tau.Neutrino said:

buffy said:

This could probably go in this thread

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-01-15/canberra-could-learn-from-victorias-response-to-the-fires/11860122

A new TAFE Fire awareness course with Fire hazard reduction training

A Compulsory Fire Course for all farmers

A new fleet of helicopters must be a start, more helicopter water bombing pilots

A new fleet of water bombing planes more water bombing pilots

New water tank trucks

More fire education awareness for people leaving in wooded areas.

More fire awareness training for trades that generate sparks

Tau.Neutrino said:

Tau.Neutrino said:

buffy said:

This could probably go in this thread

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-01-15/canberra-could-learn-from-victorias-response-to-the-fires/11860122

A new TAFE Fire awareness course with Fire hazard reduction training

A Compulsory Fire Course for all farmers

A new fleet of helicopters must be a start, more helicopter water bombing pilots

A new fleet of water bombing planes more water bombing pilots

New water tank trucks

More fire education awareness for people leaving in wooded areas.

More fire awareness training for trades that generate sparks

Maybe even TAFE back burning courses.

Tau.Neutrino said:

Tau.Neutrino said:

Tau.Neutrino said:

A new TAFE Fire awareness course with Fire hazard reduction training

A Compulsory Fire Course for all farmers

A new fleet of helicopters must be a start, more helicopter water bombing pilots

A new fleet of water bombing planes more water bombing pilots

New water tank trucks

More fire education awareness for people leaving in wooded areas.

More fire awareness training for trades that generate sparks

Maybe even TAFE back burning courses.

I prefer the fire hazard reduction approach, and more earth turning machinery designed for that is needed

Tau.Neutrino said:

Tau.Neutrino said:

Tau.Neutrino said:

A new TAFE Fire awareness course with Fire hazard reduction training

A Compulsory Fire Course for all farmers

A new fleet of helicopters must be a start, more helicopter water bombing pilots

A new fleet of water bombing planes more water bombing pilots

New water tank trucks

More fire education awareness for people leaving in wooded areas.

More fire awareness training for trades that generate sparks

Maybe even TAFE back burning courses.

short courses in fire terminology.

sarahs mum said:

Tau.Neutrino said:

Tau.Neutrino said:

More fire awareness training for trades that generate sparks

Maybe even TAFE back burning courses.

short courses in fire terminology.

Information sheets

maybe a that fire awareness package sent to all households and businesses with National postal campaign

Tau.Neutrino said:

sarahs mum said:

Tau.Neutrino said:

Maybe even TAFE back burning courses.

short courses in fire terminology.

Information sheets

maybe a that fire awareness package sent to all households and businesses with National postal campaign

A fire awareness package sent to all households and businesses via a national postal campaign.

Tau.Neutrino said:

Tau.Neutrino said:

sarahs mum said:

short courses in fire terminology.

Information sheets

maybe a that fire awareness package sent to all households and businesses with National postal campaign

A fire awareness package sent to all households and businesses via a national postal campaign.

Emergency websites and numbers for each state

emergency apps linked to fire spread data

breathing masks and eye safety glasses information

local radio frequencies

local safe places

Fire plan escape info

fire reduction info

how to protect yourself when fire passes

how to know how long fire passes etc

lots of other things

One thing about fire hazard reduction is that when a fire does pass there is less work to do.

More fire hazard reduction = less work when fire passes.

Another side to that is that nutrients are being taken away

so with proper planning those nutriments should be returned when its wet again.

first clouds now australia….where will it end???

Tau.Neutrino said:

Tau.Neutrino said:

sarahs mum said:

short courses in fire terminology.

Information sheets

maybe a that fire awareness package sent to all households and businesses with National postal campaign

A fire awareness package sent to all households and businesses via a national postal campaign.

I’ve got the CFA one that was sent out some years ago. This stuff has been done.

Tau.Neutrino said:

Tau.Neutrino said:

Tau.Neutrino said:

Information sheets

maybe a that fire awareness package sent to all households and businesses with National postal campaign

A fire awareness package sent to all households and businesses via a national postal campaign.

Emergency websites and numbers for each state

emergency apps linked to fire spread data

breathing masks and eye safety glasses information

local radio frequencies

local safe places

Fire plan escape info

fire reduction info

how to protect yourself when fire passes

how to know how long fire passes etc

lots of other things

Who’s gonna pay for that info pack?

All that stuff can be found on both council and state fire services’ websites. I have a ton of fire preparation info from local councillors and events.

(Councillors/MPs et al usually have a stall at local events in which they hand out a tote bag. The bag usually has a balloon, pen, magnetic shopping list etc, but often has fire info as well. Don’t see much regarding other natural disasters like flooding or storms though. The same events are usually attended by a fire engine unless there’s an emergency somewhere. Kids love climbing on fire engines.)

Tau.Neutrino said:

Tau.Neutrino said:

Tau.Neutrino said:

A new TAFE Fire awareness course with Fire hazard reduction training

A Compulsory Fire Course for all farmers

A new fleet of helicopters must be a start, more helicopter water bombing pilots

A new fleet of water bombing planes more water bombing pilots

New water tank trucks

More fire education awareness for people leaving in wooded areas.

More fire awareness training for trades that generate sparks

Maybe even TAFE back burning courses.

Just to clear up confusion about the terms, preventative burning is lighting fires to reduce fuel load, it’s done off-season and aims to prevent fires, or reduce the intensity of fires. Back burning is lighting fires in the path of a going fire to create a control line, to stop the fire going any further.

buffy said:

Tau.Neutrino said:

Tau.Neutrino said:

Information sheets

maybe a that fire awareness package sent to all households and businesses with National postal campaign

A fire awareness package sent to all households and businesses via a national postal campaign.

I’ve got the CFA one that was sent out some years ago. This stuff has been done.

Does it need to be done again ?

Lots of people still throwing out cigarette butts from cars

farmers campers and other people lighting fires on total fire ban days etc

Newer apps with fire spread information.

Divine Angel said:

Tau.Neutrino said:

Tau.Neutrino said:

A fire awareness package sent to all households and businesses via a national postal campaign.

Emergency websites and numbers for each state

emergency apps linked to fire spread data

breathing masks and eye safety glasses information

local radio frequencies

local safe places

Fire plan escape info

fire reduction info

how to protect yourself when fire passes

how to know how long fire passes etc

lots of other things

Who’s gonna pay for that info pack?

All that stuff can be found on both council and state fire services’ websites. I have a ton of fire preparation info from local councillors and events.

(Councillors/MPs et al usually have a stall at local events in which they hand out a tote bag. The bag usually has a balloon, pen, magnetic shopping list etc, but often has fire info as well. Don’t see much regarding other natural disasters like flooding or storms though. The same events are usually attended by a fire engine unless there’s an emergency somewhere. Kids love climbing on fire engines.)

Cost Of Australia’s fires ?

Estimates of the cost of damage from the fires have ranged from about $3 billion, or 4.4 billion Australian dollars,

Cost of postal campaign?

These are things to weigh up?

Tau.Neutrino said:

Divine Angel said:

Tau.Neutrino said:

Emergency websites and numbers for each state

emergency apps linked to fire spread data

breathing masks and eye safety glasses information

local radio frequencies

local safe places

Fire plan escape info

fire reduction info

how to protect yourself when fire passes

how to know how long fire passes etc

lots of other things

Who’s gonna pay for that info pack?

All that stuff can be found on both council and state fire services’ websites. I have a ton of fire preparation info from local councillors and events.

(Councillors/MPs et al usually have a stall at local events in which they hand out a tote bag. The bag usually has a balloon, pen, magnetic shopping list etc, but often has fire info as well. Don’t see much regarding other natural disasters like flooding or storms though. The same events are usually attended by a fire engine unless there’s an emergency somewhere. Kids love climbing on fire engines.)

Cost Of Australia’s fires ?

Estimates of the cost of damage from the fires have ranged from about $3 billion, or 4.4 billion Australian dollars,

Cost of postal campaign?

These are things to weigh up?

Maybe a TV and Radio Ad campaign instead ?

always get the firebreak info in with the rates notice. listen to the abc and you get the harvest bans and vehicle movement bans for the local shires. if you want to learn about hazard reduction etc join the local cfa.

Tau.Neutrino said:

Tau.Neutrino said:

sarahs mum said:

short courses in fire terminology.

Information sheets

maybe a that fire awareness package sent to all households and businesses with National postal campaign

A fire awareness package sent to all households and businesses via a national postal campaign.

‘Be alert, not alight’?

captain_spalding said:

Tau.Neutrino said:

Tau.Neutrino said:

Information sheets

maybe a that fire awareness package sent to all households and businesses with National postal campaign

A fire awareness package sent to all households and businesses via a national postal campaign.

‘Be alert, not alight’?

:)

captain_spalding said:

Tau.Neutrino said:

Tau.Neutrino said:

Information sheets

maybe a that fire awareness package sent to all households and businesses with National postal campaign

A fire awareness package sent to all households and businesses via a national postal campaign.

‘Be alert, not alight’?

learn, don’t burn.

Tau.Neutrino said:

’Be alert, not alight’?

>snort<

Pinched.

Oooh, this reminds me that I need to amend an answer I gave PWM a few weeks ago about the procedure for bushfire burnover (shelter in vehicle).

Last time I said leave the engine and air conditioning running (AC on Recirculate) but the current advice from the fire agency for Vic (CFA) is to turn them off when the fire is actually going over.

So, the full procedure is:

Position the car to minimise exposure to radiant heat: Park away from dense bush – try to find a clearing. If possible, park behind a barrier such as a wall or rocky outcrop. The car should ideally face towards the oncoming fire front. Park off the roadway and turn hazard lights on. Car crashes are common in bushfires due to poor visibility

To increase your chances of survival Stay in the car, and tightly close windows and doors. Cover up with woollen blankets and get down below window level – this is your highest priority. Drink water to prevent dehydration.

As soon as you become aware that the fire front is close by: Shut all vents and turn the air conditioning off Turn the engine off

Rule 303 said:

Oooh, this reminds me that I need to amend an answer I gave PWM a few weeks ago about the procedure for bushfire burnover (shelter in vehicle).

Last time I said leave the engine and air conditioning running (AC on Recirculate) but the current advice from the fire agency for Vic (CFA) is to turn them off when the fire is actually going over.

So, the full procedure is:

Position the car to minimise exposure to radiant heat: Park away from dense bush – try to find a clearing. If possible, park behind a barrier such as a wall or rocky outcrop. The car should ideally face towards the oncoming fire front. Park off the roadway and turn hazard lights on. Car crashes are common in bushfires due to poor visibility

To increase your chances of survival Stay in the car, and tightly close windows and doors. Cover up with woollen blankets and get down below window level – this is your highest priority. Drink water to prevent dehydration.

As soon as you become aware that the fire front is close by: Shut all vents and turn the air conditioning off Turn the engine off

Cheers.

Link to CSIRO / CRC research report on last.

(downloads a PDF)

Rule 303 said:

Oooh, this reminds me that I need to amend an answer I gave PWM a few weeks ago about the procedure for bushfire burnover (shelter in vehicle).

Last time I said leave the engine and air conditioning running (AC on Recirculate) but the current advice from the fire agency for Vic (CFA) is to turn them off when the fire is actually going over.

So, the full procedure is:

Position the car to minimise exposure to radiant heat: Park away from dense bush – try to find a clearing. If possible, park behind a barrier such as a wall or rocky outcrop. The car should ideally face towards the oncoming fire front. Park off the roadway and turn hazard lights on. Car crashes are common in bushfires due to poor visibility

To increase your chances of survival Stay in the car, and tightly close windows and doors. Cover up with woollen blankets and get down below window level – this is your highest priority. Drink water to prevent dehydration.

As soon as you become aware that the fire front is close by: Shut all vents and turn the air conditioning off Turn the engine off

I suppose orient yourself as well, if at some point the vehicle catches light, so hopefully you can run into an area that has already been burnt? Or try and restart and drive a bit more?

Tau.Neutrino said:

Tau.Neutrino said:

Divine Angel said:

Who’s gonna pay for that info pack?

All that stuff can be found on both council and state fire services’ websites. I have a ton of fire preparation info from local councillors and events.

(Councillors/MPs et al usually have a stall at local events in which they hand out a tote bag. The bag usually has a balloon, pen, magnetic shopping list etc, but often has fire info as well. Don’t see much regarding other natural disasters like flooding or storms though. The same events are usually attended by a fire engine unless there’s an emergency somewhere. Kids love climbing on fire engines.)

Cost Of Australia’s fires ?

Estimates of the cost of damage from the fires have ranged from about $3 billion, or 4.4 billion Australian dollars,

Cost of postal campaign?

These are things to weigh up?

Maybe a TV and Radio Ad campaign instead ?

This ad is authorised by…

Also, with regards fire safety training, there is a public Bushfire Safety for Workers CFA learning module that you can complete on-line.

AwesomeO said:

Rule 303 said:

Oooh, this reminds me that I need to amend an answer I gave PWM a few weeks ago about the procedure for bushfire burnover (shelter in vehicle).

Last time I said leave the engine and air conditioning running (AC on Recirculate) but the current advice from the fire agency for Vic (CFA) is to turn them off when the fire is actually going over.

So, the full procedure is:

Position the car to minimise exposure to radiant heat: Park away from dense bush – try to find a clearing. If possible, park behind a barrier such as a wall or rocky outcrop. The car should ideally face towards the oncoming fire front. Park off the roadway and turn hazard lights on. Car crashes are common in bushfires due to poor visibility

To increase your chances of survival Stay in the car, and tightly close windows and doors. Cover up with woollen blankets and get down below window level – this is your highest priority. Drink water to prevent dehydration.

As soon as you become aware that the fire front is close by: Shut all vents and turn the air conditioning off Turn the engine off

I suppose orient yourself as well, if at some point the vehicle catches light, so hopefully you can run into an area that has already been burnt? Or try and restart and drive a bit more?

Yeah, unless the fire around the car makes it impossible to get out, I’d be climbing out with the blanket and a fire extinguisher, and immediately checking over the car for anything that’s caught fire.

Rule 303 said:

AwesomeO said:

Rule 303 said:

Oooh, this reminds me that I need to amend an answer I gave PWM a few weeks ago about the procedure for bushfire burnover (shelter in vehicle).

Last time I said leave the engine and air conditioning running (AC on Recirculate) but the current advice from the fire agency for Vic (CFA) is to turn them off when the fire is actually going over.

So, the full procedure is:

Position the car to minimise exposure to radiant heat: Park away from dense bush – try to find a clearing. If possible, park behind a barrier such as a wall or rocky outcrop. The car should ideally face towards the oncoming fire front. Park off the roadway and turn hazard lights on. Car crashes are common in bushfires due to poor visibility

To increase your chances of survival Stay in the car, and tightly close windows and doors. Cover up with woollen blankets and get down below window level – this is your highest priority. Drink water to prevent dehydration.

As soon as you become aware that the fire front is close by: Shut all vents and turn the air conditioning off Turn the engine off

I suppose orient yourself as well, if at some point the vehicle catches light, so hopefully you can run into an area that has already been burnt? Or try and restart and drive a bit more?

Yeah, unless the fire around the car makes it impossible to get out, I’d be climbing out with the blanket and a fire extinguisher, and immediately checking over the car for anything that’s caught fire.

Maybe some company can make a water spray kit for cars 4WD, trucks and other vehicles?

Like some fire trucks have.

Tau.Neutrino said:

Rule 303 said:

AwesomeO said:

I suppose orient yourself as well, if at some point the vehicle catches light, so hopefully you can run into an area that has already been burnt? Or try and restart and drive a bit more?

Yeah, unless the fire around the car makes it impossible to get out, I’d be climbing out with the blanket and a fire extinguisher, and immediately checking over the car for anything that’s caught fire.

Maybe some company can make a water spray kit for cars 4WD, trucks and other vehicles?

Like some fire trucks have.

It would be fairly basic plumbing, I should think, but you would need to carry a fair bit of water quite high on the vehicle (^ CoG) unless you were going to run a pump.

https://www.3aw.com.au/get-rid-of-the-bush-or-live-with-it-experts-say-controlled-burning-isnt-sustainable/

who cares, it’s not like we haven’t already stripped nature bare across most of the land of other inhabited continents

SCIENCE said:

who cares, it’s not like we haven’t already stripped nature bare across most of the land of other inhabited continents

That’s the spirit

SCIENCE said:

who cares, it’s not like we haven’t already stripped nature bare across most of the land of other inhabited continents

Earth will end up like Mars

Arts said:

SCIENCE said:

who cares, it’s not like we haven’t already stripped nature bare across most of the land of other inhabited continents

That’s the spirit

Burn everything!

I didn’t say that.

roughbarked said:

party_pants said:

that was uncalled for.

I was just thinking this landscape would be less prone to wild fires:

than something like this:

Saltbush just doesn’t want to burn. You’ll never boil a billy with it.

Now that’s interesting.

Should people be planting it around their houses?

roughbarked said:

party_pants said:

that was uncalled for.

I was just thinking this landscape would be less prone to wild fires:

than something like this:

Saltbush just doesn’t want to burn. You’ll never boil a billy with it.

Now that’s interesting. I’m always interested in garden plants that don’t burn. Prickly rear doesn’t burn on its own, but there are negatives in planting that everywhere. By the way, I found out only a month ago that prickly pear was on the shipping manifesto for the first fleet.

Should people be planting saltbush around their houses?

and

Should people be adding up how much carbon dioxide these fires are adding to the atmosphere?

mollwollfumble said:

roughbarked said:

party_pants said:

that was uncalled for.

I was just thinking this landscape would be less prone to wild fires:

than something like this:

Saltbush just doesn’t want to burn. You’ll never boil a billy with it.

Now that’s interesting. I’m always interested in garden plants that don’t burn. Prickly rear doesn’t burn on its own, but there are negatives in planting that everywhere. By the way, I found out only a month ago that prickly pear was on the shipping manifesto for the first fleet.

Should people be planting saltbush around their houses?

and

Should people be adding up how much carbon dioxide these fires are adding to the atmosphere?

Back in the 1980s I planted Hakea saligna along the fenceline at Hawkesdale. It’s fire retardant. I don’t think there are any trees/shrubs that don’t burn. I bonus turned out to be that the yellow tailed black cockatoos loved it and came in to prune it every year.

:)

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-01-16/we-do-not-need-bushfire-royal-commission-this-is-why/11870824

buffy said:

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-01-16/we-do-not-need-bushfire-royal-commission-this-is-why/11870824

No, we don’t need one, but the government does.

It’s a lovely distraction, it give the impression that ‘something is being done’, it give politicians a way to dodge issue/question by saying ‘well, that’s forthe Royal Commission to determine’.

buffy said:

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-01-16/we-do-not-need-bushfire-royal-commission-this-is-why/11870824

Thanks. Backs up what Rule said earlier.

mollwollfumble said:

roughbarked said:

party_pants said:

that was uncalled for.

I was just thinking this landscape would be less prone to wild fires:

than something like this:

Saltbush just doesn’t want to burn. You’ll never boil a billy with it.

Now that’s interesting. I’m always interested in garden plants that don’t burn. Prickly rear doesn’t burn on its own, but there are negatives in planting that everywhere. By the way, I found out only a month ago that prickly pear was on the shipping manifesto for the first fleet.

Should people be planting saltbush around their houses?

and

Should people be adding up how much carbon dioxide these fires are adding to the atmosphere?

Early homesteads did have salbush around them.

https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2019/nov/21/scott-morrison-says-no-evidence-links-australias-carbon-emissions-to-bushfires

ChrispenEvan said:

https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2019/nov/21/scott-morrison-says-no-evidence-links-australias-carbon-emissions-to-bushfires

But he’d say anything in an attempt to avoid talking about the science.

ChrispenEvan said:

https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2019/nov/21/scott-morrison-says-no-evidence-links-australias-carbon-emissions-to-bushfires

Oh Scotty.

Divine Angel said:

ChrispenEvan said:

https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2019/nov/21/scott-morrison-says-no-evidence-links-australias-carbon-emissions-to-bushfires

Oh Scotty.

The utter, utter bar-steward. Scummo.

But what did we expect? Can a leopard change its spots?

Can Scotty from marketing change his spin?

That article is from Nov 9 last year. I expect Scomo’s talking posts if not his beliefs have evolved since then.

Witty Rejoinder said:

That article is from Nov 9 last year. I expect Scomo’s talking posts if not his beliefs have evolved since then.

talking points maybe, beliefs, no.

Witty Rejoinder said:

That article is from Nov 9 last year. I expect Scomo’s talking posts if not his beliefs have evolved since then.

I didn’t notice the date. Apologies.

Michael V said:

Witty Rejoinder said:

That article is from Nov 9 last year. I expect Scomo’s talking posts if not his beliefs have evolved since then.

I didn’t notice the date. Apologies.

yeah, check the date before you post articles, sheesh.

;-)

ChrispenEvan said:

Michael V said:

Witty Rejoinder said:

That article is from Nov 9 last year. I expect Scomo’s talking posts if not his beliefs have evolved since then.

I didn’t notice the date. Apologies.

yeah, check the date before you post articles, sheesh.

;-)

I didn’t post the article. DA did. But I commented on it.

Michael V said:

ChrispenEvan said:

Michael V said:

I didn’t notice the date. Apologies.

yeah, check the date before you post articles, sheesh.

;-)

I didn’t post the article. DA did. But I commented on it.

I posted the article. and I was stirring, as usual.

:-)

ChrispenEvan said:

Michael V said:

ChrispenEvan said:

yeah, check the date before you post articles, sheesh.

;-)

I didn’t post the article. DA did. But I commented on it.

I posted the article. and I was stirring, as usual.

:-)

Bar-steward.

You did, too.

roughbarked said:

ChrispenEvan said:

https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2019/nov/21/scott-morrison-says-no-evidence-links-australias-carbon-emissions-to-bushfires

But he’d say anything in an attempt to avoid talking about the science.

You have to feel sorry for Slomo though.

Having to keep both his progressive and retarded supporters happy at the same time makes life difficult.

Michael V said:

ChrispenEvan said:

Michael V said:

I didn’t notice the date. Apologies.

yeah, check the date before you post articles, sheesh.

;-)

I didn’t post the article. DA did. But I commented on it.

Uh no, Boris did.

Divine Angel said:

Michael V said:

ChrispenEvan said:

yeah, check the date before you post articles, sheesh.

;-)

I didn’t post the article. DA did. But I commented on it.

Uh no, Boris did.

geez i’m a troublemaker.

ChrispenEvan said:

Divine Angel said:

Michael V said:

I didn’t post the article. DA did. But I commented on it.

Uh no, Boris did.

geez i’m a troublemaker.

Can’t argue with that.

sarahs mum said:

Leaked report lays bare environmental devastation of Victorian fires
https://www.theage.com.au/national/victoria/leaked-report-lays-bare-environmental-devastation-of-victorian-fires-20200110-p53qep.html

https://amp.theguardian.com/environment/2020/jan/17/its-heart-wrenching-80-of-blue-mountains-and-50-of-gondwana-rainforests-burn-in-bushfires

Astronaut Shares Heartbreaking Photos of The Australian Bushfire Smoke

sarahs mum said:

https://amp.theguardian.com/environment/2020/jan/17/its-heart-wrenching-80-of-blue-mountains-and-50-of-gondwana-rainforests-burn-in-bushfires

When I see things like this, all at once – how many species has/will it drive extinct?
What animals can’t survive bushfires. Are koalas the Australian mammal most at risk, or possums?
Lizards, particularly goannas must be badly off.
Animals that can run, fly or burrow would be best off.
Last time I visited a bad bushfire in the Blue Mountains, only the ants made it through.

The Idriess Plan could reverse global warming in Australia.

You’ve heard of the latent heat of evaporation of course. As water evaporates it cools its environment – a lot.

OK, so increasing the Lake Eyre Basin and adjacent desert catchment areas by 10% on the wettest edges of the catchment increases the water evaporating (and transpiration) from the central half of the continent by about 50%. That’s a huge amount of cooling. Is it enough to completely mitigate the effects of Australian global warming on its own? Possibly, but it doesn’t have to be.

Because the cooling of central Australia removes the blocking high in the atmosphere over central Australia, this allows cold fronts, lows and wet weather systems to penetrate much further inland. Further increasing rainfall and evapo-transpiration, cooling the continent even more.

Overall, I’d make a fair bet that that 1.4 or so degrees of warming could be completely negated by implementing the Idriess plan.

So if you want to save Australia – start digging.

Bubblecar said:

With these fires set to get worse year by year, it won’t be long before the current summer infernos will be viewed as an “exceptionally mild” fire season. In regard to human habitation, the toxic smoke appears to be the worst aspect, with major population centres increasingly choked with smoke for weeks or months on end.

Far from being “a great place to raise kids”, enduring smoke-choked summers from infancy onwards can be expected to lead to truncated lifespans. Before long doctors will be urging families with young children to emigrate, and many of those who can afford it will presumably be doing so, while others will be seeking asylum in healthier countries willing to accept Oz refugees.

With the population depleted of people able to run an economy and fight the fires, it’s not hard to imagine the nation grinding to halt, and indeed coming largely to an end as a place fit for human habitation.

Is it possible this country will simply burn itself to death?

I’m still trying unsuccessfully to wrap my brain around this.

This season there have been fewer than normal fires in northern WA, NT, N Qld.

Is this fire season exceptional – yes.

Are high temperatures to blame – in part, but the fires began when temperatures were quite low, so that’s far from the full story.
Is the exceptional growth of forests due increased atmospheric CO2 to blame – definitely in part.
Is the inadequacy of fuel reduction burning to blame – don’t know, the burning is uniform so we can’t blame individual councils.
Is the lack of burning in previous fire seasons to blame – probably in part.
Is this part of the long term trend since the end of the last ice age – probably not.
More lightning strikes in storms – no influence.

The first two (one positive one negative) are due to greenhouse CO2.

How does this impact animal and plant extinction – possibly minor, possibly none.

Will the Australian desert expand north – no.
What happens if the Australian desert expands south – not much to humans, extremely bad news for species in SW of WA.
Do the present fires significantly affect SW of WA – no.
What about vegetation changes in SE Australia – hard to say, but more frequent fires would favour wattles over eucalypts.

What is the greatest threat to Australian humans – plague, pestilence, or war
What is the greatest threat to wildlife of southern Australia – pestilence, disease, or climate change

The ecosystem is not fragile, definitely not. It is very rare for any species to rely solely on any other, extinction never snowballs. Civilian effects on ecosystems have always, in the past, been negligible compared to the effects of human wars against nature. Human wars against nature include Tasmanian tiger, the war against the kangaroo and “rats” in Qld, buffalo, passenger pigeon, agent orange, mass spraying of insecticide in Panama, the war against malaria, China’s war on the four pests. Even those haven’t made a huge change. The wiping out of more than half the songbirds in parts of North America due to a blizzard returned to normal populations in just two years. Probably similar for Australia’s SE wildlife following a bushfire.

What differs here is that all major SE forests have been affected. So not as much in the way of migration into burnt out regions from unburnt regions.

At least crown fires were fairly rare this time, so some species survived in the high canopy.

As I say, I’m still trying unsuccessfully to wrap my brain around this.

mollwollfumble said:

Bubblecar said:

With these fires set to get worse year by year, it won’t be long before the current summer infernos will be viewed as an “exceptionally mild” fire season. In regard to human habitation, the toxic smoke appears to be the worst aspect, with major population centres increasingly choked with smoke for weeks or months on end.

Far from being “a great place to raise kids”, enduring smoke-choked summers from infancy onwards can be expected to lead to truncated lifespans. Before long doctors will be urging families with young children to emigrate, and many of those who can afford it will presumably be doing so, while others will be seeking asylum in healthier countries willing to accept Oz refugees.

With the population depleted of people able to run an economy and fight the fires, it’s not hard to imagine the nation grinding to halt, and indeed coming largely to an end as a place fit for human habitation.

Is it possible this country will simply burn itself to death?

I’m still trying unsuccessfully to wrap my brain around this.

This season there have been fewer than normal fires in northern WA, NT, N Qld.

Is this fire season exceptional – yes.

Are high temperatures to blame – in part, but the fires began when temperatures were quite low, so that’s far from the full story.
Is the exceptional growth of forests due increased atmospheric CO2 to blame – definitely in part.
Is the inadequacy of fuel reduction burning to blame – don’t know, the burning is uniform so we can’t blame individual councils.
Is the lack of burning in previous fire seasons to blame – probably in part.
Is this part of the long term trend since the end of the last ice age – probably not.
More lightning strikes in storms – no influence.

The first two (one positive one negative) are due to greenhouse CO2.

How does this impact animal and plant extinction – possibly minor, possibly none.

Will the Australian desert expand north – no.
What happens if the Australian desert expands south – not much to humans, extremely bad news for species in SW of WA.
Do the present fires significantly affect SW of WA – no.
What about vegetation changes in SE Australia – hard to say, but more frequent fires would favour wattles over eucalypts.

What is the greatest threat to Australian humans – plague, pestilence, or war
What is the greatest threat to wildlife of southern Australia – pestilence, disease, or climate change

The ecosystem is not fragile, definitely not. It is very rare for any species to rely solely on any other, extinction never snowballs. Civilian effects on ecosystems have always, in the past, been negligible compared to the effects of human wars against nature. Human wars against nature include Tasmanian tiger, the war against the kangaroo and “rats” in Qld, buffalo, passenger pigeon, agent orange, mass spraying of insecticide in Panama, the war against malaria, China’s war on the four pests. Even those haven’t made a huge change. The wiping out of more than half the songbirds in parts of North America due to a blizzard returned to normal populations in just two years. Probably similar for Australia’s SE wildlife following a bushfire.

What differs here is that all major SE forests have been affected. So not as much in the way of migration into burnt out regions from unburnt regions.

At least crown fires were fairly rare this time, so some species survived in the high canopy.

As I say, I’m still trying unsuccessfully to wrap my brain around this.

I don’t know.

Isn’t it possible that low rainfall had some small effect?

mollwollfumble said:

Bubblecar said:

With these fires set to get worse year by year, it won’t be long before the current summer infernos will be viewed as an “exceptionally mild” fire season. In regard to human habitation, the toxic smoke appears to be the worst aspect, with major population centres increasingly choked with smoke for weeks or months on end.

Far from being “a great place to raise kids”, enduring smoke-choked summers from infancy onwards can be expected to lead to truncated lifespans. Before long doctors will be urging families with young children to emigrate, and many of those who can afford it will presumably be doing so, while others will be seeking asylum in healthier countries willing to accept Oz refugees.

With the population depleted of people able to run an economy and fight the fires, it’s not hard to imagine the nation grinding to halt, and indeed coming largely to an end as a place fit for human habitation.

Is it possible this country will simply burn itself to death?

I’m still trying unsuccessfully to wrap my brain around this.

This season there have been fewer than normal fires in northern WA, NT, N Qld.

Is this fire season exceptional – yes.

Are high temperatures to blame – in part, but the fires began when temperatures were quite low, so that’s far from the full story.
Is the exceptional growth of forests due increased atmospheric CO2 to blame – definitely in part.
Is the inadequacy of fuel reduction burning to blame – don’t know, the burning is uniform so we can’t blame individual councils.
Is the lack of burning in previous fire seasons to blame – probably in part.
Is this part of the long term trend since the end of the last ice age – probably not.
More lightning strikes in storms – no influence.

The first two (one positive one negative) are due to greenhouse CO2.

How does this impact animal and plant extinction – possibly minor, possibly none.

Will the Australian desert expand north – no.
What happens if the Australian desert expands south – not much to humans, extremely bad news for species in SW of WA.
Do the present fires significantly affect SW of WA – no.
What about vegetation changes in SE Australia – hard to say, but more frequent fires would favour wattles over eucalypts.

What is the greatest threat to Australian humans – plague, pestilence, or war
What is the greatest threat to wildlife of southern Australia – pestilence, disease, or climate change

The ecosystem is not fragile, definitely not. It is very rare for any species to rely solely on any other, extinction never snowballs. Civilian effects on ecosystems have always, in the past, been negligible compared to the effects of human wars against nature. Human wars against nature include Tasmanian tiger, the war against the kangaroo and “rats” in Qld, buffalo, passenger pigeon, agent orange, mass spraying of insecticide in Panama, the war against malaria, China’s war on the four pests. Even those haven’t made a huge change. The wiping out of more than half the songbirds in parts of North America due to a blizzard returned to normal populations in just two years. Probably similar for Australia’s SE wildlife following a bushfire.

What differs here is that all major SE forests have been affected. So not as much in the way of migration into burnt out regions from unburnt regions.

At least crown fires were fairly rare this time, so some species survived in the high canopy.

As I say, I’m still trying unsuccessfully to wrap my brain around this.

>>>>>>>At least crown fires were fairly rare this time, so some species survived in the high canopy.

Really? I don’t know what footage and photos you saw.

mollwollfumble said:

Bubblecar said:

With these fires set to get worse year by year, it won’t be long before the current summer infernos will be viewed as an “exceptionally mild” fire season. In regard to human habitation, the toxic smoke appears to be the worst aspect, with major population centres increasingly choked with smoke for weeks or months on end.

Far from being “a great place to raise kids”, enduring smoke-choked summers from infancy onwards can be expected to lead to truncated lifespans. Before long doctors will be urging families with young children to emigrate, and many of those who can afford it will presumably be doing so, while others will be seeking asylum in healthier countries willing to accept Oz refugees.

With the population depleted of people able to run an economy and fight the fires, it’s not hard to imagine the nation grinding to halt, and indeed coming largely to an end as a place fit for human habitation.

Is it possible this country will simply burn itself to death?

I’m still trying unsuccessfully to wrap my brain around this.

This season there have been fewer than normal fires in northern WA, NT, N Qld.

Is this fire season exceptional – yes.

Are high temperatures to blame – in part, but the fires began when temperatures were quite low, so that’s far from the full story.
Is the exceptional growth of forests due increased atmospheric CO2 to blame – definitely in part.
Is the inadequacy of fuel reduction burning to blame – don’t know, the burning is uniform so we can’t blame individual councils.
Is the lack of burning in previous fire seasons to blame – probably in part.
Is this part of the long term trend since the end of the last ice age – probably not.
More lightning strikes in storms – no influence.

The first two (one positive one negative) are due to greenhouse CO2.

How does this impact animal and plant extinction – possibly minor, possibly none.

Will the Australian desert expand north – no.
What happens if the Australian desert expands south – not much to humans, extremely bad news for species in SW of WA.
Do the present fires significantly affect SW of WA – no.
What about vegetation changes in SE Australia – hard to say, but more frequent fires would favour wattles over eucalypts.

What is the greatest threat to Australian humans – plague, pestilence, or war
What is the greatest threat to wildlife of southern Australia – pestilence, disease, or climate change

The ecosystem is not fragile, definitely not. It is very rare for any species to rely solely on any other, extinction never snowballs. Civilian effects on ecosystems have always, in the past, been negligible compared to the effects of human wars against nature. Human wars against nature include Tasmanian tiger, the war against the kangaroo and “rats” in Qld, buffalo, passenger pigeon, agent orange, mass spraying of insecticide in Panama, the war against malaria, China’s war on the four pests. Even those haven’t made a huge change. The wiping out of more than half the songbirds in parts of North America due to a blizzard returned to normal populations in just two years. Probably similar for Australia’s SE wildlife following a bushfire.

What differs here is that all major SE forests have been affected. So not as much in the way of migration into burnt out regions from unburnt regions.

At least crown fires were fairly rare this time, so some species survived in the high canopy.

As I say, I’m still trying unsuccessfully to wrap my brain around this.

Absolutely agrees. You are being unsuccessful.

Just as I suggested:

Bushfire smoke could cause lung problems for generations, US monkey study suggests

Monkeys in Northern California are providing valuable clues to the health cost of exposure to bushfire smoke, revealing it could have potentially life-threatening consequences for humans.

Large swathes of south-eastern Australia were blanketed in smoke during the recent bushfire crisis, consistently exposing people to unsafe levels of noxious fumes not seen in some of the world’s most polluted cities.

But a decade-long study, tracking the impacts on a cohort of Rhesus Macaque monkeys from infancy to adulthood in California, is providing startling insight into what humans could expect in the future.

The animals grew lungs with 20 per cent less capacity than healthy monkeys; they show signs of the life-threatening condition pulmonary fibrous; and they fight infection less effectively.

And, most troubling, they could pass all of those traits on to their offspring.

Lisa Miller, who helped oversee the study at the University of California’s Primate Centre, said the lessons from the study were applicable beyond the monkeys.

“Our findings should inform regulatory agencies because they can anticipate the types of health outcomes that might be expected in the human population,” Dr Miller said.

“The youngsters, the paediatric populations, should evacuate first and get as far away from the smoke exposure.”

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-01-29/bushfire-smoke-could-alter-respiratory-health-for-generations/11892520

Bubblecar said:

Just as I suggested:

Bushfire smoke could cause lung problems for generations, US monkey study suggests

Monkeys in Northern California are providing valuable clues to the health cost of exposure to bushfire smoke, revealing it could have potentially life-threatening consequences for humans.

Large swathes of south-eastern Australia were blanketed in smoke during the recent bushfire crisis, consistently exposing people to unsafe levels of noxious fumes not seen in some of the world’s most polluted cities.

But a decade-long study, tracking the impacts on a cohort of Rhesus Macaque monkeys from infancy to adulthood in California, is providing startling insight into what humans could expect in the future.

The animals grew lungs with 20 per cent less capacity than healthy monkeys; they show signs of the life-threatening condition pulmonary fibrous; and they fight infection less effectively.

And, most troubling, they could pass all of those traits on to their offspring.

Lisa Miller, who helped oversee the study at the University of California’s Primate Centre, said the lessons from the study were applicable beyond the monkeys.

“Our findings should inform regulatory agencies because they can anticipate the types of health outcomes that might be expected in the human population,” Dr Miller said.

“The youngsters, the paediatric populations, should evacuate first and get as far away from the smoke exposure.”

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-01-29/bushfire-smoke-could-alter-respiratory-health-for-generations/11892520

Isn’t that a bit Lamarckian?

Bubblecar said:

Just as I suggested:

Bushfire smoke could cause lung problems for generations, US monkey study suggests

Monkeys in Northern California are providing valuable clues to the health cost of exposure to bushfire smoke, revealing it could have potentially life-threatening consequences for humans.

Large swathes of south-eastern Australia were blanketed in smoke during the recent bushfire crisis, consistently exposing people to unsafe levels of noxious fumes not seen in some of the world’s most polluted cities.

But a decade-long study, tracking the impacts on a cohort of Rhesus Macaque monkeys from infancy to adulthood in California, is providing startling insight into what humans could expect in the future.

The animals grew lungs with 20 per cent less capacity than healthy monkeys; they show signs of the life-threatening condition pulmonary fibrous; and they fight infection less effectively.

And, most troubling, they could pass all of those traits on to their offspring.

Lisa Miller, who helped oversee the study at the University of California’s Primate Centre, said the lessons from the study were applicable beyond the monkeys.

“Our findings should inform regulatory agencies because they can anticipate the types of health outcomes that might be expected in the human population,” Dr Miller said.

“The youngsters, the paediatric populations, should evacuate first and get as far away from the smoke exposure.”

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-01-29/bushfire-smoke-could-alter-respiratory-health-for-generations/11892520

I’m not a monkey.

sibeen said:

Bubblecar said:

Just as I suggested:

Bushfire smoke could cause lung problems for generations, US monkey study suggests

Monkeys in Northern California are providing valuable clues to the health cost of exposure to bushfire smoke, revealing it could have potentially life-threatening consequences for humans.

Large swathes of south-eastern Australia were blanketed in smoke during the recent bushfire crisis, consistently exposing people to unsafe levels of noxious fumes not seen in some of the world’s most polluted cities.

But a decade-long study, tracking the impacts on a cohort of Rhesus Macaque monkeys from infancy to adulthood in California, is providing startling insight into what humans could expect in the future.

The animals grew lungs with 20 per cent less capacity than healthy monkeys; they show signs of the life-threatening condition pulmonary fibrous; and they fight infection less effectively.

And, most troubling, they could pass all of those traits on to their offspring.

Lisa Miller, who helped oversee the study at the University of California’s Primate Centre, said the lessons from the study were applicable beyond the monkeys.

“Our findings should inform regulatory agencies because they can anticipate the types of health outcomes that might be expected in the human population,” Dr Miller said.

“The youngsters, the paediatric populations, should evacuate first and get as far away from the smoke exposure.”

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-01-29/bushfire-smoke-could-alter-respiratory-health-for-generations/11892520

Isn’t that a bit Lamarckian?

The work of Monsieur Lamarck has become a good deal more credible in recent years.

OTOH, equating long term exposure to high level exposure for a few days may be a bit alarmist.