Posted by: tungsten
Now this is how to treat heads of state who fuck up!
So they get fires and floods all the time and they expect to be constantly bailed out rather than MOVE TO A PLACE THAT DOESN'T GET FIRES AND FLOODS. Got it.
Climate Change - so I'm starting to panic a bit
Posted by: switch
Posted by: tungsten
Now this is how to treat heads of state who fuck up!
So they get fires and floods all the time and they expect to be constantly bailed out rather than MOVE TO A PLACE THAT DOESN'T GET FIRES AND FLOODS. Got it.
100%
They get fires like this every week! For the last 4,389 years! Come on sheeple, wake up!
Posted by: switch
Posted by: tungsten
Now this is how to treat heads of state who fuck up!
So they get fires and floods all the time and they expect to be constantly bailed out rather than MOVE TO A PLACE THAT DOESN'T GET FIRES AND FLOODS. Got it.
I assume you are talking about those freeloading koalas.
Posted by: tungsten
Arsons playing a part.
So they get fires and floods all the time and they expect to be constantly bailed out rather than MOVE TO A PLACE THAT DOESN'T GET FIRES AND FLOODS. Got it.
They get fires like this every week! For the last 4,389 years! Come on sheeple, wake up!
I think there is a term coined for this already... Climate refugee?
Bushfires are a part of Australian summers for sure but these are particularly bad, started in September, and are effecting multiple regions at once. Even 2013 was limited to a couple of zones.
Posted by: aShogunNamedMarcus
Posted by: tungsten
Arsons playing a part.
No more so than any other year. Climate change is still the dominant factor in the size and intensity of the fires, and the early start to fire season.
Posted by: KenN
Posted by: aShogunNamedMarcus
Posted by: tungsten
Arsons playing a part.
No more so than any other year. Climate change is still the dominant factor in the size and intensity of the fires, and the early start to fire season.
I'm unfamiliar with annual numbers but if 50-85% of Bush fires are arson and we can agree, then we do. Those are %s from a quick search.
Who says that 50-85% of bush fires have been caused by arson?
Posted by: tashi
Who says that 50-85% of bush fires have been caused by arson?
Do I look like google ? For a bunch of geniuses I have to serve y'all up everything.
Posted by: aShogunNamedMarcus
Do I look like google ? For a bunch of geniuses I have to serve y'all up everything.
One of the first parts to being taken seriously in a debate or discussion is the ability to cite your sources of information when asked. If you simply reply with some smarmy comment about google then people might think of you as a jerk-off who doesn’t know shit or is lying simply to stir up shit. Do it often enough and people will definitely believe it.
Posted by: syncro
Posted by: aShogunNamedMarcus
Do I look like google ? For a bunch of geniuses I have to serve y'all up everything.
One of the first parts to being taken seriously in a debate or discussion is the ability to cite your sources of information when asked. If you simply reply with some smarmy comment about google then people might think of you as a jerk-off who doesn’t know shit or is lying simply to stir up shit. Do it often enough and people will definitely believe it.
We're gonna do this again?
If you, Tashi or KenN cant take something and search for it then you're innate.
Put "85% bush fires arson" into google and see what happens. Dont argue with me about the sources either because you, Ken and Tashi havent linked shit.
Posted by: aShogunNamedMarcus
We're gonna do this again?
If you, Tashi or KenN cant take something and search for it then you're innate.
Put "85% bush fires arson" into google and see what happens. Dont argue with me about the sources either because you, Ken and Tashi havent linked shit.
What you’re doing now is called deflecting, it typically happens when someone isn’t able to back up their argumet.
The last post where I made a claim I included a link to the source in the post. WRT KenN’s last post, if you asked him I’m pretty sure he could cite a source for his claim.
In debate it’s not my responsibility to source info that supports your claim, that your responsibility. My responsibility is to be able to cite info that supports my claim. By arguing against that you’re simply making yourself look like a muppet .
Oh and by the way, that 85% number? You have horribly misinterpreted what that 85% number actually means. I’ll give you a hint, it’s not arson.
Posted by: syncro
Oh and by the way, that 85% number? You have horribly misinterpreted what that 85% number actually means. I’ll give you a hint, it’s not arson.
Par for the course.
Forum jump:
