Voit lisätä twiitteihisi sijainnin, esimerkiksi kaupungin tai tarkemman paikan, verkosta ja kolmannen osapuolen sovellusten kautta. Halutessasi voit poistaa twiittisi sijaintihistorian myöhemmin. Lue lisää
People think climate change is increasing fires but the share of land that burned globally declined from 4.2% in 1900 to 2.5% this year
What about California? Wildfires burned up to 12% of the state before 1800 & was 4.2% in 2020
@BjornLomborg @WSJhttps://www.wsj.com/articles/climate-activists-blow-smoke-on-wildfire-fears-adaptation-land-11635367688 …
And despite a lot of people getting annoyed about facts this is uncontroversial Even World Wildlife Fund (in an otherwise alarmist publication) says it has burned ever less since 1900 https://wwfeu.awsassets.panda.org/downloads/wwf_fires_forests_and_the_future_report.pdf …pic.twitter.com/JyXw89dJGK
It’s the wrong sort of fire these days that’s the problem
wow, nice find
Less forest, more pastures. It did not become better, it's just easier to put out bush fire. But when a forest burns, it's more damaging, because there's less of it.
? We produce more food on less land than we did even 30 years ago. The federal government has massively expanded the amount of land in the national parks. Forestland increases while farmland decreases.pic.twitter.com/D7DUAvuF1a
Couldn't that also be because you need three things for fire: heat, oxygen and fuel. If there's less fuel (trees) there would be less burning?
And of course fire is a natural process that in the best case scenario is prescribed! #ForestManagement
Counterpoint: you don’t know what you’re talking aboutpic.twitter.com/2ovHZcpVyK
What about when you express it in terms of share of the world’s forests rather than total land?
Twitter saattaa olla ruuhkautunut tai ongelma on muuten hetkellinen. Yritä uudelleen tai käy Twitterin tilasivulla saadaksesi lisätietoja.
