Master Betty wrote:

"Pete C." wrote in message
ter.com...

Master Betty wrote:

"dpb" wrote in message
...
Master Betty wrote:
...

It's good to hear other places are doing better.

If it would of have rained more we would of got a break, but
Central TX
is having a bad drought, and hot weather. Brushfires scare me.

...

Again, too short a time span to tell much, if anything. And, w/
records
as short as those like here, it's not even possible to say that what
you're experiencing is anything particularly out of the ordinary.
What
seems long in an individual's experience isn't a microsecond in
geologic
terms. The native Americans told the early settlers here the good
times
of the early 1900s wouldn't last because they had legend and oral
history
that went back hundreds of years not just the lifetimes of the current
elders.

IOW, "this, too, shall pass"...


As for the grassfires, we worry all the time over that for sure. But,
again, one has to look at it in perspective. They're only a serious
problem because there are now permanent residents and structures where
before there were nomads and other wildlife.

I don't know precisely the estimated times there but here generally
any
givem area could have expected to have burned about every 5-7
years. I
doubt it was too much greater for a lot of that country down there
altho
probably fires didn't cover as extensive an area owing to more natural
barriers and that thunderstorms there generally do have sufficient
rain w/
them to put out fires after a while whereas we have a lot of dry
t-storms.

Since the house sits in the middle of several miles of grass in all
directions w/ only a road on one side of the place closer than a full
mile, we keep close eye out when it gets dry.

--

I'm surrounded by green belt here in Austin. Damn trees!

There are accurate detailed records in polar ice caps (co2
concentrations,
temperature, precipitation, volcanic activity) and ancient tree rings.

There are reasonable approximations in those ice caps, and tree rings -
there is not anywhere near the accuracy needed to support the claims
that are being made.

No...the records are accurate it the interpretation that's flawed.
Geologist can put events together with meteorological events and
reasonable conclusions can be made. The study of the earth has been
going on for some time now.

And the interesting thing is that the CO2 concentration rises and falls
in a lagging (by several hundred years or so) the corresponding
temperature changes. Hence, there's no possibility that these records
can be used to show that rising CO2 caused global warming as that would
violate the principal of causality.

(Assuming that's your point in bringing up something totally foreign to
the general gist of the thread to date....)

--