1/7 Do you even read your own links Joe? Read the article again, but slowly this time, with your glasses on. You have completely (deliberately?) misread the article in order to foist your false narrative on others. Dr. Read said nothing of the sort & if he played your game he
2/ 7 Would be demanding a public apology or threatening legal action. Let me quote from the article YOU posted:
“The Arson Emergency narrative is a bad faith argument spotlighting ignition (what starts the fire) over condition (what keeps the fire burning and makes it spread)”
“The Arson Emergency narrative is a bad faith argument spotlighting ignition (what starts the fire) over condition (what keeps the fire burning and makes it spread)”
3/7 Read told Mashable over email that he's "angered" to see commentators "twist" reported research into ignition statistics, or to use them to gloss over the environmental factors affecting the spread and intensity of fires, no matter how they're lit.
4/7 “....arson or recklessness, even fallen power lines and campfires, are just the source of ignition and there's very little reason, outside of a very severe pyromania that's likely already known to police, for any yearly increase in arson [contributing to the current crisis]."
5/7 And finally, and most importantly Read says :
“We do not have an 'arson emergency,'" he says. "They might light the fires, but the consequences are due to climate change first, fuel load second."
“We do not have an 'arson emergency,'" he says. "They might light the fires, but the consequences are due to climate change first, fuel load second."
6/7 deliberately spreading misinformation is not a joke, people are dying &our children’s futures are at stake.Why not talk about issues you truly understand or have expertise in instead of trying to increase the profits for media moguls & politicians at the expense of Australia?
