To say otherwise is the same as saying that a cold winter is evidence against man-made global warming. A single data point, they keep reminding us, is not sufficient evidence against global warming. So why isn't the opposite also true? A single data point, like the Lytton fire, is not evidence of man-made global warming.
There have been catastrophic forest fires in BC, and anywhere there are trees, for a long time. The Canadian media and the Canadian government are using this tragedy to push their agenda, and only an idiot would be fooled by this nonsense.
They also arrested a bunch of arsonists when those fires were going on.
There's no such thing as man made global warming.
The atmosphere's basic climate parameters were first calculated and published by the French in 1864.
These base parameters were adopted globally in 1950 as the
STANDARD INTERNATIONAL ATMOSPHERE.
The calculations and parameters derived from them are practically IDENTICAL today,
to what they were in 1864,
to what they were in 1950,
and to what they were still, in 1976 when the United States published the American Standard Atmospheres so countries trying to get into computerized orbit would have proper values for air density, temperature, etc, several hundred thousand feet higher, than the International Standard Atmosphere calculated for.
Climate change is real, but we really haven't seen any effects yet. Everything "they" point to now as examples of climate change isn't - it's just normal.
What sort of “man made climate change” can you show evidence for?
You need this.
I just said we haven't seen any yet.
Weather predictions come from observing atmospheric conditions. Atmospheric CO2 is at levels unprecedented for humans. Result? We'll see.