redbloodedamerica:

Climate Change Causing Wildfires Debunked

Have you ever noticed how the left tries to add nuance to really simple issues, but then oversimplifies actually nuanced issues?  If ever there were a complex nuanced issue you would think it’d be the earth’s ecosystem, but if you listen to the day’s progressive neo-environmentalists the problems with the ecosystem are automatically people causing climate change.  Maybe these conceded environmentalists trying to fix an ecosystem are actually causing part of the problem.  The key word is “nuance.” right?  Really?  What about carbon dioxide, what about emissions, what about the ocean, what about interactions?  “No, it just pretty much just people running their Hummers.” 

So, talking about the wildfires let’s start with this clip from Vox.  So, this also came from the Washington Post about an article headline to the same effect.  But why is it misleading?  Well if you scroll down in the Washington Post article it says, “But beginning in the late 19th century, the U.S. government established a policy of fire suppression. Wildfires were seen as the ‘moral and mortal enemy of forests,’ according to one Joint Fire Science Program report — they damaged agricultural land and destroyed valuable timber.”  So, natural wildfires actually control the burns because they clear up forrest debris.  So there is some truth to this, right?  But there’s something that they’re omitting.  

They caution humans from now preventing – remember it used to be “Only you can prevent forest fires,” well now it’s “you need to prevent people preventing forest fires.”  Okay, so where do you think Smokey the Bear came from?  Do you think it was a bunch of ‘Unite the Right’ activists who were sitting there saying “let’s create a mascot in Smokey the Bear to save forests”?  No.  Ironically, Smokey the Bear was against forest fires, and that resulted in this rise in the debris that you see in the forest – the same debris by the way that presents the perfect environment for out-of-control wildfires. But here’s something they don’t tell you in their articles, there are now more trees than a century ago.  Some people say there are more trees now that in modern human history.  

So we do have more trees, but there is an issue: the severity of wildfires.  Again, the big irony is that environmentalist have actually created the perfect conditions for the severity of the current wildfires.  So, yeah human intervention has made the severity, not the frequency, of the current wildfires worse.  But again it’s the environmentalist human intervention.  Okay, the wildfires are out of control, if you read that article; but they’re out of control because of the effort to control wildfires.  That’s why there have been fewer wildfires and they’ve gotten worse, because you’ve been holding them back for a while now.  

Of course Vox doesn’t actually call attention how environmentalist have played a large role in screwing this up.  Wherever you line up on climate change, it’s just important to note that the headlines that go out you just need to read two paragraphs deeper.  Because this is one where even they can’t deny it.  Instead, of course Vox pivots to man-made climate change.   CNN recently was lamenting that Donald Trump would blame anything but climate change for the California wildfires.  These were after his tweets.  Except, as it turns out, some of the recent forest fires ones they were talking about had nothing to do with climate change.  This is something that should be mentioned.  They were purposefully set by an insane arsonist.  This kind of fear-mongering – again wherever you line up – you do have to acknowledge there’s fear-mongering and there’s misinformation abound as it relates to climate change.  

There are concrete predictions that are false.  In 2013, Dick Durbin claimed the Great Lakes were drying up.  It would be scary if we didn’t fast forward a few years and they’re actually nearing their record highs – the highest levels arguably in history.  Some of them are actually I think all-time highs.  I know Lake Michigan and a couple others are just nearing their record highs, but certainly not gone.  

We had Patrick Moore on the show, and he said, well think about it, if you actually warm the atmosphere by the degree that they’re talking about – I’m not saying the actual 1.6° F by the degree to which i’m using the relative term to which they’re they’re attributing this – you’d actually see more precipitation.  Which is kind of what we’re seeing in the Great Lakes.  And in contrast by the way to what climate change alarmists have claimed, the region has experienced moderate temperate, slow thawing winters, and some of the best crop yields in decades.  So I want to make this clear.  Like you were saying, remember it was global warming for a while, until there were some record cold.  And then they would go “It’s the extremes!  It’s the extremes that are happening!  The climate change includes the records of both the hots and the extreme colds!  It’s the extreme ends of the spectrum!” Well, hold on a second.  Now the Great Lakes are having record temperateness?  In Michigan, where I’m from, cherries are a very very finicky crop, and you need long, slow, thawing winters, very consistently moderate temperatures.  And so what do they do?   They dump the cherries because there are too many to price fix them.  Thanks, socialism!  Why don’t you just send them down to Venezuela in a fruit basket, you son of a bitch? 

It was a constant moving target.  It’s really cold, record hots, and its record colds.  The more humans try to fix ecosystems the more we end up breaking it.  A good example actually is the Yellowstone wolves.  So you may or may not have heard about the wolves in Yellowstone National Park.  A brief history lesson, the National Park Service managers actually started killing the wolves in Yellowstone in the 1800s, early 1900s because the wolves were killing people’s livestock.  They were killing people’s livestock, so this was a serious problem.  So actually the National Park Service killed some of these wolves.  Now with an apex predator removed the ecosystem of course was thrown out of balance.  There was an overabundance of elk, many of them were unhealthy, but they were also devouring the landscape.  So in 1971, the the process of reintroducing the wolves is where they began that process.  And it wasn’t completed until 1995.  And now the elk are better off.  So my point is human intervention – any time you try to get involved with something like this, when you try to actually manipulate the ecosystem, it doesn’t often work. 

So, let’s take the complexities of these issues.   Wildfire management, topsoil, replanting trees, precipitation levels leading to the rise the Great Lakes, the wolves in Yellowstone, how to balance the ecosystem. Let’s take the complexities of the issues that we’ve addressed, now magnify it times a million and you have the totality of the Earth’s atmosphere, its relationship with its temperature, and of course that of the sun.  And the left is telling us that they’ve figured this out now…so long as we sign the Paris Climate Accord?  What the hell happened to nuance?  You couldn’t get the wolves right!  My only point here is that humans have been trying to intervene by playing God for centuries.  And even though they always promised a solution, half of the time they get it completely wrong.  Now that being said, even though they get it wrong – you look at the wolves, you look at the Great Lakes drying up, look at the wildfires that was kind of a screw-up – there’s probably going to be some kind of a business that’s going to clean up the debris.  It’s going to be self-correcting.   We’re not exactly up against a mushroom cloud from Skynet from falling yet.  So yeah, we’ve screwed up.  You can manipulate the environment, you can manipulate the ecosystem.  It’s not whether you believe in climate change or not, you can believe in climate change and still not believe in the bullshit coming from the left.  You can still believe it’s all humans and that it’s catastrophic and still not believe that Bernie Sanders with an opinion is going to fix the wolf population, or is going to fix the wildfires.  My real problem with it is you take the wildfires, because people are losing their homes it’s an emotional issue, and you use that to try and feather in some science with misleading headlines, and it’s just not true.  Be honest about it.  That being said, for all of the screw-ups, things find their balance.  I guess what I’m saying here is “life finds a way.”