Science By Ambulance Chasing Journalists

Climate scamsters take every opportunity to blame human misery on climate change.

2016-05-09111304

Raging Canadian wildfire points to global warming – CBS News

Canada has had much larger fires than the current one, including the 1950 fire which burned five million acres and darkened the skies in Scotland.

2016-05-09093502

The Chinchaga Firestorm: When the Moon and Sun Turned Blue

2016-05-09100143-down

28 Sep 1950, Page 33 – The Ottawa Journal at Newspapers.com

The 1825 Miramichi Fire in Nova Scotia burned 2.5 million acres in nine hours, and destroyed multiple towns.

2016-05-08084310-down

7 Sep 1910, Page 3 – The Coffeyville Daily Journal at Newspapers.com

Here in Colorado it is so wet, I’m thinking about changing the name of Boulder to the Bayou City.  But four years ago, climate scamsters were telling us that the large fires of 2012 were “the new normal.” Ever since then, Boulder has been the wettest on record.

BOULDER_CO_TotalPrecipitation_Jan_Dec_1900_2015

Climate scamsters don’t know anything about climate or history. They are morons and/or frauds.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

17 Responses to Science By Ambulance Chasing Journalists

  1. Lance says:

    See the references….Huffington, UCS, nuf said on that BS….
    The fire was most likely (and possibly accidentally) by humans, no lightning was in the area, as they showed a web camera shot south of the Airport and the smoke that started on that day. What helped this was our last 2 years of very warm/dry weather (el nino), as we have been incredibly warm here the past 2 winters. How convenient for them that they ignored the winter from 3 years ago, when it was one of the coldest (in southern alberta) in almost 30 years. Precip patterns change….and so will the rains…eventually. (classic ex …Texas).

    • Lance says:

      BTW, I lived in Ft Mac for over 6 years, and this fire has impacted many of my friends and family that currently live there. Remove the ‘politics’ from fires folks.

      • Andy DC says:

        It gets tiresome having these vultures circling around, just itching to pounce on every human tragedy to further their agenda.

  2. Rud Istvan says:

    Paul Homewood has a nice post on this that shows neither the warm temperatures nor the dry conditions are unusual in the historical records for the Fort McMurry area. Specifically refuting Jeff Master’s version of ‘its climate change’ at Weather Underground. Nice complement to this post.

  3. John F Hultquist says:

    I remember the “end of the world” sky from the 1950 fire.
    On a Sunday afternoon in Western Pennsylvania.

  4. mcraig says:

    Fire suppression programs have resulted in a much higher percentage of old growth forest which is prime fuel for fires. These types of forests are supposed to burn which is how they regenerate

    Oh, it’s man’s fault alright. We have suppressed the natural burn and grow cycles for these types of trees and created a massive source of fuel. So yes, when some dry and warm conditions combine, you get a mega fire.

    I guess that’s not as sexy as blaming it all on climate change.

  5. Nicholas Schroeder, BSME, PE says:

    A Confession of Liberal (Progressive) Intolerance

    By NICHOLAS KRISTOF – The New York Times – Sunday, May 8, 2016

    “The stakes involve not just fairness to conservatives or evangelical Christians, not just whether progressives will be true to their own values, not just the benefits that come from diversity (and diversity of thought is arguably among the most important kinds), but also the quality of education itself. When perspectives are unrepresented in discussions, when some kinds of thinkers aren’t at the table, classrooms become echo chambers rather than sounding boards — and we all lose.”

    “Universities are unlike other institutions in that they absolutely require that people challenge each other so that the truth can emerge from limited, biased, flawed individuals,” he says. “If they lose intellectual diversity, or if they develop norms of ‘safety’ that trump challenge, they die. And this is what has been happening since the 1990s.”

    By GEORGE F. WILL / Syndicated columnist

    Published: April 26, 2016 Updated: April 27, 2016 10:04 a.m.

    WASHINGTON – Authoritarianism, always latent in progressivism, is becoming explicit. Progressivism’s determination to regulate thought by regulating speech is apparent in the campaign by 16 states’ attorneys general and those of the District of Columbia and the Virgin Islands, none Republican, to criminalize skepticism about the supposedly “settled” conclusions of climate science.

    Four core tenets of progressivism are: First, history has a destination. Second, progressives uniquely discern it. (Barack Obama frequently declares things to be on or opposed to “the right side of history.”) Third, politics should be democratic but peripheral to governance, which is the responsibility of experts scientifically administering the regulatory state. Fourth, enlightened progressives should enforce limits on speech (witness Internal Revenue Service suppression of conservative advocacy groups) in order to prevent thinking unhelpful to history’s progressive unfolding.

    Progressivism is already enforced on campuses by restrictions on speech that might produce what progressives consider retrograde intellectual diversity. Now, from the so-called party of science, aka Democrats, comes a campaign to criminalize debate about science.

  6. Latitude says:

    I truly do not understand this…
    Fires is this area are normal.

    Why in this world do they not build fire breaks at least around towns, schools, hospitals. etc?

    • Nicholas Schroeder, BSME, PE says:

      “Why in this world do they not build fire breaks at least around towns, schools, hospitals. etc?”

      A posting over at WUWT explains why – takes money, has to get in the budget. They had plans for years, just not the budget to fully implement.

      I’m in Colorado, the site of the Hayman, Waldo Canyon, and Black Forest fires. Wasn’t climate change, but consequences of known bad choices. Colorado has lots of proscribed burns to control/manage the forests. Most of the time they are controlled. There have been a few calamitous instances where they were not.

      • Latitude says:

        I would bet if someone tried to clear that many trees…
        ..it’s the environ-mentalists that would stop it

    • Colorado Wellington says:

      Latitude,

      Your question comes up frequently after major disasters (and rarely before). The answer has some complex parts but it boils down to what Nicholas says:

      Timing and money. Understanding of forest fires by the taxpaying electorate is the key to building up the political will to deal with the problem. It doesn’t help if the public is coached to blame “climate change” and push for the removal of atmospheric CO2 rather than the actual fuel on the ground.

      There are some good insights in the WUWT comment thread:

      Fort McMurray Wildfire – Climate or Incompetence?

      Minor fires are usually not a problem. During mid-size fires there is frequently enough mobilized manpower to protect most structures. Then there are BFFs and that’s when things go wrong. The width of permanent firebreaks needed to passively “insulate” an actively unprotected structure or a whole town in a major fire under all possible adverse conditions is usually prohibitive.

      When it comes to raging, wind driven crown fires, there is not much difference between the forest of the arid region like Colorado or Arizona and the northern boreal forest, the taiga. The forests can and will burn and if they are aging and overgrown, they will burn hot. Colorado forests used to be different before fire suppression and they burned differently. The dense mountain forest the typical Boulder nature lover sees today when she looks west is not natural. The original forests were thinner, with healthy, mature pines spaced generously apart from each other, not competing for water. These trees were typically veterans and survivors of multiple forest fires. If a pine survived the first fire, it lost the lower branches, its bark was singed and the tree reacted by growing thicker bark. The fire removed the underbrush and other smaller competitors for water, and fertilized the ground. The tree was set to grow bigger and stronger. The underbrush returned soon but when the next fire came, there was still not enough fuel around the old tree to generate the heat to kill it and there was no “ladder fuel” for the fire to climb into the crown. And even if by some accident the crown ignited, the next large pine was far enough from the heat.

      Today’s forests are different with smaller trees, frequently densely spaced, with overlapping root systems competing for water. No fire went through the area during the lives of these trees and there is plenty of ladder fuel in the lower part of the forest. Today’s communities and structures are typically surrounded by such aging, dense and overgrown forest because smaller fires that would have continued the natural renewal cycle were suppressed in the past. Smaller firebreaks around structures will help the crews in suppression of minor fires but they will not protect the structures against a hot, large area crown fire driven by wind. A 100 yard mitigation break, for example, will be easily overwhelmed by the combined heating effect of blown overheated gasses and infrared radiation. The materials will heat up and the whole structure will explode in flames even if there is no obvious contact fire nearby. It will all depend on what was happening further upwind from the structure.

      Even such a relatively narrow break is already expensive to build. People like their trees and if they agree to have them removed, they’d like the area to be landscaped in some way to not look like a wood harvest clear-cut. When the trees closer to the structures are preserved as is frequently done, it enlarges the inside diameter and the surface area of any firebreak built further out, adding to costs. Now, these smaller firebreaks will not stop a huge fire but they are routinely used by the response crews for safer access and operational space from which to remove additional fuel by back-burns, provided the incident command can predict the direction of the fire and send firefighters there in advance.

      The bottom line is that the problem is fairly well understood but there are no easy solutions. Even in communities with a lot of experience and the political will to spend tax money on mitigation, a problem that was created over a century will not be mitigated over a few years, if ever. Every time we decide to permanently live in and near these forests, we also choose to live with forest fires.

  7. John says:

    Tony not sure you have that right-
    “The 1825 Miramichi Fire in Nova Scotia burned 2.5 million acres in nine hours”.
    80 x 25 miles in 9 hours, doesn’t that equal 1280000 acres around half of what you say above.
    2.5 million acres is total burn?

    • David A says:

      John I think your math is correct, but that is still an incredibly scary and fast fire moving at an average speed of nine miles per hour.

    • Nicholas Schroeder, BSME, PE says:

      80 * 25 = 2,000 sq miles. About the size of Delaware. No doubt it looks terrible at ground level, but relatively speaking, in perspective, really doesn’t seem like all that much from a distance.

  8. Neal S says:

    Just came across an unscientific unamerican article …

    http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/sea-level-rise-swallows-5-whole-pacific-islands/

    And yet in this article I read …

    “Twelve islands we studied in a low wave energy area of Solomon Islands experienced little noticeable change in shorelines despite being exposed to similar sea-level rise. However, of the 21 islands exposed to higher wave energy, five completely disappeared and a further six islands eroded substantially.”

    Of course reading that I conclude, despite their gnashing of teeth and wailing, there really isn’t any appreciable sea level rise.

  9. Don Penim says:

    Lest we forget…Lots of tragic fire history in the Alberta area.
    97 years ago in May:

    The Great Alberta Fire – May 19, 1919
    More than 7.5 Million Acres burned.

    ….”At least 13 confirmed and unknown number of burned victims. Many injured.
    Undoubtedly a complex of many fires burning simultaneously over a wide area. Springtime burning conditions”…

    ‘Lest we forget’: Canada’s major wildland fire disasters of the past, 1825-1938
    PDF here: https://www.firesmartcanada.ca/images/uploads/resources/Alexander-Lest-We-Forget.pdf« less

  10. Don Penim says:

    .Alberta 1910:. . . .12-18 Million Acres of Land burned . . .

    1910 is “still remembered as the year of the big fire”. The weather conditions for Alberta in 1910 paralleled those of the Northern States. 1909 was a hot, dry year across Canadian Rockies and Foothills regions, with drought conditions that sparked the last of the great prairie fires in Alberta.

    The largest fire burnt late in the fall, devastating an estimated 12‐18 million acres of land.

    …June and July [1910] were drier than usual, with temperatures above the annual averages for the last twenty years by as much as three degrees” . . .

    Taken from “The 1910 Fires in Alberta’s Foothill and Rocky Mountain Ranges”

    PDF of Report with historical references here:
    https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwiCo6i-6sXMAhVRwmMKHa_CBGAQFggcMAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fmountainlegacy.ca%2Fresearch%2Fdocuments%2FAnnand-1910Fires-FinalReport.pdf&usg=AFQjCNHiak7ZIzOjc072nkkpH938xO69iQ&bvm=bv.121421273,d.cGc

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.