The Guardian: Support Climate Action or Face Hellfire

The low-to-moderate intensity surface fire in this prescribed burn will lower the fuel load in this forest in the Lake Tahoe Basin. CREDIT
Alan H. Taylor

Guest essay by Eric Worrall

h/t Ivan Kinsman – According to The Guardian, if you don’t mend your wicked ways you will burn in climate driven hellfire. But the Guardian fails to identify the true culprits behind USA’s devastating wildfires.

This is what our future looks like – Hellfire

by John Vaillant • Photography by Tim Hussin

The worst case scenario plays out the same way everywhere, whether you are in southern California or northern Alberta. A nascent wildfire – driven by extreme heat, high winds, drought conditions and a century of largely successful fire suppression – explodes into a juggernaut and takes over the countryside.

Any houses in the way are simply more fuel. Preheated to 500C by the 100ft flames of the advancing blaze, homes don’t so much catch on fire as explode into flames. In a dense neighborhood, many homes may do this simultaneously. The speed of ignition shocks people – citizens and firefighters alike – but it is only the beginning.

Because the temperatures achievable in an urban wildfire are comparable to those in a crucible, virtually everything is consumed as fuel. What doesn’t burn, melts: steel car chassis warp and bend while lesser metals – aluminum engine blocks, magnesium wheels – will liquify.

What do you call something that behaves like a tornado but is made of fire?

Wildfire scientists bridle at the term “fire tornado”; they prefer “fire whirl”, but “fire whirl” seems inadequate to describe something that built its own weather system seven miles high. In 1978, meteorologist David Goens devised a classification system that placed fire whirls of this magnitude in the “fire storm” category, along with the caveat that: “This is a rare phenomenon and hopefully one that is so unlikely in the forest environment that it can be disregarded.”

This was 40 years ago. So what has changed?

For one, the addition of a new verb to the wildfire lexicon. “Natural fire never did this,” explained Gyves. “It shouldn’t moonscape.” But now it does. It is alarming to consider that this annihilating energy arrived out of thin air, born of fire and fanned by an increasingly common combination of triple-digit heat, single-digit humidity, high fuel loads, dying trees and the battling winds that swirl daily through the mountains and valleys all over California and the greater west.

There was a time not so long ago, when a fire like this one, which forced the evacuation of 40,000 people and burned nearly 1,000 sq km across two counties, might have been a monstrous anomaly, but now, says Jonathan Cox, a Cal Fire battalion chief: “The anomalies are becoming more frequent and more deadly.”

Read more:

While I feel for the people who have lost everything, its important to identify the real cause of their misery, to avoid wasting resources chasing phantoms.

Decades of forest mismanagement by green politicians is what caused this, not climate change.

Back in August, Secretary of the Interior Ryan Zinke identified the real culprits behind these disasters.

Wildfires seem unstoppable, but they can be prevented. Here’s how.

Ryan Zinke, Opinion contributor Published 6:00 a.m. ET Aug. 8, 2018

Actively managing our forests benefits the environment, the economy, and most important, it saves lives.

The flames of the Ferguson Fire in California have become the latest symbols of a seemingly perennial challenge of fighting fires in the West. I just returned from the Ferguson Fire camp, where I met with firefighters who are working to combat the fire as it bears down on Yosemite National Park and its visitors, workers and nearby residents.

Why we need to manage our forests

There are three reasons for active forest management:

First, it is better for the environment to manage the forests. Wildfires produce smoke and emissions. The release of gases and particles can negatively affect air quality. Fires also damage watersheds, and as we see fires burning hotter and longer, the soil is actually becoming scorched and sterilized, preventing regrowth. In addition, while many of the frivolous lawsuits waged to stop timber harvests cite habitat as a concern, environmental litigants are little concerned when an entire forest burns to the ground and the habitat and wildlife are lost.

Second, active forest management is good for the economy. Logs come out of the forest in one of two ways: They are either harvested sustainably to improve the health and resilience of the forest (while creating jobs), or they are burned to the ground. Jobs matter, and logging has long been a cornerstone of rural economies. Fortunately for all, these economic benefits go hand-in-hand with our goal of healthy forests.

Third, and most important, the active management of our forests will save lives. The Carr Fire in northern California has already claimed half a dozen lives, and the Ferguson Fire has taken the lives of two firefighters. Sadly, these are not the only wildfire casualties this year.

Every year we watch our forests burn, and every year there is a call for action. Yet, when action comes, and we try to thin forests of dead and dying timber, or we try to sustainably harvest timber from dense and fire-prone areas, we are attacked with frivolous litigation from radical environmentalists who would rather see forests and communities burn than see a logger in the woods.

Read more:

In my dry, fire prone native Australia even green governments usually actively manage our forests. They don’t really want to – every so often one of them backslides – but in Australia the consequences of poor forest management are so immediate and devastating, voters take an active interest in reminding politicians what will happen if they fail this most basic duty.

Forest management works. Its really very simple – if there is nothing to burn, there can be no fire.

Active forest management means ensuring adequate fire breaks, to prevent fires from spreading, good access roads so firefighters can rapidly reach and control any fires which do occur, and regular controlled burnoffs of excess fuel to reduce the intensity of any fires which do occur.

Unfortunately in the USA greens have gotten away with mismanagement of forests a lot longer than could ever happen in Australia. Innocent US families are now bearing the cost of decades of green policy failures – while greens try to deflect responsibility for their own mistakes and mismanagement by blaming climate change.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
October 12, 2018 1:14 pm

Political mismanagement “anomalies are becoming more frequent and more deadly.”

Fixed it.

Reply to  ResourceGuy
October 12, 2018 1:59 pm

So the anomalies are becoming less anomalous?

Reply to  ResourceGuy
October 12, 2018 2:10 pm

massachusetts “green mayor” is destroyed…

Gone with the wind…solar too.

October 12, 2018 1:22 pm

Whose woods they are
I thought I knew,
Xe’s house is in
the city though.

October 12, 2018 1:27 pm

What i rarely hear mentioned about California is the drought conditions 5 months per year. That is May -September. Nor do you hear about the hot dry Santa Ana winds that can drive fire. Super imposed on that is 40 million people living there. Talked about the environmental buzz word “sustainability”. California is the poster child for unsustainability. San Diego has a 50 million gallon/day desalination plant. What a carbon foot print!

October 12, 2018 1:36 pm

Mike, your comments make some sense. However, I’d like to point out that the “hot dry Santa Ana winds”, which can drive a fire in a small part of southern California don’t make any difference to giant fires in Santa Barbara or in northern California. [Santa Ana winds are so named because they blow from the desert to the ocean through Santa Ana pass.] Also, your “may” is quite important – the winds don’t start fires – that requires ignition – they can only drive a fire once it has started.
As to there being way too many people, you are right. And some of them are slow-witted enough to build in areas prone to wildfires.
As to the fires being “wild” fires, many of them are unintentionally or intentionally started by people.

Reply to  Retired_Engineer_Jim
October 12, 2018 1:51 pm

Hey! Some of them are so slow-witted they vote Democrat! If you can believe it!

Reply to  Retired_Engineer_Jim
October 12, 2018 2:28 pm


A bit like building a house on a flood plain because it’s become a trendy part of a city where house prices have spiralled out of control.

A bit like building houses in the path of hurricane central in the Gulf of Mexico (or thereabouts) when you know with absolute certainty you will suffer the consequences.

But then for 90% of the time (or thereabouts) life is peachy, so you roll with the benefits. Then squeal like a stuck pig when nature deals it’s inevitable hand.

Not that I believe for a millisecond residents of the Gulf area squeal at all, it’s the media driven politicians who do the squealing for their personal benefit.

Most people know the deal they sign up for wherever they live. In the UK we get moderate weather all year round.

We are a holiday nation that travels the planet to experience sun, sand, sex and sangria because here, we get fish and chips. But we’re safe from hurricanes, tornadoes, floods, wildfires, things that bite with extreme prejudice, guns, snow and irregular plumbing.

But we signed up for that and are, for the most part, happy with our boring, safe lives.

Perhaps the greens should count their blessings.

HD Hoese
Reply to  HotScot
October 12, 2018 3:29 pm

No, the greens are going to fix it–“Green Infrastructure and Living Shorelines.” Probably won’t work for fires or much else.

Russ Wood
Reply to  HotScot
October 15, 2018 7:27 am

No tornadoes? Back in the sixties, a small, local tornado bounced around an enclosed block of three streets in Bootle, Liverpool, destroying everyone’s greenhouses! (Including my Mum’s).

Reply to  Retired_Engineer_Jim
October 12, 2018 3:15 pm

I’ve traveled to southern California many times. I’m very familiar with the winds and know they aren’t issue for the north. I was under the impression from locals that the Santa Ana winds drove brush fires.

Pop Piasa
October 12, 2018 4:26 pm

🎶”Here come those Santa Ana winds again” …🎵

Samuel C Cogar
October 13, 2018 9:13 am

I was under the impression from locals that the Santa Ana winds drove brush fires.

Once a “brush fire” gets a going real good, …… it will create it’s own wind … that will come a rushing up behind it.

October 12, 2018 10:13 pm

Sam Diego county is the only county water sufficient during droughts in CA because it was the only one with a 20 year plan to develop water resources. San Diego also expanded several reservoirs and lined water aqueducts to prevent water loss into soil. Sadly during the last drought due to state mandated water conservation laws San Diego had souch water we didn’t know what to do with it. County water asked Los Angeles to stop delivering and Los Angeles said we can’t. No way to turn off the flow

October 12, 2018 1:32 pm

Harvest forests to produce “green” energy and bio-char. Tell the eco-fascists it is necessary to stop climate change and anybody who opposes the idea is a “climate denier.”

Joe Crawford
Reply to  BillP
October 12, 2018 4:05 pm

If you harvest the timber then you’re removing a lot of the NPK (i.e.,nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium) from the soil. You can only do that for so long before it has to be replaced or the soil slowly looses its fertility. In other words it’s not sustainable, which causes the enviro’s to have a hissy fit. The only way to replace the NPK is through the addition of fertilizer or naturally through hundreds of years of rock weathering, flooding or vulcanism. But, if people chose to live in the wood there are few options other than one of no forest management and letting their home’s burn. However, once the current forest is stabilized by burning you may be able to get away with planned burns of the underbrush and fallen trees along with lower limb trimming but that would have to be tested over a rather long and potentially unacceptable period. It might also require more effort than the populous is willing to accept.

Bruce Cobb
October 12, 2018 1:41 pm

Pure emotionalism. Propaganda 101.

Doug Huffman
October 12, 2018 1:55 pm

I spent mid-September in Yosemite NP, just after the Ferguson-Yosemite Fire was controlled. There were still visible smoke and flames.

The Park is hurrying to eliminate fuel. There were many, hundreds perhaps, slash wood piles waiting for cool moist conditions to be burned. This will ensure that subsequent wildfire there will be slow and cool, with little chance of crowning.

My trip was the Fiftieth Anniversary of my next previous in Yosemite Valley and controlling my expectations was the main challenge. I remember the Park operated and maintained by dedicated people and not political appointee bureaucrats. I remember the Rangers drawing straws to avoid carrying ‘the gun’.

The last real Firefall was 25 January 1968. These slash wood piles would fuel real Firefalls again.

October 12, 2018 1:55 pm

Climate change may explain the severity of the fires but not the frequency. A few years ago, the U.S. Forest Service had a Conference on PYROTERRORISM. (Look up on Google). Jihadists have plans on the internet for remote-controlled or timed incendiary devices. It is not politically-correct for the MSM to mention this for many reasons including scaring the public. But the threat is real.

Reply to  Stanny1
October 12, 2018 2:59 pm

Curious to know what ‘climate change’ has impacted on the ‘severity’ of US forest fires. Raw ‘unadjusted’ temperature data from all US weather stations over the past century show no leap in temperatures, lightning episodes, droughts or heatwaves remotely sufficient to combust vast tracts of forest spontaneously in an unprecedented fashion. Indeed, Forestry Service records clearly demonstrate that burned acreage was much more significant prior to the 1960s, peaking in the 20s and 30s. The anthropogenic signal is, however, clearly apparent in mis-management of forest fuel loads, vulnerable utility infrastructure and, of course, arsonists and half wits playing with matches. The fact that more people choose to encroach into forestry, be it for housing or leisure, puts more people in harm’s way and, no pun intended, adds fuel to the fire. Forestry tended to be managed much better in the distant past but that still didn’t stop vast severe fires occurring on a regular basis. If they hadn’t been better managed, the historical burned acreage would, arguably, have been much more severe than now.

Jeff Alberts
Reply to  Mack
October 13, 2018 8:15 am

The best way to “manage” forests is to let them burn when a fire occurs. Doesn’t matter if it’s a human-caused fire, letting it burn is what nature does.

Ian Johnson
Reply to  Stanny1
October 12, 2018 5:06 pm

Didn’t Japan attempt this in WW2?

Komrade Kuma
Reply to  Stanny1
October 12, 2018 8:38 pm

No need to wait for the jihadis to use fire as a weapon, demented nut jobs through to eco jihadis have been doing it for years. Imbeciles like the Grauniad and other left leaning, commonsense blind msm participants have effectively weaponised fire in the CAGWar effort. Bigger/more intense/more frequent than EVAH!! These vile creeps have taken the econut aspect of Hitler’s regime, read, absorbed, rewritten and perfected Goebbels propaganda handbooks and turned it to their inter-National Socialist agenda.

Russ Wood
Reply to  Stanny1
October 15, 2018 7:31 am

Never mind about ‘planning’ – HAMAS controlled citizens of Gaza are actually waging pyro-war against Israel, using kite- or balloon-flown pyrotechnic devices to set fire to crops, woodlands, or anything they might get.

October 12, 2018 1:55 pm

I think with regard to fire there is a good argument for controlled burns and segmenting forests by logging but there may be an important issue with this approach. Some of this is being done in Canada but in cases wher the forest is opened up with logging roads and segmented logging areas they seem to find that it is detrimental to the survival of various herd animals in those areas. Either by disturbing the animals normal transit routes or by making it easier for wolves to get around it may lead to increased predation of deer, moose and caribou.

Gary Pearse
Reply to  john
October 12, 2018 2:16 pm

So, lets roast the deer, moose AND wolves, then? It is st least a level playing field solution l guess/sarc

Jeff in Calgary
Reply to  john
October 12, 2018 2:35 pm

Deer and moose are not herd animals.

Reply to  Jeff in Calgary
October 12, 2018 9:18 pm

deer most certainly hang together in herds

Jeff Alberts
Reply to  Leo Smith
October 13, 2018 8:17 am

If 2 or 3 is a herd, then I guess so. But, not all deer are the same.

Reply to  Leo Smith
October 13, 2018 9:59 am

The largest herd of deer I’ve seen was about 300. Admittedly that was Fallow Deer Dama dama, not an american species, but deer do herd.

Reply to  john
October 12, 2018 2:39 pm

Just cull the deer, like we do in the UK because there are no wolves.

Then the green fanatics come out in droves because deer culling is ‘cruel’.

So George Monbiot suggests we re introduce wolves into the UK and the government goes berserk because, of course, so many wolves would invade our cities and eat our people.

FFS, wolves and deer are natural adversaries and it’s not like deer are entirely defenceless. There is a natural order and humans are the interlopers, that is, human greens.

Reply to  HotScot
October 12, 2018 3:51 pm

Prey animals are often still alive when predators start to eat them.
Yet a quick death from a bullet or arrow to the vitals is ‘cruel’?

And even with all the modern hunting equipment and gadgets available these days, game animals still manage to give us humans the slip a very high % of the time. My older brother is a hunting enthusiast and can attest to that.

Remember D.A.D.
Deer Ain’t Dumb

Reply to  HotScot
October 12, 2018 4:09 pm

you all need to reintroduce bears, cats, AND wolves.

doesn’t the future king have a bunch of property that could be seeded with such apex carnivora?

Reply to  john
October 12, 2018 4:04 pm


In what ways specifically is it detrimental to the survival of the animals? I think we fail to give credit to animals; they are not stupid creatures. Deer, caribou, and moose all know how to cut new paths and will do so as food availability changes. Wolves, coyotes, and felids will do the same, except their food is the animals. Roads designed and built sensibly have a relatively small impact on the forest ecosystem. For example, having culverts under roads, long-deck bridges that stretch over river shores and bluffs, slow speeds on curved roads, town placement, and even hiking trails to an extent are sensible and effective ways to permit safe transit of animals across the segments of the forest.

October 12, 2018 2:04 pm

The fact that they can compare S California with Alberta, with talk of extreme heat shows just how illiterate the alarmists are.

October 12, 2018 2:11 pm

Eric, Where I live in central Victoria there used to be a logging industry but it’s gradually being strangled.
Mountain Ash, magnificent, fast growing ( 70 year rotation ) straight grained and just beautiful, either as a forest or timber will be phased out in the next ten years if the present Labor government is returned to office in November. The reason, it’s harvest is claimed to be unsustainable. Every logging coup is resown as soon as logging is completed and within two years these areas have new sapling 20 feet high but still the geens claim that mountain ash is a threatened species. Also tied up in this is a little animal called Leadbetters Possum, always rare and requiring a very specific environment of high over story some mid story and low understory, it’s claimed that ongoing logging will drive this animal to extinction. Guess where this animals numbers are highest. On the edges of regenerating logging coups ! Our Vicrorian Dept. of Sustainability or whatever it is called this year, also has an active programme to permanently close bush tracks. The arguement for this is “to preserve and protect the envrionment and when fires do occur, and they do with startling regularity, equipment always has to be brought in to open areas to allow firefighting access. The last big fire in 2009 burned 5000 Sq Kilometers, killed 180 people and destroyed several towns completely, and its all on schedule to happen again. Victoria has a long history of destructive fires occuring every ten to twenty years, we then have a Royal Commission into how it happened, why it happened and how to stop it happening again. The recommendations from these enquiries are remarkably similar in terms of forest management which includes logging and controled fuel reduction burns. However….

Reply to  Sambar
October 12, 2018 9:17 pm

My son was showing me photos of a fire near the Bogong high plains that was started by lightning and the surrounding area covered in snow , they were going to use a helicopter to go in and put it out .

Reply to  Sambar
October 13, 2018 12:59 am

Spot on Sambar. We live in the Marysville area, which was devastated in the 2009 firestorm. Our place is on the very edge of where the fires came. Marysville lost 34 people as well as all but a handful of buildings; 173 people altogether were lost. Despite Royal Commissions and various recommendations, there is masses of rubbish growth all along the roads. DELWP (yes, it’s been that for a year or two now!) try to keep on top of it but they have to have the right conditions. Last Easter there were perfect conditions for a ‘cool’ burn in the Marysville area but the State government gave in to protests that there would be smoke annoying holiday visitors. How trivial can you get?

Gary Pearse
October 12, 2018 2:19 pm

I used to think charges of CC being a religion was way over the top. Hellfires and I guess brimstone for aerosols to save the earth.

Jeff Alberts
Reply to  Gary Pearse
October 13, 2018 8:21 am

“I used to think charges of CC being a religion was were way over the top.”

Fixed it for you. 😉

Steven Fraser
October 12, 2018 2:40 pm

I wonder what climate change theorists have in mind to explain the Wisconsin fire of October, 1871, that burned 1,200,000 acres? Interestingly, that was the day before the Great Chicago Fire.

h/t Tony Heller:

comment image

Gunga Din
Reply to  Steven Fraser
October 12, 2018 3:03 pm

Mrs. O’Leary had two cows?
(Somehow it must have been Man’s fault.)

Reply to  Steven Fraser
October 12, 2018 3:55 pm

They have a simple explanation: ignore the past. People naturally forget bad events. It is a coping mechanism of the mind. As a result, they only remember the good things in the past. If they do remember the bad, they will minimize how bad it was. For the rest, they have neither have the time or the desire to research the past. The eco-zealots simply don’t tell them about the past. As a result, when people are told this is the worst ever, they believe. (Of course, nobody believes enough to change their lifestyle; someone else always need to change, not themselves.)

Just look at what is being said about Hurricane Michael. Never you mind that 1954 Hazel was a category 4 further north in October. Never you mind 1969 Camille was stronger at landfall and went from a category 2 to a category 5 in a day. Never you mind the 1935 Labor Day hurricane went from a tropical depression to the strongest US landfalling category 5 in 30 hours. Never you mind that the earliest landfalling hurricane in US records was in May 1863 called Hurricane Amanda and it came ashore on the Florida panhandle. Never you mind Barack Obama was the only president to never have a major landfalling US hurricane in his tenure since hurricane records were kept. Nope, this is the worst ever and also a sign of things to come. So says the media.

Derek Colman
Reply to  Wade
October 12, 2018 4:44 pm

I had a good look at hurricane Michael, with very good information from a newspaper article with lots of photos of the damage. It just didn’t measure up to the hype. The damage done was actually to a relatively small area, with major damage in Panama City, Florida, especially Mexico Beach area.. What the media did not mention is that Panama City is very small, with a population of under 40,000. From the photos it becomes obvious that Panama City has a lot of small boats and boat houses, as well as other old timber buildings, all of which are very vulnerable to strong winds, and succumbed to what was a tropical storm, not a hurricane, when it made landfall. Brick and concrete buildings look mainly unscathed. Overall damage looked about the same level as the infamous British hurricane which Michael Fish got so wrong, which had winds of 80 mph. I understand that the death toll was 2. All in all it looks like a fairly minor weather event, not the storm of the century which the media made it out to be.

CD in Wisconsin
October 12, 2018 2:45 pm

I am wondering if there are any kind of forest management requirements written into federal law for areas that are prone to wildfires. If there are not, then there should be. If it is written into federal law, the environmentalists might find it more difficult or impossible to stand in the way of it. Unfortunately, the big question here is whether the politicians in Washington will have the guts to stand up to the environmentalists and actually put such legislation on the books–if it isn’t already there.

Secondly, if there currently isn’t any such thing, a system should be put in place for monitoring fire-prone areas for wildfires 24/7–at least during the fire-prone season. It could involve cameras mounted in strategic locations and constantly rotating 360 degrees to monitor forests. The cameras could send the images to forest monitoring stations manned to keep a lookout for fires. Perhaps satellites could be used for this purpose as well. Cameras are already used in a similar way for nature watching, including wildlife such as eagles and osprey–especially to monitor nests during the mating season. Check out

I know all of this will cost money. Pull the money used to study the CO2 induced climate change hypothesis and use for this purpose.

Christopher Chantrill
October 12, 2018 2:50 pm

You can drive God out of Heaven, but I guess lefties still need the Devil in Hell.

Nietzsche said that we are now Beyond Good and Evil. But what did he know?

Reply to  Christopher Chantrill
October 12, 2018 4:08 pm

If we think there are only shades of grey, it’s only because, like toddlers with fingerpaints, we willfully smear the black and the white.

Bruce Cobb
October 12, 2018 2:55 pm

“The anomalies are becoming more frequent and more deadly.”
Of course they are. More people in fire-prone areas, with with way more eyes on it, and more fuel.
What do they expect?
Alarmism. What can you do? And to think, it’s all down to the lowly, completely-innocent CO2.
Just like witches, in days of yore. Good to have something to blame.

October 12, 2018 3:22 pm

Small fire now, small fire later.
No fire now, big fire later.
No fire now, no fire later, GINORMOUS RAGING INFERNO much later.
There will be fire. LET IT BURN.

(And maybe don’t build your half million dollar dream home on the slope of Mount Matchstick.)

Reply to  drednicolson
October 12, 2018 3:53 pm

Sorry, no cheap 1/2 mil homes on Mt Matchstick, they are only available in the low twos, and up. 1/2 mil shacks are for the hoi polloi at the mountain’s base with no view and all the traffic.

October 12, 2018 3:37 pm

I read an article in the NY TIMES real estate section recently about a couple who built a home in the northern hills of CA. The house was built on a 45% slope!

October 14, 2018 10:30 am

i’ve done it. it’s not a big deal.
but i did need to get a new transmission from backing up the drive so many times.

October 12, 2018 4:50 pm

Support forest management and firebreaks or face an elevated risk of hellfire.

Prophecies of Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming a.k.a. Catastrophic Anthropogenic Climate Change… not so much. Gaia is in denial.

October 12, 2018 4:50 pm

I love the irony of what has enabled us to reduce wildfires in the U.S. by 80% in the last 90 years: the internal combustion engine. It has given us the mobility to actually manage remote lands and to fight fires.

October 12, 2018 4:53 pm

Triple digit humidity…..I am no expert but with maximum moisture in the air a fire finds it very hard to breath just like my car. Maybe co2 is creating its own laws of physics?

R Shearer
October 12, 2018 5:04 pm

Two wrongs don’t make a right, though I do like the sound of hellfire.

Bryan A
Reply to  R Shearer
October 12, 2018 7:00 pm

But three left’s do

Walter Sobchak
Reply to  R Shearer
October 13, 2018 7:58 am

You got it. See my October 12, 2018 at 5:45 pm .

Reply to  Walter Sobchak
October 14, 2018 10:23 am

and 100 establishes a legal precedent…lol

Walter Sobchak
October 12, 2018 5:45 pm

Patrick MJD
October 12, 2018 5:56 pm

This IMO pretty much confirms the whole CAGW scare is a religion. Nothing more and nothing less.

Reply to  Patrick MJD
October 14, 2018 10:21 am

the climate inquisition has been conducting a never ending auto da fe to purge the heretics.
it’s been obvious from the beginning.

i found an interesting key to understanding the crazy, tho.
if a group of people are unable to reason it’s because they have a dogma.
if they lack principles, it’s because they obey rules instead.

the spiritual home, in the usa, is san francisco. it really got its foothold there when voters were bussed in from other counties to vote in the mayoral election. moscone won by only 4000 votes. that secured the city as a base.
those voters were mostly black and all were members of a ‘church’ run by a cult leader who was a big democratic donor. feinstein was present and learned the tricks from him.
since that time, it’s been the main strategy – the church owns everything and the congregation is dependent on the redistribution of their tithes.

what makes kanye so important is the fear that others might break free of the cult, so he has to be made an example of at all cost.

trump, on the other hand, is not a guru but a businessman.
he represents individualism, wealth creation, ownership and trade.

he is their ‘antichrist’

i was there at the time. i remember.
the koolaid is still being made by the same company.

Patrick MJD
Reply to  gnomish
October 14, 2018 4:21 pm

There is an interesting documentary about old Jimmy bouy!

Reply to  gnomish
October 14, 2018 6:44 pm

if they lose the busloads of formerly compliant blacks they can’t win any more
so they’ll be going after the electronic voting machines , cranking out the absentee ballots and staffing the polling places
REVERENDs sharpton and jackon have no clout if they can’t deliver, so they pull out all the stops to burn kanye
if racial strife can’t keep them walled in, no holds are barred.
white people on tv are authorized to call him a dumb negro now

Patrick MJD
October 12, 2018 7:16 pm

More proof the scam is a religion;

And my post in comments hasn’t appeared.

October 12, 2018 7:59 pm

I have a brother and wife who live next door to a National Park North of Brisbane. He has a wood stove, but he is not allowed to enter the National Park to harvest the considerable quantity of fallen timber, it must be allowed to slowly rot into the ground, and of course to also add to the fuel load when the next forest fire occurs.


Patrick MJD
Reply to  Michael
October 13, 2018 10:36 pm

And while rotting releasing the more deadly methane!

October 12, 2018 8:47 pm

Even if we restored CO2 levels to the Guardians perfect value we still have some high fire risk. In this day and age we must demand zero deaths etc, there is no risk that is allowed. The solution is therefore obvious trees burn so we either remove all trees or create genetically engineered trees that don’t burn … problem fixed 🙂

October 12, 2018 10:10 pm

“The rise in the IPCC is now the leading cause of a dangerous increase in ridiculous quotations.” – UN IPCC

Ivan Kinsman
October 12, 2018 10:39 pm

To blame the huge recent wild fires on the ‘greens’ for ‘poor forestry management is utter bollocks and you know it Eric. Your viewpoint us a huge oversimplification and is written simply to blame everything on environmentalists and cast them in a negative light.

Forestry mismanagement may be a contributing factor where trees are too dense and there are not enough fire breaks but only one of the factors. Of course the rising temperatures as a result of cO2 emissions are a big contributing factor, with warmer winters leading to increased drought and the drying out of the land.

Again, just as in Florida, those who have lost their homes and possessions will be thinking about climate change next time they head for the ballot box.

Trump sits in the WH listening to the praise of his mega rich buddy Kayne whilst American citizens struggle to put their lives back together. The optics ciuldn’t have looked worse.

Reply to  Ivan Kinsman
October 13, 2018 2:55 am

Decades of forest fuel buildup due to ill-advised fire suppression policies and management practices is exacerbated when the natural cycles of drought occur. Not the other way around. Tree ring cores prove drought and fire have occurred for eons, long before modern climate change (whatever that is supposed to be).

Patrick MJD
Reply to  Ivan Kinsman
October 13, 2018 10:31 pm

“Ivan Kinsman October 12, 2018 at 10:39 pm

To blame the huge recent wild fires on the ‘greens’ for ‘poor forestry management is utter bollocks and you know it Eric.”

And then there is reality.

The council made clearing land illegal, based on “green” policies.

October 13, 2018 12:07 am

The Guardian will be long gone before the earth floods . Of course if the Guardian really believed what it preached they would stop their tree killing ways . Maybe that’s why they do it . Deflection strategy or guilt ?
The objective of eco-anarchists like the Guardian is population elimination so what better way than by
flooding the earth as the IPCC has predicted over and over again . Obviously crying wolf has lost its effect .
The deplorables can’t even be fooled anymore . A trillion $ scam just crumbling under the weight of it’s own BS .
Climate changes and fortunately humans are not running the show . An inconvenient truth indeed .

October 13, 2018 4:08 am

This in via Energy Matters

“Australia is rejecting the latest U.N. report on climate change, insisting coal remains critical to energy security and lowering household power bills…. Australia’s Environment Minister Melissa Price believes the IPCC report exaggerates the threat posed by fossil fuel.”


Patrick MJD
Reply to  Don
October 13, 2018 10:28 pm

Don, you made a comment at that link that the oceans have 1000x the specific heat capacity of air. While you are heading in the right direction, the number is well short of the actual. Water has ~2500 times the heat capacity of air. For the alarmists to claim that ~4% of ~410ppm/v CO2 is warming the air above the land and oceans which in turn warms the land surface and deep ocean, is simply a load of twaddle!

Reply to  Patrick MJD
October 16, 2018 8:48 am

You may be right. My understanding is that the oceans, taken as a whole, have 1000x the heat capacity of the atmosphere as a whole, taking into account the heat capacity of water versus air.

Ivan Kinsman
Reply to  Don
October 16, 2018 9:20 am

So what point are you making here exactly? You just are happy to see the oceans gradually warming? And the impact on the life in those oceans? You think everything will just carry on as normal? Think that and you grand kids are going to be living on a sterile planet. Ok with you maybe but not with me and many others…

Reply to  Ivan Kinsman
October 16, 2018 9:26 am

doesn’t all that existential angst make your stigmata bleed?

Anthony Banton
Reply to  Patrick MJD
October 16, 2018 9:32 am

” For the alarmists to claim that ~4% of ~410ppm/v CO2 is warming the air above the land and oceans which in turn warms the land surface and deep ocean, is simply a load of twaddle!”

Yes indeed.
And this while that 0.04% (actually)
Greens the planet.
Miraculous stuff CO2 (sarc).
It does what you want it to but nothing else.

October 13, 2018 6:29 am

Dumb question:
If CO2 absorbs and emits IR, and if roughly half of that IR is directed back down, then why would the local atmosphere not burn up on a foggy day, when there’s an abundance of water vapor that absorbs/emits IR in many more wavelengths than CO2?

Or to put it another way, since it’s chilly here today and there’s fog in the valleys, can I go to the valley to warm up? Or if I climb a mountain and it gets cold but clouds are near the summit, can I climb up to the clouds to warm up?

These things would make sense to me if back-radiation is so powerful. I’m just trying to figure out ways to survive the coming end-times.

Thanks in advance,

Anthony Banton
Reply to  Don
October 16, 2018 9:42 am

“If CO2 absorbs and emits IR, and if roughly half of that IR is directed back down, then why would the local atmosphere not burn up on a foggy day, when there’s an abundance of water vapor that absorbs/emits IR in many more wavelengths than CO2?”

Because it’s not a one-shot action.
The half that goes down is radiated back up again and half of that is back-radiated.
And so on. And so on.
In a fog there is a balance between that received from the ground and that emitted from it’s top.
Otherwise the fog will either cool/thicken or burn-off.
In strong insolation the burn-off wins. In radiation conditions the cooling/thickening wins.
WV has more absorbing/emitting wavelengths yes BUT there is an overlap at 15 micron where CO2 is most effective, especially so at 255K – which is the temp that has it’s peak emission at 15 micron. And where is that temp to be found? – at the Earth’s effective radiating level (where indeed more goes up than back down. Currently at ~6km globally averaged …. and slowly rising.
At the surface WV massively dominates.

October 14, 2018 9:18 am

“Triple-digit temperatures and single-digit humidity”? Never mind that AGW theory suggests rising humidity levels. Never mind that temperatures are always more variable in conditions of low humidity. Somehow, high temperature and low humidity equals CO²-caused thermageddon.

(palm-to-head interface)

Ivan Kinsman
Reply to  Keith
October 14, 2018 9:55 am

Every sceptic has their own ‘killer theory of why global warming is not happening. Fortunately the vast majority on this planet, particularly in Europe, remain unconvinced. So you will have to do better than that.

October 16, 2018 4:32 am

There is a simple answer- make the environmental departments responsible for fire damage.

%d bloggers like this: