California Governor: “In Less than Five Years, Even the Worst Skeptics Will Be Believers”

Jerry Brown, photo author Neon Tommy, source Wikimedia

Jerry Brown, photo author Neon Tommy, source Wikimedia

Guest essay by Eric Worrall

h/t Breitbart – Governor Jerry Brown of California thinks coming climate disasters will convert even the “worst” skeptics in five years, though in a surprisingly moderate interview (for Brown) he also admitted that forest management might be playing a part in California’s wildfires.

Source: Breitbart and CBS Face The Nation

Note: the five year quote is at the end of the video clip above

A few months ago, Secretary of the Interior Ryan Zinke fired a broadside at green obstructionism, blaming green activists for stopping logging and other active forest intervention, which led to a rise in fuel load and the severity of forest fires.

… 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:

Even if you believe climate change is contributing to the fires, better forest management will save lives. If there is nothing to burn, there can be no fire. Proper firebreaks, tree thinning and access roads should be enough, but chopping down entire forests is always an option, for areas where access roads and firebreaks do not provide sufficient protection. Human lives are more important than trees.

At the very least clear the trees away from houses in vulnerable areas. Every picture of Paradise, California I’ve seen to date shows the remains of giant trees right next to burned out buildings. This is madness.

We learned this lesson the hard way in Australia. Let us hope US government agencies take action before more lives are lost.

276 thoughts on “California Governor: “In Less than Five Years, Even the Worst Skeptics Will Be Believers”

    • In Jerry’s mind we will all achieve nirvana together on public money. Just follow his instructions and the whole world can achieve paradise (pun of irony intended, though not at all funny).

    • In 5 years even the worst believers will be sceptics 🙂

      Well if the predictions of the cyclical scientists happen then we are back to the 60s & 70s type ocean cycles and resulting cold, darn cold or DFC.

      We shall see shortly. Not that a prolonged cold period would change some peoples’ minds but it would change a lot.

      • We are back to the 60s & 70s type ocean cycles and resulting cold, darn cold or DFC.

        In the 1962.3 winter in the uk the satirical magazine Private eye published an Old Moores guide to the Winter; whereby the actual temperatures could be related to ‘natural’ phenomena.

        Si starting wit things like “-3C taps freeze and pipes burst” through “-9C Seals come ashore in Shetland”

        All the way down to “-25C “Fires lit in British Rail waiting rooms”

        British rail was the nationalized railway system and the railways still ran on coal – and every waiting room had a small coal fire which was never kit.

        Scientist warned us that ‘this could be the start of a new Ice Age’.

    • The man does not understand skeptics. His remark is just insulting. In fact, I take it as a personal insult. He’s every bit as stupid and ignorant as he thinks I am.

      • Brown is a failed Catholic and was educated as a Jesuit and even attended seminary. Brown also has huge daddy issues regarding his father, who was also a disastrous Governor of California.
        He seems to have sought redemption by adopting the worst of the religious aspects of the climate obsession. So he frames the climate issue not as science but instead as relgion. As if we all believe properly, we will appease the environment good he he has created.

      • “Globull Warmening” is his RELIGION; he cannot give it up just like that. Please remember that both Jerry “Moonbeam” Brown and AlGore are failed seminarians, so they started their own religion.

    • It is amazing that Brown lives in such an insulated world that no one has gotten to him with any real science. He apparently feels no need to seek other knowledge, not just opinions, but real science. It must be nice to be in your own world with the confidence that the rest of the world is wrong and you are right. That does smack of being delusional. He must have all kinds of sycophants who constantly reinforce the facade that he is always right. It serves the political and financial needs of so many people for them to keep him delusional.

      • “It is amazing that Brown lives in such an insulated world that no one has gotten to him with any real science. He apparently feels no need to seek other knowledge ….”

        He probably reads the newsletters and feeds of half a dozen green organizations, which he imagines provide him the the real lowdown on what’s going on and what’s comingn which which assuere hi the contrarians are not to be paid attention to. So do millions of others.

    • Yes, I do believe that Gubernor Moonbeam is a loon.

      I have always believed that, and I will continue to believe it until he proves otherwise.

      That’s my story and I’m sticking to it.

      Meantime, I have to figure out a way to get the village government in my tiny little burg to get after the owner of some unimproved land that is awash in buckthorn and honeysuckle, both of which are invasive plants that grow like Topys, and both of which present fire hazards to the houses from the bottom of the hill up to where I live at the top. All we need is one dry winter followed by a dry summer, and hey, presto! fire hazard.

    • R Shearer – I’m thinking the same thing somewhat.

      If, in 5 years a current skeptic becomes a believer, he/she was indeed one of the worst skeptics.


    • That was really brave of Moonbeam to go out such a short distance with the goalposts. Doesn’t he realize we track these things? Better to play it safe with the prognostications and set your targets far enough out that they won’t be checked. Year 2100 sounds pretty safe.

  1. Budget Surpluses, Fire and Water in California: Governor Jerry Brown continues to declare that all of this year’s forest fires (including “Camp Fire,” “Woolsey,” “Hill Fire,” and “Rocky Peak Fire) have been caused by climate change. In fact, the WSJ points out that the State Of California has MISSPENT 10 times more on electric vehicles than on controlled forest fires and underbrush removal, $335 million to $30 million, in the last fiscal year.

    Then, there is the matter of spending billions and billions of dollars annually on the bullet train that is expected to cost north of $100 Billion, which many knowledgeable people suspect will never be completed.

    Additionally, the plethora of forest fires this year have likely put as much pollution into the atmosphere as has been reduced through emission reduction strategies in 2018. Also, the State has a $9 billion surplus this year, while spending only $30 million on forest management.

    Finally, a February report by the Little Hoover Commission, the State Oversight Committee for the State of California, found that CA has “ignored the gathering underbrush and dead trees in their forests for 100 years by underfunding any systematic removal of it.” As the Committee put it, these forest fires probably nullified California’s “hard-fought carbon reductions.”

    One can only wonder what would have happened if California had spent as money on forest management as they spent electric vehicles?

    • Yes, they refuse to take the “adaptation” route. They want to prevent the temperature rising instead.

    • I’m Australian so I have no idea who is responsible for forest management in the USA or California ..
      But Brown says that the fire around Paradise are on Federally owned & controlled forests…
      Can anyone clarify this ?

      PS Here the states own all “Crown or Public Land” which is where the forests mostly are

      • Great question.
        As I have seen it,
        California is responsible for the regressive failed policies of overgrowth and refusal to clear debris and deadfall and brush.
        The lie of blaming it on the Federal government is a canard only hides the fact that the Feds also allowed the same bad land use policies on much land.
        It is the policiesof the greens that are killing our environment and our fellow citizens.

      • Most forest land in California is privately owned and legislatively cotrolled by the State government. The same problem as we have in Australia.

        • Sorry, Mark, not true according to official statistics available at

          According to this website:
          33 million acres of forest(ed) lands in California
          Federal ownership is 19 million acres = 57%
          State and local agencies (including land trusts) own 3%
          Privately owned forest lands are 13.3 million acres = 40%

          And further dividing the “privately owned” segment:
          Industrial private owners are 4.7 million acres = 14%
          Remainder private owned forestlands are 9 million acres = 26%
          (Non-corporate private forestlands are 7.9 million acres)

      • The fire may or may not have started in federally owned land (I’ve heard it both ways). In either case, most of the land that actually burned is state and privately owned. (Privately owned is still regulated by the state.)

        • It seems to me the extreme greens got what they wanted: a forest in its “natural state” with people living in it in harmony with nature. Well, “Nature” doesn’t care about human life. Not at all. “Nature” doesn’t have “feelings”. Nature has fires. Harmonise as you can…

          It is fitting that extreme greens are blaming humans for the fires (AG warming) rather than their own foolish policies. I have never met an ideologically possessed person who blames themselves for anything. Before they start planting trees to replace the burned ones, they should first be made to plant the people killed in a preventable and what would have otherwise been a manageable fire.

          I am sorry, People of Paradise, for the illusions that contributed to your demise.

        • Thanks for the replies MarkW, Mark Smith, & Hunter…

          I was before retiring a farmer from 1985-2015 on two separate farms with lots of bush around that was never cool burned..There was so much opposition and abuse of any attempt to cool burn,that I gave up.
          There is still a big council sign on the road next to my second farm, that said “DON’T BURN, MULCH”….Put there by office based dudes with bloody idea…

  2. Undergrowth thinning is not glamorous. A high speed train (to nowhere) is. Let’s put taxpayer’s money in the high speed train. Who cares about fire safety? We can always blame Trump and Global Warming and whoever disagrees with us.

  3. The mostly urban environmentalists mistake what was an actively managed system for “natural”. The Indians regularly used fire to manage the environment for their own purposes, and Native Americans have been in residence since before the ecosystem settled down after the last Ice Age.
    Brown is engaging in bad history as far as fires, or what the climate has historically done. Droughts are the norm, and the normal weather pattern allows for the foliage to dry out by fall. One would think he just moved there from New York.

  4. This well said on BB by EmeraldAl
    The funny thing is that Jerry Brown obviously either doesn’t believe what he is saying about “climate change” or has been willfully incompetent. He believes a problem will get worse yet has done nothing to prepare the state via forest management. He has been governor long enough to have mitigated the problem. His actions are opposite of his claims. Although that is also just the typical mark of a “liberal”.

    • He is taking a retirement job as paid schill for some lobbying company posing as a sciencey policy think tank.
      Of course the lobbying company is hacking for even more green policies like the ones that are failing in California.

  5. Just wondering how effective all of the billions spent on windmills, solar panels and electric vehicles has been in changing the climate or preventing wildfires?

    Oh right! Maybe we should reconsider our approach.

  6. Another warmist prediction not based on any evidence, but fear. When the deadline passes no one will remember it.

  7. “In Less than Five Years, Even the Worst Skeptics Will Be Believers”

    Ok folks. 11/18/2023, mark this date down.

    We will all get together and ram the above statement from Moonbeam back down his throat. Afterwards, the first round is on me.

  8. I hope those unaccounted for have simply left the area and not contacted authorities.
    According to Wiki the population of Paradise Ca has grown from around 8,000 in 1960 to 26,000 in 2010.
    Statistics from the US Department of Agriculture show the total area of wildfire burns has dropped from
    50 million acres in 1930 to around 7 million acres in 2000 due to awareness and prevention measures i.e. human intervention.
    I don’t wish to undervalue the great human tragedy but nowadays there are far more lives and assets at risk than in the past in forest areas.

    • I hope those unaccounted for have simply left the area and not contacted authorities.

      When you are alive and well, and do not know you are missing, why would you contact authorities?
      The only real purpose in making the “1,000 missing” report is to have people from the area check the list, and call if they see their names. Officials would like to clear the list, but otherwise, the number dead is likely maxed out.

  9. Basically ALL the problems Kookifornia are having at the moment can be slated straight at the feet of GOVERNMENT MISMANAGEMENT.

    • fred250,

      That is, regrettably, not the total story. Remember, the good voters of California have elected a single-party legislature, with a Governor of the same party. And the legislature and Governor are just doing that which will ensure that the single-party state continues.

      • the voters get the government they deserve. Any sane Californians should flee that dumpster fire of a state at their first opportunity (if they haven’t already) because things are only gonna get worse thanks to the voters choices.

  10. Jerry Brown Eye is merely deflecting his responsibility for wildfire management to a claim that he has been victimized by those who don’t partake in the dogma of the Church of Omnipotent Greenhouse In Carbon.
    Witches, in his perspective.

    • of course he won’t. It’s not a prediction so much as political rhetoric. It’s already served it’s purpose and five years from now he probably won’t even remember ever saying it.

  11. 71dead, 100s missing, a town incinerated, an ecosystem trashed,
    all for a political dogma…
    in the land of guns…I’m surprised no-one has taken a shotgun to ‘Moonbeam’ !!

    “Human lives are more important than trees. ”
    I don’t agree;
    without trees, Humans couldn’t exist;
    without Humans, trees exist very well.

    If you want to live in a forest & survive, you should live by the rules of nature, NOT by the rules of armchair eco-warriors.

    At the very least, Brown & Co should be done for manslaughter, they knew what the outcome would be (enough people have told them over the years) but chose to go the ‘green way’ & put 1,000s of innocent lives at risk, they should pay dearly.

  12. “Let us hope US government agencies take action before more lives are lost.” Does that include reducing the production of unwanted/unneeded CO2?

      • I agree with the nuclear thing…. but all worthwhile inventions start off being useless. If we can get renewables to be fly we will be way better off.

        • I thought there was no time to lose. If we only have 12 years to save the world, better focus on known nuclear technology than take a huge gamble on the possibility renewables might work in the future.

          What France did in the 1970s could be done worldwide today. I appreciate your support for nuclear, but why are your fellow travellers hesitating? What can we do to persuade them?

          • Nuclear as we all know has its problem, I just think the gamble is small and getting smaller, particularly for the benefit.

          • Simon, we’re talking about the end of the world, aren’t we? Why take ANY gamble? Sure nuclear has problems, but as the French conversion to nuclear in the 1970s demonstrated, the problems are surmountable. Nothing but a major effort to convert to nuclear can possibly deliver serious CO2 emissions cuts by the 2030 deadline.

          • No Eric, we are not talking about the end of the world. The world will go on. It is really about what sort of world it will be. We both know that. You think the problems will be minimal. I think you under estimate things.

          • Whats your evidence there would be major problems Simon? At least I can cite a successful programme, the 1970s French nuclear conversion. Its not like every country would have to make their own reactors – major nuclear companies are itching for the opportunity to deploy self contained modular reactors.

          • The first automobiles were electric. Then engineers realized how that would never fly and even today, their decision to switch is still superior to electric!

            Some things are never viable considering whole system analysis!

          • Indeed RockyRoad, all the drawbacks of all-electric automobile from a century ago still exist with the current batch. They’re only good if all your driving is within a limited range. If you have to go long distances (particularly in an emergency situation) you are SOL with an all-electric car.

        • Simon us a typical climate coward.
          He backs the people claiming climate is an existential crisis.
          Then when confronted about his extremism simply pretends he doesn’t believe it is an existential crisis.

        • Windmills have been around since A.D. 500-900, if we haven’t gotten them to fly after 1000-1500 years, I doubt we’ll get them to fly any time soon.

          Solar has been around forever (as far back a the 7th century B.C., glass was uses as a magnifier to light fires. Though solar for electric currents weren’t observed until the 19th century A.D. (I.E. two centuries ago). Again, after all this time, the kind of “breakthrough” greenies are looking for to make solar “fly” just isn’t in the cards anytime soon if ever.

          The only technology proven to provide abundant “zero carbon” energy is Nuclear. And the greenies absolutely hate nuclear and actively obstruct any attempts to build new Nuclear plants (at least here in the states) and actively attempt to get existing Nuclear plants closed down.

      • Driving a V8 down to the corner shop is producing more CO2 that we need to. I am a realist. We need to burn fossil fuels at the moment, but not just coz we can and it’s my “right”, which seems to be the attitude of some.

        • Actually, V8’s are quite economical these days with cylinders being shutdown and 8 speed transmissions that change up early. Mind you, I don’t view CO2 as a problem from vehicle exhaust.

        • Where I live it’s every person’s right to use as much fossil fuels as they want and can afford, who are “we” to dictate otherwise?

          • Simon is one of those people who believes that the majority have the right to determine how everyone must live.

          • But only so long as he’s in the majority.
            When he’s not in the majority, that’s defined as a failure of democracy and is automatically invalid.

        • When you stop using modern transportation, hydrocarbons of any kind, stop wearing modern clothing, using aluminum anythings, or living in a concrete steel and glass abode, or exhaling, I’ll take your asserted sincerity about cutting down of CO2 emissions seriously.

        • Driving a V8 down to the corner shop is producing more CO2 that we need to

          The plants of the Earth disagree.

          I am a realist

          judging from that comment, I’d say you’re a comedian. Just not a funny one.

          We need to burn fossil fuels at the moment, but not just coz we can and it’s my “right”, which seems to be the attitude of some.

          cheap abundant energy is more than a “right”, it’s essential for prosperity and modern civilization. Without it we’d be a lot worse off. Just ask anyone in the third world living in energy poverty about how great it is that they don’t get to burn fossil fuels.

    • CO2 is a necessary component of the natural world. At 800 to 1,000 ppm the living world is much safer.
      The human body is able to control breathing while you sleep because of CO2. You can’t live without it.

      It is mostly city, county, and state agencies that need to act. Those are the lands where people build houses, >80% of wild fires are related to actions of people.

    • “Unwanted” or “unneeded” CO2 did exactly what with these tragic fires?
      Whatever actual tole CO2 may have played, it is still s factor that is not controllable by California.
      Rational scientific based land use of California land is, however, controllable by California government.
      The government of California has chosen to ignore the skeptics who have pointed out that land use and land use infrastructure has been badly managed.
      Perhaps the rational approach is better than the climate obsessed approach.

      • “The government of California has chosen to ignore the skeptics who have pointed out that land use and land use infrastructure has been badly managed.” And the “D” team ignore the science that says a warming climate will result in greater damage and loss of life from fires.

        • What science?
          Models are not science.
          Data on the other hand shows that none of the predictions of you alarmists have come true, or show any sign of ever coming true.

  13. Why hasn’t President Trump ordered a federal investigation into the (lack of ) forest management in California?

    • Probably because he’d also have to order a Federal investigation of Federal forest management policies and procedures. And the role played in both State and Federal forest management policies by NGOs.

      Hmmm, maybe that wouldn’t be a good idea.

    • The “camp fire” burned the community of Paradise.
      This was/is an urban forest – not a National Forest.
      Yes it started where power lines and N. F. co-exist, if Cliff Mass’ analysis was correct.
      Skeptics of cAGW would like to see funds directed toward public lands stewardship, rather than wasted on subsidies for fancy cars for the well-off, subsidies to investors for a 2nd and 3rd layer of unreliable electricity production.
      For investors to make money from removing trees and chipping, the companies that make that type of equipment would have to get a fancy new name, like maybe Tesla.

    • “Why hasn’t President Trump ordered a federal investigation into the (lack of ) forest management in California?”
      Coz he only cares about trees on gold courses……

      • “Why hasn’t President Trump ordered a federal investigation into the (lack of ) forest management in California?”
        Coz he only cares about trees on golf courses……

  14. In considerably less than 5 years, Doomsday Brown will need another income to replace his present one. Is this just a PR release to help him vie for future power and income?

    • His net worth is reported to be $4 million and he has government pensions. He’s not rich, but he shouldn’t be wanting.

  15. So he refers to people as “Believers”. Isn’t that what we call those who engage in religious ideas? Perhaps a Freudian slip?

    • Tom in Florida And whomever/whoever thought? Moonbeam Eddy Gerry/Jerry Brown has the similar self belief as the late Jimmy kool-aid Jones of 1978. People worshiping other people and expending great energy to make oneself the point of worship. Watermelon religious Cult.

  16. “admitted that forest management might be playing a part in California’s wildfires.” Well Mr. Brown, Mother Nature is telling you your forest management sucks.

  17. I agree that forest management is a problem, and I also think that a number of skeptics will (perhaps slowly) be won over to the notions that CO2 is warming the planet and causing increasing damage. For example,

    “Opinions regarding climate change in North Carolina have shifted among Republicans following Hurricane Florence, with 37 percent now saying global warming is “very likely” to impact the state’s coastal communities in the next 50 years, compared to 13 percent who felt that way in 2017…”

    Read Newsmax: Poll: NC Republicans Shift Thinking on Climate Change After Florence |

    Just as Republican political sentiment is shifting on Obamacare, as more people decide they like having health care, and not paying through the nose if the have pre-existing conditions, I think that will happen with global warming/climate change as well. Maybe not in 5 years.

        • Seriously, I’ve had several conversations online with greens about why they are anti-nuclear. The conversations usually start off rational but get increasingly strange, as I push points like the French nuclear programme in the 1970s (proves nuclear is a viable baseload option), that the risk of a few meltdowns, even a few meltdowns per YEAR, is less of a problem than the end of the world. They usually squirm about a bit then stop answering.

    • Politics is not the reason I don’t “believe” in global warming. As a PhD scientist with some graduate training in atmospheric chemistry, I assumed that what I had been taught was good and solid science. Many years after graduate school, I was challenged and looked into it more fully. To be explicit, most of what climate scientists are telling us about global warming is crap.

      I had even voted for Gore, but my awakening occurred shortly thereafter. My scientific realization actually influenced my path to conservatism with a Libertarian bent and not the other way round. Leftists have a problem differentiating between cause and effect.

      With regard to health insurance (healthcare is not quite the same), it is too expensive. Nonetheless, many people like it if someone else is paying for it and in general. Another problem with Leftists is that as we all know, they eventually run out of other peoples money.

    • So John, the AGW hypothesis and the Obamacare initiative both have the same level-of-doubt-by-sceptics(republicans)-but-will-come-round-to-acceptance-in-5-years? I see.

      Is this the new scientific method that covers all aspects of life whereby we wait 5 years and count how many people tick the I-was-wrong-box?

      Maybe we should vote on whether I have the best looking bum in Scotland? May take 5 years though, maybe not.

    • During the 2016 primaries, Bernie Sanders repeatedly stated that 20 million people in the US were without medical coverage – years after ObamaCare was approved. His statements were never challenged. Prior to its passage, Nancy Pelosi stated that the Patient Protection and AFFORDABLE Care Act would cover those 15% (~45 – 50 million people) that had no coverage. Looks like 40% or more of those who were without coverage still haven’t signed up. To which “more people decide they like having health care” are you referring?

      • It’s hard to expect people to sign up for Obamacare now that the indivdual mandate has been repealed.

        Healthcare policy is a mess with many perverse incentives. Remember, the Cong. Budget Office concluded that Obamacare would save money when everything was considered. It is basically a good idea, IMO, with some flaws that could be corrected by thoughful, well-meaning, politicians.

        One of these days, we’ll have a serious debate on whether universal health care is a good idea. It could be if we could figure a way to get insurance companies out of the business, and if the tradeoff between higher taxes and insurance premiums could be explained.

    • The majority of the public have not attempted to understand the science, if there is enough propaganda they will believe for a while; until the evidence of their eyes shows the truth.

      Also recent weather has a big effect, when a weather related disaster occurs many people will believe the propaganda that it was caused by climate change and only a few will look at the data that shows no increase in such disasters. However, a few cold winters reduces public belief in global warming; even though that is just weather as well.

      Age has a big effect, no sane person who remembers the predictions being made in the 90s can believe in CAGW.

    • In the real world,vwhere the crappy insurance and poor quality care of the failed Obamacare scam is hurting people your claims are an insult.
      In the real world, where the kegacy of failed green policies has destroyed whole towns and is costing real people more and more money for power and everything that uses power, your claims are an outrage.
      I find climate extremists like you irrational and dangerous, with your faux science claims and refusal to deal with reality.
      You seen to enjoy the damage the failed policies you support are imposing.

    • Since there isn’t the slightest bit of evidence that the teeny bit of warming that the planet has enjoyed since the end of the Little Ice Age is causing any problems, why should we believe otherwise?

    • The concept of Insurance is based on a premium paid, that covers the RISK of the losses from reimbursement exceeding the premium paid.
      It is not a program of wealth redistribution where everyone pays more regardless of their personal risk profile, so that those that will consume much more than they can afford, are free to consume without restrictions of any kind. Many current procedures are very expensive. If you are a bad risk for insurance, and you are advocating for “affordable” premiums, you are charging your healthcare expense to someone else. That is at the heart of Obamacare, and the reason it will not work over the long term. It does not reduce health care cost. It allows costs to continue to grow faster than wage growth and inflation combined.
      What kind of home insurance company is going to write policies for homes in Paradise, when the fire is raging and heading in their direction???
      If your risk is higher than you can afford, then you are a charity case. Whether that goes through a non-profit or the government, that is the best way to keep insurance premiums from continuing to out pace wages. The more premiums go up, the more people will not be able to afford them, and the end result is a system that becomes unsustainable. If you are taking money that some one else has to earn, you should at least ask for it (charity) or give the voters a say in whether they agree with it (govt program).
      Home insurance is based on risk. Car insurance is based on risk. Those programs are working as designed and do not require wealth redistribution. Health insurance will only work if premiums are based on the risk of reimbursement.

    • Please quote a “sceptic” that disbelieves that the climate is warming. Most, other than the kooks, will tell you that of course the climate is warming as the earth leaves the Little Ice Age. The problem is why. You obviously “believe” it is due to CO2. Sceptics say that CO2 is so small a percent of the atmosphere that its affects are overwhelmed by natural variation.

      Please show us the physical, empirical evidence that CO2, and especially man-made CO2, is causing the warming that has been detected. The only thing we ever see is that computer models say it is so. You know Einstein said gravity affected light. However, it wasn’t considered an actual fact until physical, empirical evidence was gathered that proved it. Please show us the same kind of evidence please.

  18. “In Less than Five Years, Even the Worst Skeptics Will Be Believers” How many times have we heard such pontification by the elite about future climate disasters and when the day/year comes and goes, not a single media type put the person in the spot light? Folks like Gov Moonbeam know they are safe in making these claims because only the conservative media will remind folks and who would believe them anyway. These lefties know their ignorant mobs will never hear about these “errors” and would probably make excuses even if they did hear about it.

    • The guy is goners, old news, so who would do the news in 2023?

      And politician being wrong, what news is that?

      They talk crap all the time.

  19. As someone who lives in a fire prone area in Australia I can say with some authority that the fundamental premise in this article is wrong. Thinning trees will not/would not prevent the kind of tragedy we have just witnessed.
    What is required is that the underbrush be cleared, and ground debris be removed.
    These fires start in the underbrush, and if there is sufficient fuel to generate a BIG fire, the heat will ignite the foliage of trees within range. If the understorey/foliage fire is sufficiently intense, then we may or may not have a crown fire, depending on the wind and the density of intersecting tree foliage.
    I have fought/lived through numerous bush fires where I dampened down the understorey fire, and the tree foliage was singed, but did not ignite.
    So to repeat the point: removing trees has no bearing on the outcome of these kinds of tragedies.

    • I also live in a bushfire prone area of Australia. Removing trees removes stuff which can burn, though I should have mentioned controlled burns of undergrowth as I did on previous posts on this subject.

      • Yes, but back to my point: if the fire has become hot enough and big enough to ignite trees, then God himself couldn’t help.
        The thing to do is ensure that the fire never gets that hot. You do this by removing the underbrush and reducing the fuel load. Not by removing trees.

        • Or you could follow CFA advice and clear trees well away from the house, so there is nothing to catch fire.

          • In a firestorm, the fire doesn’t need to touch the house. The cinders will be thrown 200m in front of the fire starting new fires ahead of the front. And the natural furnace-like heat from the fire means that when the flame finally gets hold of something that will burn, it explodes.

            I had a grass fire on my property last week, and I was surprised that even though the grass was green and healthy, there was a mat of leaf and twig underneath the grass that burned vigorously. Surprised me just how healthy the fire was going.

            Australia usually does back burning in winter months because the fire burns slower.

          • Wetting down the occasional cinder is not the same as having to fend off a towering inferno on your front porch.

          • Depends on what you mean by a “firestorm”.
            I have had the unfortunate experience of standing and watching a wall of fire approaching about 400yds away, and could feel the skin on my face starting to blister.
            I made a run for it, and in my mirror, I saw the bushes where I had been standing explode into a fireball despite the fact the fire front was still several hundred yards away.
            When I returned a few days later, I saw the puddles of aluminium of what used to be car wheel rims.
            When we have a hot fire around here, it gives a whole new meaning to the word “hot”.
            If fire in California has the same characteristics, those people who were caught out in the open or in their cars didn’t stand a chance.

          • and remembering to make sure the generator to run the pump for water isnt a damned PLASTIC fuel tank job. or sprinkler lines ditto plastic jobs
            amazinghow many peoples are.
            my homes old ,gappy wood n indefensible, as the power would be cut the borepumps 2hp and i cant run my genset on it
            id be loading pets n papers n driving away

          • There are some misunderstandings regarding the removal of trees, and their relationship to fire risk.
            In a fire, trees become a problem only when the undergrowth is burning hot enough to ignite the foliage of the tree. If you are still in the area when that happens, you should make sure your relationship with God is a good one; because you will soon be meeting him.
            Home owners are advised to cut down trees adjacent to their homes. This advice is not based on their hazard while there is a fire, but due to the fact that in time leading up to a fire they will deposit leaves and other debris on the ground, in gutters and on roofs. Most home owners will neglect to remove this debris, so when a fire does come this fuel, especially that on the roof and in the gutters, will increase the risk that their house will burn down. When you are fighting an underbrush fire, you probably won’t notice that the dead leaves in your gutter have ignited.
            So cutting down a dead tree won’t do anything to increase your fire safety, but it may remove a nesting spot for birds and other creatures. Ditto for a living tree.

  20. It’s almost as if Jerry is working hard to fulfill his predictions with the lives of Californians. At the very least, he is an accessory to mansalughter.

  21. It’s almost as if Jerry is working hard to fulfill his prophecy with the lives of Californians. At the very least, he is an accessory to mansalughter.

  22. Regardless of whether Global Warming or Forest Mismanagement is to blame for these fires, the prudent course of action, to mitigate the threat, should have been aggressive fire prevention measures.
    Waiting to reverse global warming, if it were even possible, is gross negligence on behalf of the government and the related forestry management agencies.

    • I had heard that well over half of wildfires started in California the past two years were a result of sparking or downed power lines.

      • Global warming may have some influence on California weather. But it’s doubtful that wildfires have much, if anything, to do with climate change. The conditions favoring wildfires over the years have been around forever, and have been aggravated by the influx of homeowners and by disputes over how forests are managed.

        So much of the problem is self-inflicted, and is a favorite subject of politicians and advocates with various stripes. Difficult to actually work on solving problems in an atmosphere like this.

        • Also, PG&E has been made a scapegoat for such a serious and complicated problem. Are they supposed to guarantee that their equipment won’t create sparks or downed power lines? This is just another way to deflect “blame”.

    • He just said Democrat policy to let the state burn is not their fault as they predicted the End Days for you anyway. In other words, he refuses to provide any solution. The solution to environmentalists is depopulation, for others not them, of course.

  23. “Governor Jerry Brown of California thinks coming climate disasters will convert even the “worst” skeptics in five years”

    I am skeptical about that.

    These are the words of a religious fanatic.

    • Gov. Brown is a bitter old rich man with no children and the blood of innocent Californians on his hands.
      His policies have hurt California and squandered billions of tax dollars.
      His legacy is literally one of ashes.

    • 2000 F fireball breaks out all the windows and spontaneously ignites the interiors. The windows need fire shutters.

      • “The windows need fire shutters.”

        Yes—And metal roofs help too. Insurance companies in California will gie you a discount if you have one—although that is mostly for their earthquake-protection effect. (They prevent the house from twisting and nails popping and rafters failing.)

  24. “In Less than Five Years, Even the Worst Skeptics Will Be Believers”

    Is this a prediction or a prospective California policy?

  25. I immediately sat up straight when I saw that. Makes me think of Hansen
    in 1989, I think, and Gore in 2007. When will they learn.
    And in other news in Berkeley, I posted, in jest, Yay! It’s clearing. I can
    see chemtrails again!

  26. Its always seemed pretty simple to me.

    The fire triangle has oxygen, heat and fuel as its sides.

    Oxygen is a moot point for forest fires and the heat is generated by the fire itself.

    So you are left with fuel as by far the most important issue to address to limit the severity of a fire.

    Regardless of your belief in a small increase of CO2 being responsible for more/less rain and vegetation growth/drought ( I can never keep up with what the effects are supposed to be) managing fuel loads IS the one action we can take to manage natural fuel buildups and any buildup associated with whatever impact of CO2 you believe in. It should be the primary method we have of controlling fires. Its certainly the most effective.

    • Essentially the heat blows through the house windows and ignites the interior. With fire shutters, I would think that would stop it as most house exteriors in CA are stucco concrete.

  27. Jerry Brown and his advisers have poor reading skills.

    The scenarios of catastrophic global warming have been explained to happen later this century – 2070 -2100 and beyond. So, why is anything going to happen in the next five that will concern anyone?

    Continuing: Earlier this month we were told there are just 12 years before we go over the cliff. The wording in the UN report was a little different.
    Last time I checked, 12 years is longer than 5 years. Rather than panic at 5, let’s wait to 12.

    I’m not the only one that is tired of this nonsense. Brown and friends get sillier by the day.

  28. In 5 years I will have been a climate crisis skeptic for 33 years. For the last 28 years I have watched the other side produce an endless stream of failed predictions, try to erase inconvenient historical climate change, manipulate data to jack-up warming, avoid debate, demonize those with a different scientific opinion, rely almost exclusively on the fallacious arguments of authority and consensus, completely ignore the scientific method and generally act more like tyrants wanting to control the people than scientists wanting to understand the physical world.

    Even if the climate does some really wacky things over the next 5 years, it would be hard to attribute that to the steadily rising concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere, which to date, has not produced any discernible change from natural climate variability.

    No…It is likely that the number of crisis climate skeptics will be much larger in 5 years than it is now, and the true believers will be a twindiling breed.

    I feel pretty safe in betting against the ideas of Jerry Brown.

  29. ~~~~~~
    As with trying to live in a flood plain, living in some fire-prone areas ought not to be allowed. Making one’s own house, buildings, and land fire resistant is a responsibility many folks will not, or cannot do. Cutting trees when the land is empty of people and buildings is less costly than when the land is occupied. Check the cost of removing a single large tree from near a building. There are several still standing in this image:

    • Two-thirds of California is fire prone. It is not possible to live in non fire-prone areas of the state except for the Central Valley, LA Basin, and High Desert. The problem is that the High Desert and LA Basin don’t have water. The cost of trimming trees is about $500 a tree. The key mechanism is to fireproof houses by using prefab concrete, tube steel for walls and roof, and tile roofs. Also, automatically closing fire shutters on outdoor windows to stop heat breaking through the windows.

  30. If the house is made with prefab concrete, the walls made with tubular steel, and the roof of tile, and fire shutters close on outside windows so the heat cannot break into the house through them, how are the houses going to burn? It looks like timber construction of housing needs to be phased out, particularly in timber areas.

    • The costs of building something like that, that is also earthquake and high wind safe, would be probably prohibitive.

      • Not prefab concrete. Panels are trucked in. Now, if the walls are tube steel with stucco, may have same effect so the cost is the tube steel.

        • I don’t see it would work. There would be enough heat generated to cause material items inside to heat up to near flash-over point. People inside would suffocate.

  31. Photos and videos of the Camp fire devastation suggest the burn would have been primarily underbrush if the area were not so densely populated with tinderbox homes.

  32. Yes forest management (actually lack there of) is a problem in California but the truth that hardly anyone wants to admit is that these types of fires can’t be completely prevented. You can’t go into the forest and remove all of the fuel load every single year. Remember, some of the area burned by the Camp Fire burned just 10 years ago. It’s also not reasonable or realistic to say “cut down all the trees). People move to towns like Paradise because they want to be surrounded by trees and forest.

    So what’s the solution? Better forest management. Better technology to prevent powerlines from sparking fires. Improved building codes to help make structures less susceptible to burning. Better emergency notifications. Improved escape routes. Help people to be better prepared.

    Even if every one of those things got done you’d still have fires and ultimately you’d still have structures lost and people killed. The only way to prevent tragedy is to prevent people from living in vulnerable areas. Even that might not be enough. Fire is a part of the ecosystems of California. There’s no changing that.

    • You burn it in sections when the air is damp, and the winds are not accelerated and heated by adiabatic compression. It should be done regularly so you make sure the areas that have the worst wind problems are never allowed to reach a critical mass. The Camp Fire Area should be burnt in sections where you burnt the majority of it, over a 20 year period, a section at a time. If that was done it would never burn out of control. It has to be a continuous process. And it should be paid for by the people that choose to live in the area, through taxes. The home owners insurance should be based on cleaning up the area around your home. You should pay more if you want to risk trees burning in the proximity of your home.
      A wild fire needs fuel and a wind that is driving it into more fuel. If you are creating fire breaks before the event, the one that happens during the worst conditions will still be manageable because you can contain it when it drives itself into an area without enough fuel to keep it going.

  33. I am curious here.
    What is your take on this …

    OPERATION TORCH CALIFORNIA: A Special Report of the Firestorm Terror Operations.
    It is said that, “California “wildfires” line up EXACTLY in the same path as the “California High Speed rail System.”
    Who is firebombing california & why ??

    Very little Climate Change has to do with this ??

  34. Well I am not exactly blessed as I am a 60+ old white guy but I have seen and heard this “Bushfire” (Wildfire) argument about 20 or 30 times over my life. I really mean I have observed this phenomena that many times.
    The argument hardly changes. One side says cut back the fuel load (the only constant I know that creates the ensuing havoc and loss of life) and the other says no way we must look after the environment.
    Then it happens and unfortunately the Brown’s of the world seize the opportunity to blame CC.
    I am loathe to speak ill of other counry’s Pollies but Brown is an A Grade idiot.
    At least he can be drawn and quartered in 2023, or is that another tipping point that has ongoing error bars the like of which I have never seen!!
    This is a big battle folks!

  35. As a very rich retiree, Jerry Brown can retreat to behind his privileged, gated community barricades and feign total deafness to any pleas from other Americans for sanity to correct the demise in their quality of life brought about by his public energy and immigration social policies.

  36. 20th Century Democide – University of Hawaii

    Just to give perspective on this incredible murder by government, if all these bodies were laid head to toe, with the average height being 5′, then they would circle the earth ten times. Also, this democide murdered 6 times more people than dies in all the foreign & international wars of the century. Finally, given popular estimated of the dead in a major nuclear war, this total democide is as though such a war did occur, but with its dead spread over a century.

    These tactics are not new, they are the tactics inflicted upon the people of Palestine by Israel.
    The Electronic Intifada by Ali Abunimah is a good place to look.

  37. I’m tired of having retarded egotists in government.

    We need to start testing these (Snipped) and require a degree.

  38. Re. health care , I recall reading about Challenncer Bismark of 1880 teees Germany sad, For a greater Germany it is important t that a man has a reasonable waage, has a house to live in, , and is in good health (Women did not get a mention back then.)

    n 1942 when he US was calling men up for military service, a very high percentage were rejected as physically unfit, the result of the Gr eat Depression and a lack of affordable health car e.

    So if you want a country which is fit to take the shocks and kncks of todays
    workd, ensure that there is a affordable and good health care system.

    By the way Bismark was very right wing, but he knew what was good for Germany.


    • First off, having money does not make one right wing.
      The claim that adequate nutrition and health care are necessary for there to be enough young men suitable for sending to war, is not evidence that government is the best way to achieve this goal.

      If you want to make it possible for people to afford to eat and have health care, the only way to do this is to increase the average wealth of the population. You do this by getting government out of the way, not by making government even bigger and more intrusive.

  39. “War on Skeptics!”

    In a few years only lackies, lick-spittles, toadies and gratuitous sycophants will be deemed able to make up their ‘own’ mind, and to have their ‘own’ opinion, or be worthy of a license for using ‘free’ speech or permit-ed to associate with approved persons, or buy an iPhoney EleventyNGx.

  40. Please view Juan Browne’s video from 17th November 2018. He shows in a couple of minutes, just just how the last 60 years of forestry mismanagement created the fuel loads for wildfires.

    As was the case in November 2017, it’s possible that PG & E Recloser devices were the cause of this years’s “Camp” disaster.

  41. Gov. Brown leaves a legacy of ashes, literally and figuratively.
    And California just elected his less intelligent more extreme protege.
    Think of Venezuela’s Chavez followed by Maduro.
    I am going to really find a way to get my son and his family out of there.

  42. Moonbeam never was in contact with reality. That has not changed.

    If he’s right and people are that stupid, expect massive death and misery. I guess that’s his goal, based on looking at California right now.

  43. A very sad state of affairs.
    It is NOT my fault because once a year I drive my pickup the 2800 km total to visit my sister and the 5600 km total to visit my stepson.
    It is -32 C this morning, the truck will run at least 10 minutes before heading out today. I will also be heating my house, with low carbon hydroelectric power, that you don’t even recognise as renewable energy.
    You government officials really should try to learn about how things actually work in life, like proper forestry practices, before spewing nonsense and gibberish.

  44. In 2016 we passed the ‘Tipping Point’ and we are all miraculously alive and thriving as far as climate is concerned. The predictors of climate disaster are still enjoying their seaside mansions, flying to conferences in private jets, driving in limos and telling us we have to accept the world’s most expensive and unreliable power that cannot lower carbon emissions and we must at all cost stand in the way of nuclear, fracking, natural gas and even the transmission of hydraulic power from Canada. We have to accept penance for being the world’s freest and most successful country by sending jobs overseas to the world’s greatest polluters and producers of carbon emissions and pollution. We must accept the dictate that the world is overheating and will become uninhabitable no matter what historic evidence says and how badly models perform even though they are the only ‘Proof’ of a theory.

  45. Is there a way of holding Brown to that statement? AGW makes outrages statements, makes policies based on those statements … then nothing happens. Only in the minds of the deranged… let’s send some kids on a totally safe Arctic excursion. See! There’s no ice! The models say so! Yes, the fire is tragic, however building with trees next to your property is never a good idea. Further being in a forest, I didn’t see one fire wall around any property. It stops the blowing embers from reaching the house. And with trees that burn with the intensity of gasoline, I’d have the distance to the nearest tree far enough away so the house doesn’t burn from the heat. The result of that fire, climate change or plain stupidity?

  46. He is referring to the next over reach Presidency and hinting at the possibility of re-education camps for fact checkers of political climate change.

  47. Never underestimate climate change as the Swiss Army Knife of political gamesmanship. It can either be used to deflect mismanagement and culpability in the case of forest management or it can be used to generate major new revenue for high speed rail mileage to nowhere and any other spending need that the elite need to cover. And can even be used simultaneously in the cases above, which makes it a very special tool in the absence of competency. You can even use it while blaming PG&E. The uses are endless for any devious minded user in power.

  48. This is the guy who counseled the Pope on global warming and the handy uses of it in sidestepping other policy problems like sex abuse in the Catholic Church. The tactics look familiar.

  49. He is correct!
    The “worst skeptics” are the worst because they believe what they are told, without checking the data that supports the supposition. Their level of skepticism is so low that it is insignificant. Just like the level of change we are imposing on the climate. It exists, but it is at a level that is insignificant.
    And in five more years of insignificant change the worst skeptics will still believe what the climate astrologers tell them to believe.
    So for once Moonbeam stumbled into the truth. Must have been a Freudian slip.

  50. Jerry Brown and many others should do a search of the NY Times archives or other digitized national paper for years 1933 to 1936 using key words temperature and drought. You get lots of hits and it will sound a like the present. Not just drought will be in the hits, but record temperatures in California. What is happening is not unique. My prediction is 5 to 10 years from now science will have a black eye over their predictions.

  51. Why wait five years when they could convert many of us overnight with a simple external examination by an aggressive panel demanding answers to the hundreds of perfectly reasonable questions instead of using vile associative insults like the use of denier with its Nazi implications as currently happens to us.
    First question should be how dare you claim the science is beyond question given the spectacular failure rate where blind guesses will produce better results than climate science by a dramatic margin.

  52. Hello, Governor Brown, you can keep your “five years” and take with you my three, not-too-original, words: winter is coming.

  53. “In Less than Five Years, Even the Worst Skeptics Will Be Believers”

    As a very bad skeptic that Governor Moonbeam is heterosexual, I think he will come out as a flaming sodomite in less than five years.

  54. I don’t care for your Governor’s attitude about this. He is using climate change to deflect responsibility. And his previous comments about climate skeptics where downright irrational. Whether CA wildfires are or are not caused by climate change, climate skeptics beliefs are not the cause of the fires.

  55. Obviously untrue. Over the next five years, nothing much is supposed to happen, according to climate scientists. It could even cool a little, if natural variation us greater than the CO2 forcing.

    If there is really significant change though then that will DISPROVE AGW because that’s really not in the forecasts.

  56. What is this rainmaker saying ? If you build more solar panels the rain will return and no more fires ?
    Tar and feather him !

Comments are closed.