Joe Biden on the West Coast Fires: “climate change poses an imminent, existential threat to our way of life”

Democrat Presidential wannabe Joe Biden. By David Lienemann – White House (V011013DL-0556), Public Domain, Link

Guest essay by Eric Worrall

According to Joe Biden, the fires raging on the West Coast of the USA are a sign that climate change is an existential threat to our way of life.

However Biden is ignoring decades of West Coast forest management failures.

Fires show climate change an existential threat, says Biden

11:07PM SEPTEMBER 13, 2020

Dense smog from US bushfires that have burnt more than 2 million hectares and killed 31 people smothered the West Coast on Saturday (Sunday AEST), as presidential challenger Joe Biden warned climate change is becoming an existential issue.

US officials girded for the possibility of further deaths as wide stretches of land in California, Oregon and Washington remained cut off by flames fuelled by tinder-dry conditions of the kind caused by climate change.

“The science is clear, and deadly signs like these are unmistakeable — climate change poses an imminent, existential threat to our way of life,” said Mr Biden, the Democratic nominee who will face President Donald Trump at the polls on November 3.

“President Trump can try to deny that reality, but the facts are undeniable.”

Read more:

The following was published in 2019 by Cal Fire:

Community Wildfire Prevention & Mitigation Report

In response to Executive Order N-05-19

Executive Summary

California experienced the deadliest and most destructive wildfires in its history in 2017 and 2018. Fueled by drought, an unprecedented buildup of dry vegetation and extreme winds, the size and intensity of these wildfires caused the loss of more than 100 lives, destroyed thousands of homes and exposed millions of urban and rural Californians to unhealthy air.

Climate change, an epidemic of dead and dying trees, and the proliferation of new homes in the wildland urban interface (WUI) magnify the threat and place substantially more people and property at risk than in preceding decades. More than 25 million acres of California wildlands are classified as under very high or extreme fire threat, extending that risk over half the state.

Certain populations in our state are particularly vulnerable to wildfire threats. These Californians live in communities that face near-term public safety threats given their location. Certain residents are further vulnerable given factors such as age and lack of mobility. The tragic loss of life and property in the town of Paradise during the recent Camp Fire demonstrates such vulnerability.

Recognizing the need for urgent action, Governor Gavin Newsom issued Executive Order N-05-19 on January 9, 2019. The Executive Order directs the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE), in consultation with other state agencies and departments, to recommend immediate, medium and long-term actions to help prevent destructive wildfires.

With an emphasis on taking necessary actions to protect vulnerable populations, and recognizing a backlog in fuels management work combined with finite resources, the Governor placed an emphasis on pursuing a strategic approach where necessary actions are focused on California’s most vulnerable communities as a prescriptive and deliberative endeavor to realize the greatest returns on reducing risk to life and property.

Using locally developed and vetted fire plans prepared by CAL FIRE Units as a starting point, CAL FIRE identified priority fuel reduction projects that can be implemented almost immediately to protect communities vulnerable to wildfire. It then considered socioeconomic characteristics of the communities that would be protected, including data on poverty levels, residents with disabilities, language barriers, residents over 65 or under five years of age, and households without a car.

In total, CAL FIRE identified 35 priority projects that can be implemented immediately to help reduce public safety risk for over 200 communities. Project examples include removal of hazardous dead trees, vegetation clearing, creation of fuel breaks and community defensible spaces, and creation of ingress and egress corridors. These projects can be implemented immediately if recommendations in this report are taken to enable the work. Details on the projects and CAL FIRE’s analysis can be found online at , which will remain updated in the coming months. The list of projects is attached to this report as Appendix C.

CAL FIRE has also worked with over 40 entities including government and non- government stakeholders to identify administrative, regulatory and policy actions that can be taken in the next 12 months to begin systematically addressing community vulnerability and wildfire fuel buildup through rapid deployment of resources. Implementing several of these recommended actions is necessary to execute the priority fuel reduction projects referenced above. Other recommendations are intended to put the state on a path toward long- term community protection, wildfire prevention, and forest health.

The recommendations in this report, while significant, are only part of the solution. Additional efforts around protecting lives and property through home hardening and other measures must be vigorously pursued by government and stakeholders at all levels concurrently with the pursuit of the recommendations in this report. California must adopt an “all of the above” approach to protectingpublic safety and maintaining the health of our forest ecosystems.

It is important to note that California faces a massive backlog of forest management work. Millions of acres are in need of treatment, and this work— once completed—must be repeated over the years. Also, while fuels treatment such as forest thinning and creation of fire breaks can help reduce fire severity, wind-driven wildfire events that destroy lives and property will very likely still occur.

This report’s recommendations on priority fuel reduction projects and administrative, regulatory, and policy changes can protect our most vulnerable communities in the short term and place California on a trajectory away from increasingly destructive fires and toward more a moderate and manageable fire regime.

Read more:

Governor Newsom last year briefly admitted there is a problem with forestry management when he issued executive order N-05-19:- “… California has arrived at our present emergency condition through the combined factors of fire exclusion, forest management policies which created overgrown and overcrowded forests, a rapidly changing climate, and a historic drought with accompanying bark beetle epidemics; …”. But now Newsom, like Biden, seems to have gone back to focussing on climate change, instead of addressing the real problem.

Even if climate change is responsible for a drying trend, this does not detract from a far more pressing need for West Coast governors to take forest management seriously.

Building wind turbines won’t fix failed forest management policies, except maybe in the forests which are clear felled to make way for new wind farms.

Fire safety is not rocket science. Fires can only exist where there is something to burn. If you get rid of the flammable stuff in places where fires might pose a threat to life or property, you end up with a substantially reduced fire risk and safer forests, regardless of what happens to the local or global climate.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
September 13, 2020 10:18 pm

The vast majority of the public forest land is managed and mismanaged by the Federal government, headed by both Dems and Republicans like your hero Trump. Mismanagement there certainly has been at all levels, but the Federal gov bears the most responsibility as it owns the most land. The lands have been managed to maximize profit not lives. That is what must change.

Reply to  Eric Lerner
September 14, 2020 2:05 am

Are the Democrats really this crazy?

From Brian Peckford’s blog (Brian Peckford is former Premier of Newfoundland and Labrador)

Michael Anton
Democrats are laying the groundwork for revolution right in front of our eyes.

As if 2020 were not insane enough already, we now have Democrats and their ruling class masters openly talking about staging a coup. You might have missed it, what with the riots, lockdowns and other daily mayhem we’re forced to endure in this, the most wretched year of my lifetime. But it’s happening.

September 14, 2020 5:08 am

Thanks for the link to that. Now I need a strong drink. 🙂

September 14, 2020 5:56 am

Biden will lead the coup, but first someone must wake him from his nap.

September 14, 2020 2:10 pm

“Vote Joe or we’ll have such a hissy-fit!”
– The Atlantic

Vote Biden in, or else? Atlantic op-ed warns Dems will be unable to concede so to stop riots, vote Joe
September 14, 2020

In the latest liberal take on a potential Democrat defeat in November, “law-and-order” Republicans are being urged to vote for Joe Biden to avoid riots that will be triggered by President Trump’s reelection.

Joel Snider
September 14, 2020 3:20 pm

‘Are the Democrats really this crazy?’


Damiel kampo
September 15, 2020 5:07 pm

Yes they are that NUTS !! Trump 2020 2024 2028 2032

Reply to  Eric Lerner
September 14, 2020 2:08 am

Covid-19 was less dangerous than the seasonal flus of 2014/15, 2016/17 and 2017/18 that nobody remembers. The full-Gulag lockdown for Covid-19 was an error and probably a fraud – the intent of the fraud is to defeat Trump in November 2020. The full fraud includes phony global warming (aka climate change), phony green energy (aka California rolling blackouts), the Covid-19 full-Gulag lockdown that crushed the economy and Democrat-paid-and-planned riots by Antifa and BLM- it’s all lies concocted by wolves to stampede the sheep.

September 14, 2020 3:17 am

Who cares if the west coast states burn? They’re just full of liberals and their San Francisco values. Don’t worry Trump has gutted the postal service, selectively purged the election rolls and most of the swing states have been gerrymandered to ensure a red victory. There’s no way the libtards will win come November. Next up, the supreme court and the 22nd amendment. 12 MORE YEARS! 12 MORE YEARS!

Reply to  Steve45
September 14, 2020 6:01 am

Sometimes stupid and ignorance can be fixed with education. Anyway, lots of people care because we are all the people of the United States.

Reply to  Scissor
September 14, 2020 2:18 pm

I agree. The only way to inoculate ordinary folks against the drivel spouted by the eggheads with their PhDs is to educate people.

September 14, 2020 7:55 am

CoVid19 less dangerous ? The closures and restrictions have resulted in the average person being exposed to potential viral sources by say a factor of 10 or more. August relaxations of group sizes and allowed public activities have resulted in cases increasing again to April highs in yours and my home town of Calgary, for example. From this I glean that CoVid is very contagious but restricting contacts to some percentage of normal is effective at preventing health care facilities and undertakers from being overloaded. In fact, exposure reduction is so effective that the anticipated case loads extrapolated from initial outbreaks in China, Italy, and Spain have been much lower here. However, by the time 4 or 5 years go by assuming no vaccine, the total percentage of the population infected will likely be the same. Therefore, if voluntary exposure reduction is being followed by most of the population, it is ridiculous to take draconian legal measures.

Reply to  DMacKenzie
September 14, 2020 7:57 am

sorry, meant to say……exposure reduced by a factor of 10 or more.

Reply to  DMacKenzie
September 14, 2020 11:55 am

Covid-19 is very contagious but not dangerous except to the very elderly and infirm – the CDC published that only 6% of Covid-19 deaths in the USA did NOT involve serious comorbidities. The old folks were typically into the last year of their lives.

September 14, 2020 7:42 pm

Clueless”doctor” macrae again
So the elderly don’t matter because they don’t have many years left?

Pain and suffering don’t matter?

What’s wrong with you?

Virtually all flu deaths involve adults with other heath problems, although some people and their doctors may not KNOW of their medical problems. Huge numbers of people are not aware they have high blood pressure, diabetes or heart disease. Sometimes the first symptom of heart disease is death — I lost a 50 something friend that way. And a friends husband had pancreatic cancer and didn’t know it until one month before he died.

A perfectly healthy person dying from influenza is very unlikely.

September 14, 2020 7:49 pm

And the medical profession has found better regimes of treatment. For example the much vaunted Henry Ford Study that excited HCQ “believers” also showed (way down second line from the bottom of their results table) that steroids improved treatment outcomes significantly.

September 14, 2020 8:34 pm

Now you are changing your tune Richard Greene. It’s clear you don’t know what you are talking about – you are arm-waving, tilting at windmills.

The Covid-19 lockdown “cure” was much worse than the disease – the lockdown did not save lives, it cost lives and it continues to do so – and these are young lives. One estimate said the lockdown is costing “years of life lost” at a ratio 25 times greater than the Covid-19 flu.

Leftists and other simpletons think you get to choose between good and bad – you don’t. In real life, you often have to choose between bad and worse – between lockdown and no lockdown. Sweden has already proved that “no lockdown” was the better choice.

Your arguments lack any attempt to examine useful data or contemplate rational thought – you just repeat the destructive hysteria of the worthless mainstream media.

September 15, 2020 4:50 pm

Sweden had lock downs Mr clueless macrae, in spite of what you falsely imply in one of your non-expert Covid assertions.

They closed high schools and colleges.

They didn’t close businesses but Swedish people voluntarily avoided businesses where social distancing was impossible and the store was not a mandatory stop, like a supermarket. The Swrdish real GDP declined in the first half of 2020 with voluntary behaviors –Swedish people avoiding risk. That was a voluntary business lockdown.

Amazing how you think you are a Covid expert when the pandemic is not over yet !

Pat from kerbob
Reply to  DMacKenzie
September 14, 2020 8:41 pm

I too live in calgary
I see that we had a record of new “cases” the other day, +400
Following other big days
And yet today in all of AB there are 37 people in hospital
Down from mid 40’s last week

For a population over 4 million

And you’re scared?
Of what?

September 14, 2020 9:37 am

Nonsense MACREA
Covid 19 is still in progress so it is too soon for comparisons with influenza in other seasons.

No one dies from flu. It is not a cause of death on the CDC”s over 100 causes of death list. People die from major organ failures, accidents or homicides. The number of deaths attributed to flu is a CDC wild guess based on computer models. Most doctors believe the CDC grossly overe estimated flu deaths in the past. That may happen again for Covid19, but the death count is still in progress and it will take time to evaluate the “final” numbers.

Covid sends a highet percentage of victims to the hospital and ICU than seasonal influenza in the past. The number of deaths estimated so far is already higher than any other seasonal influenza since 1918. Only a f o o l would claim Covid19 was less dangerous than prior seasonal influenza.

The negative health effects of the Covid partial lockdowns adds to the medical effects of the Covid virus itself.

Reply to  Richard Greene
September 14, 2020 10:43 am

No one dies from flu.

No one dies from the car wreck either. (its the impact trauma as well as other peripheral tearing, ripping and blood loss)

No one dies from an airplane crash. (its the impact trauma)

No one dies from the cancer. (its the loss of blood & nutrients, loss of blood function, blockages, and infections ….)

Reply to  DonM
September 14, 2020 6:04 pm

Flu is not a direct cause of death for a death certificate.
Read the CDC complete list of about 110 items and fond “flu”
to prove me wrong. Your comment just sounds silly.

Reply to  Richard Greene
September 14, 2020 11:47 am

Richard Greene: IF you actually looked at the data, you would see you are dead wrong. Look up Excess Winter Mortality. About more 100,000 MORE American citizens die every winter, typically the flu is a major cause – it’s called Excess Winter Mortality.

by Joseph d’Aleo and Allan MacRae, September 4, 2015

The real Covid-19 vs seasonal flu’s situation is as depicted in Figure 1 – the area under the curve shows total deaths from all causes:
comment image

Covid-19 was no more dangerous than the seasonal flus of 2014/15, 2016/17 and 2017/18 that nobody remembers. The full-Gulag lockdown for Covid-19 was a huge error – Sweden has now proved that fact. The full-lockdown was probably also a fraud.

The full-Gulag Covid-19 lockdown was originally intended to prevent the “tsunami of cases from swamping our medical system” – A TSUNAMI OF CASES that NEVER HAPPENED! Medical people knew this reality by about mid-March, ~two weeks into the lockdown, but our Alberta hospitals were essentially emptied for over two months! One 600-bed Calgary hospital had a maximum of six Covid-cases, and typically only 2 or 3. A wasteful debacle!

Since then, the goalposts have been moved and the Covid-19 lockdown has been extended through today, about six months, and has squandered trillions of dollars and harmed billions of people, and for what? The lockdown has NOT saved lives – all it has done is prolong the life of the virus by delaying herd immunity – it will probably allow the virus to continue into the next flu season and perhaps even to mutate.

September 14, 2020 7:33 pm

More nonsense macrea
Excess deaths is meaningless for flu because such a tiny percentage of infected people die, even with Covid. And the flu deaths are a CDC wild guess based on computer models. Flu is not one of CDC”s 110 death certificate causes of death.

Herd immunity? No nation is even close and no nation will ever be close. For the US herd immunity would require at least 20000 to 40000 more deaths. Is that what you want macrae?

September 15, 2020 3:57 am

By Paula Liu

September 2, 2020

September 15, 2020 4:34 am

7 September 2020. Updated 8 September 2020.
Paul Kirkham, Professor of cell Biology and Head of Respiratory Disease Research Group at Wolverhampton University
Dr Mike Yeadon, former CSO and VP, Allergy and Respiratory Research Head with Pfizer Global R&D and co-Founder of Ziarco Pharma Ltd
Barry Thomas, Epidemiologist

Executive Summary
Evidence presented in this paper indicates that the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 pandemic as an event in the UK is ESSENTIALLY COMPLETE, with ongoing and anticipated challenges well within the capacity of a normalised NHS to cope. The virus infection has passed through the bulk of the population as a result of wholly natural processes and evidence indicates that in the UK and other heavily infected European countries the spread of the virus has been all but halted by a substantial reduction in the susceptible population. This has occurred because the level of infection required to introduce enough immunity into the population to reduce the reproduction number (R) permanently below 1 occurred at markedly lower infection rates and loss of life than had been initially anticipated. The evidence presented in this paper indicates that there should be no expectation of a large scale ‘second wave’ with smaller localised outbreaks when the virus contacts pockets of previously uninfected populations.
Current mass testing using the PCR test is inappropriate in its current form. If it is to continue, then results and reporting should be refined to meet the gold standard of testing methodology to give clinicians improved information so that they are able to make appropriate clinical decisions. Positive tests should be confirmed by testing a second sample and all positive tests should be reported along with the Cycle Threshold (Ct) obtained during the test to aid assessment of a patient’s viral load.
It is recommended that a greater focus be placed on evidence-based medicine rather than highly sensitive theoretical modelling based on assumptions and unknowns. Current evidence allows for a greatly improved understanding of positive infectious patients and using the evidence to improve measurements and understanding can lead to sensitive measurements of active cases to give a more accurate warning of escalating cases and potential issues and outbreaks.

September 15, 2020 5:12 pm

Probably nearly everyone who is said to gave died from flu, a CDC computer model wild guess, has less than perfect health, but may not know it yet. So many people have high blood pressure or diabetes and don’t know it.

A fifth friend who tested positive for Covid and was sick was advised by us that he tests are not that accurate. Her next two tests were negative. She”s really sick with flu-like symptoms but not Covid. Her boyfriend was Covid positive but only mild symptoms. Both about 70 years old.

The negative health and economic effects of partial lock downs might have made sense in some urban areas for a montj ot two where people travel on crowded subways and busses.
But for rural areas and suburbs I don’t get it. In time it will be possible to estimate the total health and economic costs of partial lockdowns.

Given how many American deaths have been attributed to Covid, assuming the numbers are realistic, the US / 50 states policies were not a success, especially in NYC and surrounding states.

But Covid flu is already worse than any prior flu since 1918, based on death pain and suffering. and iit is still in progress. Adding negative health effects from partial lockdowns and unemployment just makes the damage worse.

willem post
Reply to  Eric Lerner
September 14, 2020 5:54 am

I have written extensively on the CO2 released just after clearcutting.
This article has 5 examples of CO2 released, due to clearcutting

In northern climates, it takes about 35 years for the CO2 to get back to neutral
The initial CO2 release, due to belowground biomass decay, is very high, and the decay is on-going for about 80 to 100 years.
The released CO2 far exceeds any CO2 absorbed by the regrowth on the HARVESTED AREA.
That negative condition continues for about 17 years.
But to offset that negative condition, and get back to neutral, regrowth on the HARVESTED AREA needs to take place for another 17 to 18 years

The decay CO2 is entirely independent from 1) combustion CO2, and 2) harvesting and other CO2.
Combustion CO2 of year 1 would have to wait for 35 years to start being absorbed, which takes about 80 – 100 years.

The harvesting and other CO2, due to 1) logging, 2) chipping, 3) transport, 4) in-plant processing, and 5) plant operations other than combustion, etc., is like all other CO2.

However, in the real world, a logger would come along, sees 40-y-old trees, and cuts them down; veni, vidi, vici; i.e., the CO2 absorption process is CUT SHORT.

The logging industry continues to claim, without blushing: “Burning wood is renewable”.

Reply to  willem post
September 14, 2020 12:46 pm

OK. But remember that logging companies don’t cut trees for the fun of it. They make lumber which is used to build needed homes and apartments to house people. I don’t think clear cutting is the norm, and it is pretty obvious that good forest management will reduce fires, loss of life, and loss of property. Over the next 100 yrs, technology may bring all kinds of carbon capture technologies or adaptive mitigations for GW (assuming it turns out to be a serious issue, which even the IPCC underlying reports aren’t clear on). For right now, seems we should clear brush and log responsibly.

Reply to  Eric Lerner
September 14, 2020 6:41 am

It was not Trump who diminished forest management back in the 70s. It took 40 years to accumulate the biomass/fuel for fires to get intensely hot and hard to put out.

In fact, Trump has changed the Federal forest policies and is revitalizing the lumber industry on Federal land to thin and clear the forests. Our media is mute on the good things he has done. Shame on them.

Interesting that you try to include Trump in these bad policies when he is the only one who has done anything useful in decades.

Then, you have the state policies that Trump cannot change. Neusom (CA) is only now trying to do emergency measures based on social justice, with no real imposition of ongoing general forest management.

Want to protect ALL people at risk? Let them all cut fire breaks around their homes and this loss of property and life will end.

Tim Gorman
Reply to  Charles Higley
September 14, 2020 2:31 pm


Damiel kampo
Reply to  Charles Higley
September 15, 2020 5:18 pm

Great !! Post 😊U.S. needs Trump

Reply to  Eric Lerner
September 14, 2020 6:58 am

If the lands were being managed for profit, then there would be extensive logging.

Why do progressives feel that they can get away with the most baseless of lies?

Reply to  Eric Lerner
September 14, 2020 7:05 am

If this year is anything like the last couple of years, the vast majority of fires start on state or private land.

Joel Snider
Reply to  Eric Lerner
September 14, 2020 7:45 am

This year, we’ve added arson to the mismanagement – it’s the BLM/ANTIFA fire season.

Joel Snider
Reply to  Joel Snider
September 14, 2020 11:03 am

AND just heard a news clip – a guy just got arrested for arson for the second time in a week.

Funny that he was let out to get busted a second time. And I’ll bet these weren’t the only two he’s set.

But I’m sure Governor Burn-it-down-Brown won’t find any evidence of arson.

Joel Snider
Reply to  Joel Snider
September 14, 2020 3:21 pm

AND just announced EIGHT MORE SUSPICIOUS FIRES started just this morning.

This has Jack to do with climate – this is terrorism.

Reply to  Eric Lerner
September 14, 2020 8:56 am

I beg to differ. We drove through the West and Northwest in 2019 and saw many instances of good forest management. In Rocky Mountain National Park, for instance, we saw hundreds of piles of forest litter, fallen trees, and limbs in piles all visible from the roads throughout the park. I asked a ranger about them and was told that they would be burned in the winter in safe and controlled conditions as part of good forest management, removing fuel from the forest floor. This is obviously federal policy, and is being done under my hero, Trump. MUCH better policy than is being done under Dem Newsome in the failed state of CA. Get you facts straight.

Reply to  DrEd
September 14, 2020 9:14 am

Your facts disagree with his talking points memo. Guess which one the progressive is going to chose to belive.

Reply to  Eric Lerner
September 14, 2020 11:06 am


The feds may own the land, but just like any land owned by anyone, the state has ultimate jurisdiction. After all, our country is a federation of states. Whenever the feds want to allow logging, controlled burns or anything else related to proper forest management, the Sierra club sues and keeps it tied up in the courts until the far left state courts ultimately rule in their favor. Some landowners in forested areas can’t even cut down a dead tree without bundles of red tape, potentially even preventing the ability to maintain defensible space.

Your echoing the typical socialist narrative that profit is the enemy, like most of what these idiots push, is nothing but disingenuous nonsense designed to accumulate power and control by fooling the gullible into thinking that the government will actually take care of them and that the corporations who provide them with jobs and a paycheck are intrinsically evil. Socialism always fails because once the propaganda stops working, and it always will, the only way to shut down dissent against its repressive policies is with brutal oppression.

Michael C. Roberts
Reply to  Eric Lerner
September 14, 2020 12:25 pm

Mr. Lerner – Really, now? “Like your hero Trump”? If you are implying that a Commander in Chief (CiC) such as President Trump has, through his administrative forest mismanagement created the forest conditions that have lead to trees killed by Pine Bark Beetles, as well as the build-up of forest floor ‘duff’ and other tree-related detritus that have accumulated to become a fire fuel source, well…President Trump is the most efficient person in creating forest conditions ripe for support conflagrations in the history of our Fair Planet!!!

As you may recall – if not not let me remind you -Fact 1: President Trump has been CiC since early 2017 (elected NOV 2016). Fact 2: Forest floor fuel build-up, to the extent seen in West Coast CONUS federal forests, takes a considerably longer time period than a mere 3-4 years. Even More Fun Fact 3: For 8 years prior to President Trump’s inauguration, a President aligned with the Democrat (read: Communist) Party was CiC…..By your ‘logic’, forest conditions leading to today’s fires would have been more created through the policy choices of an 8-year term CiC versus a 3-4 year term CiC, yes?

However, I must concur with your statement ‘The vast majority of the public forest land is managed and mismanaged by the Federal government, headed by both Dems and Republicans”, but I cannot concur with your attribution to the Trump Administration retaining sole liability for said mismanagement.

Just to be clear.



Reply to  Eric Lerner
September 14, 2020 6:10 pm

No, Joey, you are the threat….because you don’t have any clue what you are talking about.

September 13, 2020 10:19 pm

Funny how ‘climate change’ fires obey state lines…..

Reply to  Chaswarnertoo
September 14, 2020 12:30 am

Yes. Is there any climate change of any kind happening elsewhere in the US?

David Brewer
Reply to  Chaswarnertoo
September 14, 2020 8:36 am

I’ve wondered the same thing myself. It’s truly amazing how all the forests in the rest of the world seem disinclined to burn more savagely because of “climate change” making them more severe.

September 13, 2020 10:20 pm

Thirty years, Joe. Thirty years. Drop your cargo cult science. Deny your Twilight faith. Lose your Pro-Choice, selective, opportunistic, politically congruent religion.

Shanghai Dan
September 13, 2020 10:44 pm

It’s not Climate Change, slow Joe – it’s your pals, ANTIFA:

They are taking credit for them, and so far all the arrests in WA and OR (CA is too timid to arrest people) are ANTIFA related.

Reply to  Shanghai Dan
September 14, 2020 4:33 am

“Democrats are starting fires all over the country”

If this is going to be the Republican’s election slogan then it’s effectively a scorched earth policy. Wow, I didn’t think politics could get any more polarized. Vale USA. The only thing that’ll stop China now is a Carrington event.

Reply to  Loydo
September 14, 2020 6:08 am

Marxists, that are in many cases the same as Demo☭rats, have been chanting in the streets about burning things to the ground for months now.

They would burn it all down to rule over the ashes.

Reply to  Scissor
September 14, 2020 6:49 am

I don’t think it matters which hairball is elected, it will be a Pyrrhic victory. The ‘victor’ will have a pandemic, a healthcare crisis, a depression, mass unemployment, a population who’ve forgotten how to produce food, an eye-watering debt, a civil war and an erratic climate.

Reply to  Loydo
September 14, 2020 8:00 am

Amazing how many items in that list of problems were started by progressives.

Joel Snider
Reply to  Loydo
September 14, 2020 9:25 am

‘Amazing how many items in that list of problems were started by progressives.’

Which suggests that THEY are the only real problem.

Reply to  Loydo
September 14, 2020 11:03 am

The climate is no more “erratic” than it was in prior years, decades, centuries, millennia.

Reply to  Loydo
September 14, 2020 7:00 am

Fascinating how violently progressives react when faced with reality.

Joel Snider
Reply to  Loydo
September 14, 2020 9:24 am

Sorry Loydo – scorched earth policy is the methods of the vote-for-us-or-we-riot fascist progressive movement, where ALL the polarization, division, and violence is coming from.

Reply to  Joel Snider
September 14, 2020 11:05 am

But you don’t understand. If Trump would just give the rioters everything they are demanding, they would stop rioting. That proves that Trump caused the riots. /sarc

Joel Snider
Reply to  Loydo
September 14, 2020 3:31 pm

Well Loydo, here in Oregon, last night a gentleman was busted for the second time in a week for arson.
Just this morning eight suspicious fires were started.

Yeah – progressive terrorists are doing this.

Shanghai Dan
Reply to  Loydo
September 14, 2020 8:12 pm

The truth stings sometimes, doesn’t it?

The truth is the Democrats want us to lose our reliable power, crank our costs for power and fuel sky-high, want to kill our capitalist economy, want to regulate our bodies (must wear a mask, gotta get a vaccine, no 32 oz. sodas, etc), and are willing to use violence (arson, riots, looting, shootings) to get what they want.

Yes, the truth stings. And a majority will vote against their insane policies and positions.

Matthew Schilling
Reply to  Loydo
September 15, 2020 6:37 am

So, it’s not awful that Leftists are committing arson, it’s awful that people are pointing out Leftist are committing arson. Got it, thanks!

Gordon A. Dressler
September 13, 2020 11:31 pm

Left unsaid by Joe: “. . . and therefore we have to tax the heck out of US citizens to fight it.”

Shanghai Dan
Reply to  Gordon A. Dressler
September 14, 2020 8:14 pm

No, he said it:

Your taxes are gonna be raised, not cut.

September 13, 2020 11:31 pm

Climate Change = Not their fault
Forest Management = Is their fault

It’s pretty obvious which a politician is going to blame and the greens will go along with it because they are complicit.

Craig from Oz
September 13, 2020 11:33 pm

Is it just me or is the most unbelievable thing about the Biden quote the fact that he actually said it?

That sentence has a beginning, middle, end and maintains direction from start to finish. I have series doubts Biden actually said it.

Thomas Englert
Reply to  Craig from Oz
September 14, 2020 12:04 am

That is exactly my thought upon hearing any of Joe’s campaign statements. You didn’t build that, Joe.

It seems I read that only 1% of California was in drought in 2019. So drought is not the cause. Too much rain and snow is a likely contributor to the fires though.

Reply to  Craig from Oz
September 14, 2020 12:27 am

LOL. Considering he has trouble reading from a teleprompter, ya gotta wonder!

Bring on the debates…

Reply to  davidmhoffer
September 14, 2020 7:02 am

Slow Joe is now using a teleprompter to answer questions from friendly reporters. It’s almost like even his handlers don’t trust him to remember even the simple answers on his own.

Reply to  Craig from Oz
September 14, 2020 12:31 am

Dementia patients have their good and bad days..

Joe seems to be ok some of the time…. so long as he as a script to read from..

Izaak Walton
Reply to  Craig from Oz
September 14, 2020 12:32 am

How many series? Perhaps people in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones.

Right-Handed Shark
Reply to  Izaak Walton
September 14, 2020 2:09 am

Shall we start counting your typos?

Reply to  Right-Handed Shark
September 14, 2020 3:20 am

Already noticed izzy’s incompetence at science. and total gullibility for any leftist agenda.

Reply to  fred250
September 14, 2020 7:03 am

I don’t know if it’s incompetence or merely the standard leftwing tendency to ignore anything that doesn’t get him more free stuff.

Reply to  Izaak Walton
September 14, 2020 7:03 am

If that’s the best you got, you should hang your head in shame.

Joel Snider
Reply to  MarkW
September 14, 2020 3:29 pm

Shame is not present in progressives.

Reply to  Craig from Oz
September 14, 2020 12:33 am

Just don’t let Joe near any little girls or boys..

They seem to lower his attention span on the words..

Reply to  Craig from Oz
September 14, 2020 12:33 am

”said it”
Read it…

Jim Whelan
Reply to  Craig from Oz
September 14, 2020 10:42 am

What Joe says has been crafted by a committee of “handlers”. He does actually say what he reads from the teleprompter or handheld notes.

September 13, 2020 11:38 pm

I know that in Australia some plants need the regular wildfires to germinate, is it the same in California, I.e. Wildfires are normal and flora has adapted?

Reply to  Bil
September 14, 2020 5:31 am


Reply to  Roger Caiazza
September 14, 2020 7:54 am

Thank you

John Culhane
September 13, 2020 11:47 pm

Dear voters,

When you cast your votes this November for the DNC we want you to know that the fires are caused by climate change and Mother Nature because President Trump. The DNC takes full responsibility for being setup by Mother Nature and denies that lack of stewardship by its members or domestic terrorists had anything to do with the spread of the fires and we certainly don’t want you to about the AGREEMENT FOR SHARED STEWARDSHIP OF CALIFORNIA’S FOREST AND RANGELANDS between the STATE OF CALIFORNIA and the USDA, FOREST SERVICE PACIFIC SOUTHWEST REGION.

September 13, 2020 11:54 pm

“Even if climate change is responsible for a drying trend, this does not detract from a far more pressing need for West Coast governors to take forest management seriously.”

I’m sure it is good for everyone to take it seriously. But who particularly? According to WUWT, no less:
The federal government through the U.S. Forest Service (USFS), Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and National Park Service owns about 19 million acres of the total 33 million acres of forestlands in the state of California representing about 57% of the forest areas. Private nonindustrial entities own about one‑quarter (8 million acres) acres of forestland. These include families, individuals, conservation and natural resource organizations, and Native American tribes. Industrial owners—primarily timber companies—own 14 percent (4.5 million acres) of forestland. State and local governments own about a 3 percent (1 million acres) combined. In total these non-federal entities represent about 43% of the states forest areas.”

Reply to  Nick Stokes
September 14, 2020 1:04 am

If its anything like in Australia, its the greenie agenda and ridiculous anti-logging, lock-the-gates, minimal burn-off rules by state and local councils that are a big part of the problem.

But I suspect you know that, Nick.

Reply to  fred250
September 14, 2020 1:06 am

“If its anything like in Australia”
It isn’t. 57% of the forest is owned and managed by the Federal Government.

Reply to  Nick Stokes
September 14, 2020 3:31 am

Those departments responsible will be still run by leftist incompetence.

Trump has SO MANY THINGS to fix from 8 years of neglect and leftist/socialist agenda under O’bummer.

Hopefully he will get another 4 years and it will not be marred by constant blocking and distractions by the far-left deep-state.

Wouldn’t you agree, Nick.

Reply to  Nick Stokes
September 14, 2020 4:37 am

Here in Victoria, Australia all authorities are responsible for protecting their assets.
If a school borders a park (say owned by council).
It is the education departments responsibility to assess the fire risk to the school and then create an action plan to reduce the risk.
The action plan would require them to request council to clear the park.
The council who owns the park would then have an action to keep the park clear.
So all authorities are responsible for fire protection.

I see nothing to indicate that Oregon and California are any different than Victoria.

Reply to  Nick Stokes
September 14, 2020 4:46 am

So Nick looking at the data the vast percentage of the areas burning is the wildland-urban interface so that is non federal forest. Hence why people are having to be evacuated and dying. So do you want a bet that the federal land area burnt is less than the others even while it has as you note 57%.

Reply to  LdB
September 14, 2020 7:07 am

Nick was corrected on this point last year.
No doubt he will have to be corrected on it again next year.
It’s almost like Nick doesn’t care what the truth is, he’s gonna keep repeating what he wants to believe.

Matthew Schilling
Reply to  Nick Stokes
September 15, 2020 6:34 am

And fires that start off of Fed owned land cannot, by force of law, come onto Fed owned land.
Or something.

Reply to  Nick Stokes
September 14, 2020 1:25 am

Nick you have given us a breakdown of land tenure, so who is responsible for the land that has burnt. That is the crux of the matter.

Reply to  aussiecol
September 14, 2020 1:39 am

Joe Biden, he was vice president of the Federal Government for 8 years.

Reply to  Loydo
September 14, 2020 3:33 am

But dementia Joe has never been “responsible” at any stage in his life.

Reply to  fred250
September 14, 2020 6:15 am

Pedophiles frequently blame the victim.

Reply to  aussiecol
September 14, 2020 5:04 am

Nick won’t answer than because it isn’t the USDF land that is burning which is why people and houses are at risk. The largest park burnt AFAIK is Big Basin Redwoods State Park which is a state park under the control of California’s Department of Parks and Recreation.

Reply to  LdB
September 14, 2020 11:20 am

State and local governments own about 1 million acres in total. The area burnt in California so far is about 3.5 million acres. It wasn’t all in State forests.

Mike Dubrasich
Reply to  Nick Stokes
September 14, 2020 12:33 pm

The Federal Government owns 45,864,800 acres in California, or 45.8% of all land in the state. That’s just the Feds. The State owns ~460,000 acres and has jurisdiction over another ~4,000,000 acres.

The acreage of Fed land burned to-date in 2020 in CA is 2,553,299 acres according to the NIFC (National Interagency Fire Center).

Mike Dubrasich
Reply to  Nick Stokes
September 14, 2020 12:39 pm

Correction: the Federal Government owns 45,864,800 acres in California, or 29% of all land in the state. CA has 158,000,000 acres total.

Reply to  Nick Stokes
September 14, 2020 1:06 pm

It’s not just government land that is burning. The state and local governments also control what private land owners are permitted to do with their land.

Reply to  Nick Stokes
September 14, 2020 6:22 pm

Nick so instead of making stupid claims how about you go get some data. Where you see houses being burnt it would rarely be USDF forest lands because they have the same situation as Australia. If it was USDF land burning I am also sure the whole MSM press retards would be all over Trump. From what we are told what is burning is private, state lands in the urban fringe.

Reply to  Nick Stokes
September 14, 2020 7:18 pm

“Where you see houses being burnt it would rarely be USDF forest lands”
The article here is about “decades of West Coast forest management failures”. It says there is “a far more pressing need for West Coast governors to take forest management seriously”. Forest management is the chosen issue, and if there is a failure there, it is by the people whose job it is to manage the forests. And that is overwhelmingly the Federal government, controlled by President Trump.

Reply to  Nick Stokes
September 15, 2020 12:29 am

If the USDF forest isn’t burning and the State controlled areas (no matter how small) are burning then the statement is correct … so if you have data to say that isn’t true present otherwise zip it troll. So put up or shut up.

Reply to  Nick Stokes
September 15, 2020 12:34 am

Griff is now claiming that 80% of the burnt area is private land and urban fringe scrub so again that would be State control they make those laws NOT the feds. You trolls need to sort out your posts.

Reply to  Nick Stokes
September 15, 2020 1:17 am

Should add published Feb research published makes interesting reading

First it explains that all private land comes under the control of the State same as in Australia. Secondly it recommended 20 Million acres be control burnt or about 1/5th of the state to stabilize its fire ecology.

Reply to  Nick Stokes
September 14, 2020 4:38 am

” State and local governments own about a 3 percent (1 million acres) combined.”

Irrelevant. CalFire is responsible for 30% of the fire management. Your first fallacy is using “forests” as criteria. Official forests are mostly federal. The proper criteria is wildland. Your second fallacy is presuming that CalFire is like the fire department. They are not. They are responsible for preventing fire and they have been grossly inadequate. Even Newsome admits that and has determined that they should do 33 times more fuel treatment. They did 3 times more last year (ending June 2020). A start but too little and too late.

Reply to  Nick Stokes
September 14, 2020 7:06 am

If it’s anything like the last couple of years, the vast majority of the fires are starting on state or private lands.

Reply to  MarkW
September 14, 2020 6:37 pm

Yes that is what it looks like only a couple of national forest lands have fires and as I said to Nick if it was USDF lands be sure the MSM press would be all over him.

September 13, 2020 11:57 pm

“Existential threat…”

As Inigo Montoya says, “You keep using that word phrase. I do not think it means what you think it means.”

Existential implies widespread death on a global scale. A 5-mile wide meteor smashing into earth is an existential threat. A 1° C temperature rise over the last century is not. Neither is a 1.5 or 2° C rise over the next, even if it were accurate.

Reply to  stinkerp
September 14, 2020 1:22 am

Said the man plumeting past the 13th floor.

Reply to  Loydo
September 14, 2020 3:05 am

…said the troll, pretending that there was an actual man actually plummeting past the 13th floor.

…said the troll, ignoring the fact that a quick scan of as many modern day elevator control panels as you wish proves that there is no 13th floor.

…said the troll, using modern climate change precision which in actual fact is only accurate to +/- 12 floors.

…said the troll, confusing a sudden and immediate impact resulting in death with an undefined “projection” that cannot be measured accurately since it takes decades if not centuries to unfold.

Reply to  davidmhoffer
September 14, 2020 3:59 am

Millenia David.
“we expect that 17– 33% of
the fossil fuel carbon will still reside in the atmosphere
1 kyr from now, decreasing to 10– 15% at 10 kyr, and 7%
at 100 kyr. The mean lifetime of fossil fuel CO2 is about
30– 35 kyr.

A hundred of them! If emitting so much CO2 was a mistake, there’s no fixing it. 12th floor, all good still.

Reply to  Loydo
September 14, 2020 5:01 am

Emitting CO2 is NOTHING BUT BENEFICIAL to the whole of the planets ecosystem

It invigorates the carbon cycle that provides for ALL LIFE ON EARTH.

Even gutter slime need CO2.

Reply to  Loydo
September 14, 2020 5:03 am

4 years, you poor scientifically inebriated twerp

Science has progressed since 2005, even if your mind hasn’t.

Reply to  Loydo
September 14, 2020 5:26 am

You aren’t going to stop China, Russia, India emitting. Unlike the west you activist can’t even go there to protest or get a voice without them throwing your stupid butt in a jail for decades if they want. They are going to burn fossil fuels regardless what you think or do because there is an economic incentive for them to do so.

You acknowledge you aren’t going to get any significant movement from the Australian voters for over a decade. You need all the brain washed youngsters to stay believers and a pile of the older people to pass to change the balance.

So do you have a plan B or do you just intend to bore us to death for a decade?

Reply to  Loydo
September 14, 2020 6:23 am

Bore you.

Reply to  Loydo
September 14, 2020 7:12 am

Emitting so much CO2 was not only not a mistake, we should be emitting more of it.

First off, you have yet to demonstrate that most of the warming over the last 200 years has been caused by CO2. (Especially considering the FACT that the vast majority of this warming occurred long before CO2 started to rise.
Secondly, you have yet to demonstrate that a few degrees of warming is even a problem, much less an “existential” one.
Thirdly, your an idiot.

Gordon A. Dressler
Reply to  Loydo
September 14, 2020 8:09 am

The article that you linked to provide support for the claimed lifetimes of CO2 in the air (including that from fossil fuels) talks about results from a MODEL “of the ocean and seafloor carbon cycle”.

I stopped reading the linked article when I first came across that word in the abstract.

Stupid me . . . I should have been tipped off when your quote started with “we expect . . .”

Joel Snider
Reply to  Loydo
September 14, 2020 2:15 pm

‘Bore you.’

Certainly no chance of learning anything.

Reply to  Loydo
September 14, 2020 2:25 pm

Keep up lads, don’t make me post a hockey stick.

Joel Snider
Reply to  Loydo
September 14, 2020 3:33 pm

‘Keep up lads, don’t make me post a hockey stick.’

As long as everyone’s clear that the sole reason for your presence here is to be a prick.

Reply to  Loydo
September 14, 2020 4:19 pm

Ha ha ha HA HA HAAAAA! Just because “some” CO2 may remain in the atmosphere for a long time (according to those oh-so-infallible computer models), doesn’t mean all of it does.

The mean atmospheric lifetime of CO2 is estimated to be between 30 and 95 years, but some of it (estimated to be 20%, again by computer models) may linger for thousands of years. That doesn’t mean that if it stopped increasing today at ~410 ppm and no “excess” CO2 was added that it would remain at ~410 ppm for thousands of years. In fact it would likely begin to decline very soon, but some portion of the CO2 in the atmosphere thousands of years from now may have been from now.

Reply to  Loydo
September 14, 2020 6:24 pm

So Loydo admits she is a troll with nothing remotely useful to post so it’s only fair we treat her as such.

Reply to  Loydo
September 14, 2020 9:51 pm

“don’t make me post a hockey stick”

Would be as meaningless and evidence-free as any of your other posts.

You live in a zero-knowledge fantasy world, Loy..

Reply to  Loydo
September 14, 2020 3:25 am

Says loy-doh as he gazed up out of his gutter. !

Do you live in LA do you, Loy… Lots of gutter dwellers there. !

Seeing as MUCH of the last 10,000 years has been significantly warmer than our current tiny blip from the coldest period in 10,000 years you have absolutely no evidence that a tiny amount more warming would be any less beneficial that the last little bit.

Reply to  fred250
September 14, 2020 6:54 am

Nah, its warmer now, look at the Arctic.

Reply to  Loydo
September 14, 2020 8:05 am

According to physics prof loy-doh, the fact that the arctic is a smidge warmer than it was 50 years ago, is proof that the arctic is warmer today compared to 10K years ago.

The world right now, is approximately the same temperature as it was during the Medieval Warm Period. Which in turn was cooler than the Roman, Minoan and Egyptian warm periods and all of those were 3 to 5C warmer than the Earth was during the Holocene Optimum.

David Kamakaris
Reply to  Loydo
September 14, 2020 10:26 am

“Nah, its warmer now, look at the Arctic.”
How warm was the Arctic during the mid-Holocene Optimum when spruce trees were flourishing on what is now tundra, you know, where TODAY it is too cold for trees to grow because the soil is permanently frozen. Have you thought about what forcings brought about that level of warmth, 3-5C warmer than today? It’s a safe bet that it was not from humans burning fossil fuels. Furthermore, how do you know it’s not those forcings rather than anthropogenic CO2 that are causing the minimal warming we see today?

Reply to  Loydo
September 14, 2020 1:17 pm

1979 was a time of extreme cold in the Arctic, sea ice up there with the LIA.

The current Arctic sea ice is in the top 5-10% of the last 10,000 years
comment image

and the current Arctic temperatures are BELOW those of most of the last 10,000 years
comment image

There is no accounting for your ignorance and climate change denial, is there , loy.doh ! !

Reply to  Loydo
September 15, 2020 12:09 am

Yes, Let’s look at the Arctic..

Only warming has been at the two El Ninos..

It actually COOLED between 1980 and 1995
comment image

Then the big El Nino around 1998

Since then it has been dead flat except for the jump at the 2015 El Nino which has now all but disappeared.
comment image

So, since the warming was PROVABLE driven by the two El Ninos, it had absolutely nothing to do with human CO2.

Thanks Loy-doh, for pointing us toward even further proof that the beneficial warming is nothing to do with atmospheric CO2.

Reply to  Loydo
September 14, 2020 7:10 am

Loydo, I know that you have made a career out of be-clowning yourself, but I have to congratulate you. This past year you have managed to take your idiocy to a whole new level.

Reply to  MarkW
September 14, 2020 2:22 pm

Seen through he wrong end of your telescope Mark, I appreciate that. Your banality continues to scale ever greater heights.

David Kamakaris
Reply to  Loydo
September 14, 2020 3:01 pm

Care to respond to Mark’s original post, Fred, and me?

Joel Snider
Reply to  Loydo
September 14, 2020 3:34 pm

While your smarm sinks ever lower.

Reply to  Loydo
September 14, 2020 5:23 pm

I know you are but what am I.
Kindergarten level taunts, how apropos, considering your mental age.

Reply to  Loydo
September 14, 2020 9:54 pm

And loy-doh releases yet another gnat’s fart !

Only thing he/she/it is capable of

Still waiting for that evidence of warming by atmospheric CO2, Loy..

Etaoin Shrdlu
Reply to  stinkerp
September 14, 2020 7:34 am

No doubt Biden would be happy to explain the word “existential” to us Deplorables.

September 14, 2020 12:08 am

The argument I see here is that these fires are completely and only due to lack of forest management…

which is nonsense isn’t it?

Reply to  griff
September 14, 2020 1:01 am

The severity of the fires is heavily influence by the lack of forest management….

….. Just like the Australian fires were this season.

Yes, its been hot dry WEATHER… a very regular occurrence in California and along the west coast.

Don’t tell you are confusing WEATHER for climate… yet again, griffool !!..

sheesh !! talk about a learning impediment. !!

You can provide NO EVIDENCE of any human CO2 cause “climate change”…

…. so human CO2 caused “climate change” cannot be to blame except in the fantasy realm.

Reply to  griff
September 14, 2020 4:45 am

Cal Fire seems to disagree with you.

Reply to  DHR
September 14, 2020 7:16 am

Reality and griff have a long distance relationship.

Reply to  griff
September 14, 2020 4:48 am

“The argument I see here is that these fires are completely and only due to lack of forest management…”

The Washington governor said that “climate change” amplifies the problem. The alarmists at the Washington Post say that global warming is an amplifier. The problem is lack of forest management. That’s obvious from the science: There are scientific estimates that California has 20 million acres in arrears (needing treatment).

The other fact to remember is that current global warming and warming-related drying is within natural variation. There is no warming or drying that has not been seen before. All-time temperature records in urban locations are not caused by global warming. California has always been boom and bust and their precipitation can be judged based on the wet 1980’s and 1990’s.

Tim Gorman
Reply to  griff
September 14, 2020 5:05 am


It is simply irrelevant what the global average temperature is or is going to be.

You can’t have fire without fuel. That means that no matter what the temperature is you *HAVE* to remove the fuel if you don’t want the fires.

Leave the fuel and you’ll have the fires regardless of the temperature!

Reply to  griff
September 14, 2020 5:09 am

It happens to be the only thing you can do to stop them … even if you want to accept Climate Change is the cause you might as well ignore it because nothing is going to happen on that front for a half a century or more. Sure lets all says it’s climate change don’t change anything and get burnt out every couple of years for a century … are you really that retarded Griff.

John Endicott
Reply to  LdB
September 14, 2020 7:04 am

Judging by his/her posts, yes s/he is.

Reply to  John Endicott
September 14, 2020 8:05 am

Given the widely varying styles in griff posts, it’s most likely that it is a tag team effort.

Clyde Spencer
Reply to  MarkW
September 14, 2020 9:27 am

There is another possibility: Multiple personalities in the same body.

Reply to  MarkW
September 14, 2020 11:07 am

I doubt griff’s brain is big enough to hold more than one personality.

Reply to  MarkW
September 15, 2020 12:13 am

“I doubt griff’s brain is big enough to hold more than one personality.”

It holds ZERO personality.

There may be a worm in there somewhere, which does all griff’s thinking.

Reply to  griff
September 14, 2020 7:15 am

Once again, the only way griff can make progress is by countering arguments that nobody has ever made.

California has always had wildfires. So anyone who claims that that these fires are completely caused by anything man has done is either a total idiot, or pushing an agenda that they can’t name directly. (If not both)

That these fires have been made worse by a lack of proper forest management has even been admitted by Newsom.

Reply to  MarkW
September 14, 2020 7:51 am

Among the many things that the first European explorers reported on upon reaching what would become California are oil sheens on the water and smoke in the air.

It doesn't add up...
September 14, 2020 2:05 am

The purpose of such wild claims was voiced by the Speaker to the House of Commons, Sir Lindsay Hoyle.

Not sure whether Americans should feel grateful for rioters who flout such dystopias. Perhaps the intention is they should become the enforcers. Any burning involved can be excluded from official emissions by fiat, just as it is for wood burnt in power stations.

Ed Zuiderwijk
September 14, 2020 2:08 am

Saw the pictures of the Golden Gate in an orange haze. It’s a sign! The future is orange.

Reply to  Ed Zuiderwijk
September 14, 2020 3:28 am

Orange man for another 4 years 😉

Bruce Cobb
Reply to  Ed Zuiderwijk
September 14, 2020 3:52 am

Pseudo-religious kooks are using it as a “sign” that God is punishing California for “allowing” child rapists and pedophiles to roam free, which of course is just as idiotic a lie as the Alarmists are using the fires for.

John Endicott
Reply to  Bruce Cobb
September 15, 2020 5:18 am

“signs” aren’t so much lies as they are Rorschach tests. Anything can be a “sign”, as people tend to see the “signs” they want to see.

Bruce Hall
September 14, 2020 3:37 am
September 14, 2020 4:14 am

“Forest Management” is a general term that includes many components.
A risk assessment is needed for all these components.
The risk assessment basically highlights which locations need more fuel reduction and which locations can be left alone. If this is done correctly then not much clearing is actually required.
BUT environmentalists just fight all clearing.
Strategic roads are an important component.
Not directly related to fire intensity but definitely related to reduction in fatalities is the need to widen and clear strategic roads..
In Paradise CA, instead of widening strategic escape roads, authorities narrowed them.

Reply to  Waza
September 14, 2020 5:14 am

Every decade or so the fires will clean it up for them if they don’t. In Australia stupid state fire management and green activism almost managed to send a large number of endangered animals to extinction. Who knows next time they might not be that lucky and there will be lots of land open up houses as there won’t be any wildlife left.

Tim Gorman
Reply to  LdB
September 14, 2020 2:45 pm


Greg S.
September 14, 2020 5:37 am

No Joe. You and your cabal are an “imminent, existential threat to our way of life”.

September 14, 2020 5:58 am

Leftist “pose and immediate and existential threat.”

We can’t allow Leftists to destroy the last bastion of Western Civilization with their insane tyrannical dogma and failed ideas that always make things worse.

The Immutabke Law of Leftist Irony:

Whatever the Leftist intention, the end result is ultimately the complete opposite….

Clyde Spencer
Reply to  SAMURAI
September 14, 2020 9:34 am

One of my favorite sayings is that “The road to Hell is paved with good intentions.” One of the characteristics of a Progressive is that they erroneously think that they are smarter than everyone else and believe that the world should be changed to be as they think it should be. Hence, unintended consequences rule the day and the efforts of Progressive end up being FUBAR.

Spencer’s Third Law is that for every social action there is an equal an opposite reaction. Progressives never anticipate the reactions.

joe - the non climate scientist
September 14, 2020 6:02 am

Medievil Warming period

numerous tree ring proxies from Central California show frequent fires during the MWP – but somehow those proxies dont produce the cooler WMP signal – so those tree proxies some how get excluded from the WMP temp reconstructions

Reply to  joe - the non climate scientist
September 14, 2020 7:21 am

In this case, the tree rings aren’t proxies. They show the fires via scarring. That’s direct evidence.

Ric Haldane
September 14, 2020 6:05 am

Biden recently said that he believes in truth over facts. Liberals decide what the facts are. Facts don’t matter.

September 14, 2020 6:23 am

Here comes another push button advocacy response Presidency. No thoughts required in this operating plan. One is for climate alarm, two is for union jobs for all, and three is for whatever you are willing to pay up for.

Obama lined up each agency to issue weekly press releases on climate alarm in a queue. It will happen again regardless of their day job responsibilities.

Reply to  ResourceGuy
September 14, 2020 7:23 am

“and three is for whatever you are willing to pay up for.”

Since when have liberals felt limited by what you are willing to pay for?

Reply to  MarkW
September 14, 2020 8:05 am

Campaigns are costly especially when multiplied across House and Senate efforts.

John Endicott
Reply to  ResourceGuy
September 15, 2020 5:16 am

As long as it’s other people’s money footing the bill, what do they care the cost?

Kevin A
September 14, 2020 6:31 am

Here in ‘fly over country’ (South East Idaho) two weeks ago the forestry service ran around posting No Camp Fire signs after they finished putting out all the fires that were started during the last lighting storms …. They would be better off chaining a million or 10 million acres of cedars
Federal or State, being tied up in court stops any management of the land.

Reply to  Kevin A
September 14, 2020 7:24 am

Putting out all the fires started by lightning is what got us into this mess in the first place.

September 14, 2020 6:44 am

Joe Biden on the West Coast Fires upcoming election: “climate change My election to the Presidency poses an imminent, existential threat to our way of life & particularly cute little girls”

Fixed it for ya, creepy Joe.

Gordon A. Dressler
September 14, 2020 8:25 am

Hmmmm . . .

1. CO2 fire extinguishers are used to put out fires.

2. Many (far too many?) people claim that mankind accounts for most, if not all, of the increase in atmospheric CO2 over the last 200 or so years . . . almost a 50% increase, from ~280 ppm to 410 ppm.

3. If the frequency of wildfires (aka forest fires) is really increasing with time as claimed, why hasn’t putting more CO2 “on top of” the fires worked? Sorry mankind, FAILURE BIG TIME. Try harder, maybe?

/sarc off

September 14, 2020 8:55 am

British Columbia is also on the West Coast and has one of lowest recorded fire seasons. Strange how climate change ends at the US Canada border.

Reply to  ferdberple
September 14, 2020 10:41 am


AGW is Not Science
September 14, 2020 9:07 am

The ONLY “imminent, existential threat to our way of life” is that they will get elected and implement their POLICIES – which ARE an “imminent, existential threat to our way of life,” UNLIKE so-called “climate change.”

The Crisis Is the Cure!

Clyde Spencer
September 14, 2020 9:42 am

“… Biden is ignoring decades of West Coast forest management failures.” He is also ignoring the introduction and spread of exotic grasses that make the western landscape more susceptible to rapidly spreading ground fires. He is also ignoring the spread of flammable homes into the urban/rural transition zones. If one looks at a picture of the damage in Paradise (CA), it is evident that the trees survived better than the homes did. There is plenty of blame (or lack of foresight) to go around. So-called climate change is really lost in the noise.

September 14, 2020 9:43 am

Gee I wonder what Great Society II spending in a low growth Obama recovery and huge progressive agenda will look like—on the way down. Bring in the finance experts from Argentine.

September 14, 2020 10:28 am

Joe is almost right, he just forgot one word.

Fixed it for you, Joe:

climate change alarmism poses an imminent, existential threat to our way of life

Reply to  lb
September 14, 2020 2:33 pm

“climate change alarmism poses an immediate opportunity for our cause”

There are gift crises and there are man made crises that take a whole lot more spin and spin coordination to pull off. But there is one ringing statement to rule them all. “never let a crisis go to waste” as Rahm would say.

September 14, 2020 10:43 am

All of us who live in CA know that the fire departments and CALFire continuously preach loudly to every homeowner in the wildland interface to “clear the brush to a distance of at least 30 feet from your houses” to prevent the wildfires from sparking a blaze in your yard and consuming your house.
Yet the “science led” idiots in (D) party keep poo-pooing forest management initiatives to clear the brush in the dense forests, not only poo-pooing but actively defunding and preventing any large scale efforts to address the areas CALFire has pointed out as dire and urgent.

Tim Gorman
September 14, 2020 10:51 am

Biden is on TV right now in CA saying that we *MUST* increase our use of solar and wind!

In California! Where even Gavin Newsome has admitted that their movement toward solar and wind is the root cause of their brownouts and blackouts!

Does Ol’ Joe not even keep up with the news down there in his basement?

September 14, 2020 10:55 am

I’m listening to Joe Biden climate speech right now – 10:50 am pacific time Sept 14, 2020. He is stating lies one after the other about climate change and extreme weather. It’s been a long speech about climate, electricity, renewables, etc – I can’t take it. !!!


September 14, 2020 11:05 am

Any comment on cop assassinations? I thought not.

September 14, 2020 11:07 am

The main stream media will present his lies as Gospel Truth! We and Trump should push back hard against these lies.

– JPP – – (I have to keep retyping my name, as it now appears in all caps)

September 14, 2020 11:12 am

After the ambush of the two police officiers in Compton, CA, Biden came out with a statement that we need to eliminate assault weapons.

1) The officers were shot with a handgun, as anyone who has watched the video could easily tell.
2) Only a progressive could believe that the way to solve the problem of criminals with guns, is to disarm the law abiding.

Reply to  MarkW
September 15, 2020 12:14 am

And yet countries like mine with very strict gun laws don’t have a gun crime problem… and certainly don’t have a mass shooting problem… our schools don’t need active shooter drills…

Reply to  griff
September 15, 2020 9:23 pm

If I’m not mistaken, Griff is from the UK and according to him, 6,759 firearm
offences is not “a gun crime problem!

March 2020, UK Parliament, House of Commons Library Firearm Crime Statistics: England & Wales Research Briefing

Tom Abbott
Reply to  BruceC
September 16, 2020 11:05 am

So Griff deosn’t have his facts straight?

September 14, 2020 10:59 am

Press 1 for existential threat, press 2 for union jobs for all, and press 3 for stimulus bailout funds for our friends.

Mike Maguire
September 14, 2020 11:57 am

The real reason for the fires:


The reason that we know that these people are being dishonest and political is because they only give “climate change” or the “climate emergency” as the reason for these problems.

Then, they tell us its based on the science and the scientists……….but they never provide the actual big picture, objective science that includes all the elements contributing, including the meteorology/increase in vegetation from CO2 fertilization and especially the adaptation and forest management that would be a viable option to greatly reduce this problem.

Because all of those realities take away from the false narrative “climate change is destroying the planet and every extreme event is proof of it!!!”

So you/we must all do what they say to save the planet.

The greening planet and life on it is currently experiencing an authentic climate optimum by all standards in science(biology, agronomy, zoology) .
But we are having a crisis and emergency……..a political one using busted(indisputably too warm) climate models…computer simulations of the atmosphere going out 100 years, using speculative mathematical equations to represent what we think that we know(which isn’t everything despite what we are told) along with worst case, very unlikely scenario’s that have replaced authentic climate science.

It’s pretty simple.

Authentic climate science was completely hijacked and replaced with manufactured science used for political propaganda.

If that wasn’t true, then why is EVERYTHING about climate change bad?

Propaganda is not objective. It doesn’t tell you both sides of an issue. It doesn’t use the skeptical scientific method. It’s mission is to convince/brain wash you to believe ONLY in what the (fanatical) belief is.

When was the last time that CNN’s top story was that the planet is massively greening up, the biosphere booming and most life doing the best in at least 1,000 years?

How about…………..never!

If those authentic scientific facts about the climate optimum, based on observations are not being told, then when we hear ONLY the complete opposite…………which contradicts that authentic science……’s clearly one sided propaganda.

Mike Maguire
September 14, 2020 12:19 pm

Climate change is huge risk for the American financial system, a major new bipartisan report says

metmike: Sounds scary and convincing but is entirely propaganda. I don’t know everything but as an atmospheric scientist that has been analyzing global weather ever day for 38 years, I clearly recognize pure propaganda in my field.

Get ready for them to start imposing the carbon and energy taxes and the continuation of the cultural revolution which features global(and US) socialism/Marxism.

That’s the reason they hijacked climate science and are using the propaganda to impose their political belief system(by tricking us to do something we would not agree to if we weren’t told that its to “save the planet”).

The other objective is to reign in the OVER consumption of natural resources by the developed countries(sustainable development) and modulate world population growth………….which also consumes too much.

As an environmentalist, I can see benefits to fighting/reducing REAL pollution and conserving natural resources and using renewable energy…….but CO2 is a beneficial gas. We rescued the planet from near starvation of CO2! Life wants more of it.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Mike Maguire
September 16, 2020 11:11 am

“Get ready for them to start imposing the carbon and energy taxes and the continuation of the cultural revolution which features global(and US) socialism/Marxism.”

I don’t think we are going to have a national carbon dioxide tax as long as Trump is president.

Tax increases slow down economic activity. Trump doesn’t want economic activity to slow down.

Any Republicans who support a carbon dioxide tax should prepare themselves to be challenged by clear-thinking Republican challengers at the next election. Hear that, Rep. Gaetz? You won’t be nearly as popular if you go promoting new taxes, especially new taxes to fix a non-existent problem like CO2 emissions. Don’t drink any more of the koolaide.

September 14, 2020 12:48 pm

The BOM and NOAA forecasts match. The Nino 3.4 index in November will reach -1.5 degrees C.
You can expect high northeast winds on the west coast of North America, drought in California and numerous wildfires.

Donald Boughton
September 14, 2020 1:32 pm

Joe Biden poses an imminent, existential threat to our way of life.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Donald Boughton
September 16, 2020 11:16 am

Yes, he does.

The entire Left is a disaster waiting to happen. They don’t live in the real world. Delusional people like Joe Biden and those on the Left should not be making decisions for others.

Mike Maguire
September 14, 2020 2:46 pm

September 14, 2020 at 12:08 am

“The argument I see here is that these fires are completely and only due to lack of forest management…

which is nonsense isn’t it?”

That is correct, forest management would only be partially effective but it would help A GREAT DEAL.

This is the reason for these fires getting so bad:

Unless you have a solution that stops La Nina’s, natural droughts, lightning, arson and weather systems with high winds, then we should focus on something that we know with absolute certainty would help a great deal…………forest management.

You must agree with this, right?

We sure can’t change the facts about climate below:

California drought: Past dry periods have lasted more than 200 years, scientists say

Maybe you can take heart in the fact that busted global climate models, that have been wrong, are forecasting MORE rain for California during the next century(though it would make sense with more El Ninos)

California projected to get wetter through this century

Reply to  Mike Maguire
September 14, 2020 5:26 pm

Weather models, which aren’t all that bad, are predicting more rain. Climate models aren’t used for that purpose.

Reply to  Mike Maguire
September 15, 2020 12:17 am

The link you provide seems to show me Oregon had very hot and dry weather… which is something which occurs more intensely and often due to climate change…???

Is not the Californian climate pattern shifting to more and more intense rain in a shorter period concentrated over winter??

Tom Abbott
Reply to  griff
September 16, 2020 11:19 am

Actually, California’s weather is much better now, than in the past. California used to have droughts that lasted over 100 years.

So you would have to say it’s a lot better today, compared to that..

Mike Maguire
September 14, 2020 2:57 pm

‘Is this doomsday’: Biden says wildfires show Trump doesn’t deserve reelection, calls him ‘climate arsonist’

Biden attacks Trump’s climate record amid Western wildfires, lays out his plan

“The former vice president sees fighting climate change as part of his economic vision, one that will create new jobs as the U.S. develops technology to battle rising temperatures.

Biden’s climate plan would fight global warming with a transition to cleaner technologies, including electric vehicles and renewable energy, as well as a requirement that all power be carbon free by 2035.”

Biden/politicians and others are the most pathetic when they use natural disasters to bs us about climate change. Trump is right about humans being able to manage the forest floors to lessen the severity of wildfires like this.

Instead of doing that, let’s blame it entirely on climate change so that we can impose carbon taxes and use it for political agenda. Then they tell us its science and the ones actually using authentic science and offering practical solutions……….are the deniers.

These people want us to believe they can control the weather and climate. Under the Green New Fairly Tale, wildfires and hurricanes will stop being a major threat if you believe their position. They can control the weather!

It’s just manufactured junk/anti science, using every extreme natural event and worst case scenario’s of indisputably busted computer simulations of the atmosphere for the next 100 years…… get votes, impose taxes and their political/economical agenda/models.

Read Bidens quote above again. “All power will be carbon free by 2035”. He just insisted earlier this month when he was in the fracking state of PA, that he would not ban fracking and repeated it for emphasis……to get votes in PA.

What do you think fracking does Joe? There isn’t any sunshine or wind buried under the ground (-:

Carbon free = ZERO fracking

This means the end of the combustion engine and corn ethanol, which is 40% of the demand for the US crop goes that goes away completely.

With the Green New Deal there is no longer any corn ethanol. Electric cars use ZERO ethanol. Crop farmers should be informed of this.

Surprised that Trump is not making that clear to the ag community.
Any crop farmer that votes for Biden must really hate Trump…….more than they love profits.

Higher Vibration
September 14, 2020 5:42 pm

Looks like the West is being sold out for Agenda 2030 and that CLARA Project under the guise of Climate Change.

This happened in Australia last year.

This means that our own Intelligent Agencies will make sure that everything is just About Climate Change. There is no one starting fires there are no DEW it is all part of Climate Change.

Climate Change the new Communist Revolution.

Reply to  Higher Vibration
September 15, 2020 12:13 am

Didn’t Agenda 2030 used to be Agenda 2021?

why on earth could they have renamed it?

John Endicott
Reply to  griff
September 15, 2020 5:14 am

the 21 in Agenda 21 referred to the 21st century not the year 2021. When it became clearthe start of the 21st century (ie the year 2000 or 2001, depending on your perspective) was too optimistic a target date, it was quietly revised to a target date of 2030. It became formally known as Agenda 2030 at the Sustainable Development Summit of 2015.

Reply to  griff
September 15, 2020 9:28 am

…because the UN was unable to implement their Agenda 2021 by 2021 so instead of looking foolish, they projected another date for completion.

Hopefully, that will be delayed also.

September 14, 2020 10:04 pm

Once upon a time, California didn’t have a fire problem or rolling blackouts, either.

What happened?

The Democrat Party happened, and they seem to destroy pretty much everything they touch eventually!

Mike Maguire
September 14, 2020 10:58 pm

I think your average Twilight Zone episode had far more truth in it than Biden’s words today (-:

Biden says Trump’s ‘climate denialism, his disdain for science and facts’ is ‘unconscionable’

“If you give a climate denier four more years in the White House, why would anyone be surprised when more of America is under water?”

Since the sea levels are increasing at just over 1 inch/decade, in 4 years, the water from our surrounding oceans will be up around 1/2 inch……hardly enough for America to be under water anywhere.

It’s so pathetic to use a tragedy and natural disaster to deceive people with fabricated facts and junk science for political gain…………..and to call the people using authentic science and the real world of being the deniers.

Here’s the TRUTH about sea levels.

%d bloggers like this: