Guest essay by Eric Worrall
Video of Dr. Willie Soon at his awesome best, obliterating the absurd climate driven wildfire narrative under the weight of the evidence he presents.
One of the most shocking slides in Dr. Soon’s video was an environmentalist and climate activist, who was convicted in court of deliberately setting fires.
As an Australian I’m acutely aware that screaming alarmists like the BBC in Britain and CNN in the USA painted a wildly sensationalist picture of the impact of the 2019-20 fires on Australia. I had friends in Britain contacting me to ask me if I was OK.
Watching Dr. Soon rip apart their flimsy exaggerated claims is like a breath of fresh air.
We had relatives in the UK contact us at the time to ask if we were affected by the fires. We live in Darlinghurst in a terrace house in the centre of Eastern Sydney and chances of there ever being a bushfire here now are less than zero unless it is a bitumen fire. Many Climate Alarmists love to start bushfires as they see it as a holy act in support of the Glorious Cause of fighting ‘Global Warming’. They have little understanding of anything else either.
Of course in Australia where country houses are built can be a major bushfire potential problem and many, too many lifestyle change seekers build in bushland and ignore fire breaks and fire fighting equipment and building design.
And then complain loudly when they are burnt out, and often without insurance.
Australia has always been the land of droughts and flooding rains and natural disasters resulting. The most recent climate and weather changes commenced about 130,000 years ago to drier conditions, the rainforests retreated over time to about 3 per cent of forest today and eucalypts that can survive droughts replaced them, eucalypts that need occasional fires to regenerate.
There has been some studies looking at the tropical forests deliberately burned off over time resulting in the now mostly dry landscape
The retreat of rainforests in Australia commenced around 130,000 years ago, the first migrant Australian Aborigines arrived 65-70,000 years ago according to the last upgraded estimate based on dating excavations in cave floors in Northern Australia, Kakadu National Park.
Season burning tradition as far as I can discover dates back maybe 10,000 years. By that time the climate zone was much drier than 130,000 years ago.
But of course there are examples of “tropical forests” that were deliberately destroyed by fires, South America Amazon Region an example.
Friends of the Earth set fires in California as well, when forests were most dry, to hype the Climate Change message.
Those evil folks are so fanatic, they would make Hitler and Stalin blush.
These arsonists are truly evil people, right up there with the Spanish Inquisition. It is actually interesting how devotees of a particular ideology can sublimate any and all decent impulses in order to further the aims of their beliefs. Surely they must know that to deliberately set a fire in a dry woodland is wrong but they do it anyway in the mistaken belief that they will draw attention to what they have been told is is a worsening situation that will destroy all mankind. It never occurs to them that they are the problem and not even a wee part of any solution!
Or maybe nutters are naturally attracted to such causes….
I’ve seen videos these people make of themselves while driving, starting a chain of fires along a highway. Sick stuff.
After Australia signed UN Agenda 21 – Sustainability, circa 1990, many State Forests set aside for selective commercial logging operations were changed to National Parks and bans introduced on logging, mining, new dams, just about everything. The National Parks & Wildlife Services (most of them State responsibility) have not managed the vast areas of land as Forestry personnel did which resulted in decades of build up of fire hazard materials on the ground and tangled undergrowth perfect of wild fires to develop from.
Permits for burning off and general clearing of fuel on the ground have been difficult to obtain from local government councils by volunteer bushfire units, farmers and other land owners.
The Greens have managed to gain positions of influence in local government and state level and seem to believe that land management should be left to nature ignoring that hot wild fires kill plant life and native creatures. As compared to the Australian Aborigine’s seasonal burning land management tradition to burn in patches when the weather conditions are favourable (seasonal) and allow new burning to run out of fuel when the bushfire reaches the nearby “patch” that has minimal fuel load and the fire goes out. Noting that managed areas produce cool fires compared to hot wild fires.
Of course the climate hoaxers (climate change is natural Earth Cycles) and creative accounting of a warming trend blame bushfires with their warming scare campaign, deceptive commentary.
It’s almost a requirement of the media to mention catastrophic “climate change” here in British Columbia, especially during a particularly hot Summer. Most of the province is covered by coniferous forest (especially pine in the central regions). No one mentions the fact that there is evidence of vast fires covering large percentages of the province.
AGW true believers hate history and will rarely try to upgrade their willful ignorance. Chicken Little Syndrome is rife here, every time we get a bit of smoke. I’ve experienced forest fires, and fought them too, for most of my nearly 80 years. The remote areas aren’t so remote any longer … so there is far more property damage today (and as others have mentioned, far more arson, too).
I used to get that all the time, whenever there was a fire, flood or cyclone (ie pretty much all the time) in Australia. I had to point out to them that it was like me being worried about them in the UK if they’re was a flood in Africa.
People don’t often understand how large Australian really is. I often drive up the east coast. It’s like 3 or 4 days drive from Sydney to Cairns, for example. Then you have to add a day if you start at Melbourne. If you want to go to the very top, and your vehicle is capable, that’s another 2 days, maybe 3, if the weather will even let you (roads disappear in the wet season). That’s up to 8 days to drive up the east coast.
Once I went from BC to Sydney and it took us 21 days. I worked out that on the same ship at the same speed it would take 28 days to go round Australia from Sydney back to Sydney.
“People don’t often understand how large Australian really is.”
U.S. too. I remember a couple visiting NYC who were planning to visit Seattle one day, then go see the Alamo the next day, and finally go to Disneyworld on the third day.
‘All views expressed are strictly my own and should be yours too.’
Love it, Willie.
Hardly a reliable witness, is he?
and there are more fire days now in California than before and a longer fire season…
There are fires across the globe, notably this year in the Med…
fires in Australia in recent years have taken out actual rainforest, something not seen in the last 200 years…
fires occur even in well managed forest (e.g in recent years in Sweden)
More heat, more heatwaves, more drought, more fires. That’s the fact of the matter.
More than what, when, how many? You always make BS statements with no data. Funny that fires always occur in dry seasons and the more fuel and the stronger the wind the more intense the fire.
Maybe you never went to Scouts or similar and learnt about fire or maybe it is just your pants that are on fire. Get some commonsense please.
I see the group humourist has chipped in
The griff-bot reappears. Spewing @ClimateScientology BS as usual.
But doesnt more heat lead to more moisture in air and more rainfall….see New York City this week.
Extreme cold in Texas was global warming too,…that Junior high school stuff
“and there are more fire days now in California than before and a longer fire season”
Yes, griff. And there is much less scientific management of forests, and there are much less forest engineers (and much more “environment experts”), and there are much more law, rules and regulations preventing the rational management of forest (their cleaning, thinning and economic exploitation of the wood). You can check that in the official statistics of California; did you?
Grif….
I live in the western half of NSW. It is the hotter, drier half….. and in the season under discussion we had zero serious fires.
Yes, there was a drought. We have a history of droughts going back to the earliest days of european settlement, and strong scientific evidence from multiple studies, showing that longer and more severe droughts have happened previously – none of which is explained by the theory of anthropogenic global warming.
Nor are your claims consistent with the BOM rainfall records, which show that Australian rainfall, Eastern Australian rainfall and Eastern Australian SUMMER rainfall have all tended to increase over the last 50-60 years.
Blunt truth is that the fires occurred where there was a lot of fuel. Not in the hottest and driest part of the state.
Deal with it!
How does it work, griffter? Is it….is it SPONTANEOUS COMBUSTION?
…but, I thought you said there was 6% more rain… anyway, you do realize there are less heatwaves than in previous decades, don’t you? (it’s not even close).
As the article asks, “why focus on length of the fire season-just ask, are there more or less fires?” Sorry griff, there’s less. https://phzoe.com/2021/02/17/trend-in-global-fires/
What griff finds to be a fact, almost never is.
Heck with data proving that the number of fires is down. The models say fires should be up, therefore they are. That’s the only “data” a true believer needs.
Geezo Pete, Griffypoo, what dimension of sight and sound and “mind” are you living in?
FIRES DON’T START WITHOUT AN IGNITION SOURCE.
Oh, it can be a lightning strike, or a downed electricity transmission line, or ARSON, and the ambient temperature, including “heat days” in California, have NOTHING – ZERO, ZIP, NADA – to do with it.
Fires can’t start without an ignition source, period. Spontaneous combustion in forests? Ain’t no such thing.
The ignition point for wood (trees, you ninnyhammer) is, as I clearly state below, 390F to 500F, so please tell us just WHEN and WHERE these temperatures exist on Earth, outside of cookstoves and volcanoes and the random meteor.
Are you sure you’re living on Planet Earth?
I’m really concerned about your association with reality these days, Griffypoo.
He knows far more than you do, so is a reliable witness.
You are a reliable witless.
(Other wordplays are available).
How many fires SHOULD there be, griff?
Forest fires in Sweden? I live in Norway and can assure you that if that was the case on a notionable scale it would be on the news here. Crickets….
Tropical green rainforests never dry out , its the crap on the ground that can set it alight .
Shouldn’t the Australian bushfire season be worse this year than that epic year griff? C02 has only gone up.
Splendidly done
“One of the most shocking slides in Dr. Soon’s video was an environmentalist and climate activist, who was convicted in court of deliberately setting fires.”
Other than an anonymous tweet, what evidence do you have that he actually is an environmental activist? I am assuming you mean the guy mugshotted but not named at around 15:20? (nb I haven’t watched the whole video, there’s no way I’m sitting through an hour of Soonisms)
The arsonist would seem to be one Johnny Mullins and the press coverage I’ve seen describes his motive as starting fires so he could film them to boost views of his facebook videos, he apparently had aspirations to be a TV weatherman. No mention of environmentalism.
But that would mean Dr Soon was drawing an entirely false conclusion for political reasons, and I am sure he would never stoop so low. So I look forward to conclusive evidence of Mr Mullins’ environmentalist views and activism.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3930526/Aspiring-weatherman-starts-forest-fire-films-reporting-desperate-bid-draw-viewers-Facebook-channel.html
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/weatherman-kentucky-arson-wannabe-arrested-starting-wildfire-a7414736.html
PS I have just noticed that Mr Mullins was convicted 5 years ago. Not sure of the relevance to the devastating wildfires of more recent years….
Also not sure about the wisdom of relying on a tweet from ‘cosmic consciousness enthusiast’ ‘Dr Sundance’, whose twitter profile comes with a health warning. But I am sure proper research was conducted before accusations were flung…..
😉 The DenierSphere is well known for their deep, exhaustive, systematic, and conscientious research.
Meanwhile neither of you two could find anything wrong with his presentation about the climate change forest fire alarmism…….
You two are ankle biting, thus trying to deflect and insult to create a diversion, I saw though that easily.
As I said, I didn’t watch the thing. Soon kissed goodbye to his credibility around the time of Soon and Baliunas, in my view. Feel free to precis his arguments.
The ‘green activist setting fires’ claim seemed unlikely so I did a little digging. It is beginning to look very much like lazy, lying propaganda.
But I will apologise if it turns out Mr Worrell did research the charge before making it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doctors_for_Disaster_Preparedness
No Comment.
??? And this is after John Phillips has shown the “climate activist” thing was BS…
Furthermore, I would like to add the standard point here. Before the satellite era (in this specific case, the mid 80s, I think, but it may be later in Australia), forest fire acreages were unreliable, and those numbers shouldn’t be used. Please consider this.
In the US, it was not so much satellites, as the fact that prior to 1983 there was no nationally-agreed methodology for collecting the data and so there was scope for double- or possibly even triple-counting.
https://www.nifc.gov/fire-information/statistics/wildfires
Anthony Banton easily settled the matter (see further down). These numbers are completely unreliable in Australia, they sometimes include eg. savanna fires (an entirely different category), sometimes do not etc. So Soon either used the data he could get in 1 minute too hastily (haha, nomen est omen), or intentionally used bad data.
That is pretty rich coming from someone on the side of the debate that routinely ignores accuracy and precision in any quantitative discussion! At what level of uncertainty do you recommend data be completely ignored? Does that apply to temperatures and ocean pH as well?
At the easily demonstrated level of corruption. Just as in this case.
This from the guy who claims that things must be true because it was peer reviewed.
Well, this is how science works. And you know, what? I rather believe in a peer reviewed article (that conforms well with usually a lot of other articles, in science you don’t really have things in a vacuum) than in a blogpost in an obscure, industry financed blog from a guy who demonstrably made bad “research” in the past.
So having a couple of your besties whose livelihood depends on proving global warming exists, look over your paper is the gold standard for science. Really?
BTW, I”m still waiting for you to provide evidence that this site is industry funded,
The last time I asked, you just proclaimed that all your friends know it is and then insulted anyone who disagrees with you and your friends.
A few corrections:
The last point leads us to the next one:
Sorry, I didn’t realize you wanted this. Okay. So this cabal is very closely connected to various think tanks (most notably: Heartland, the premier bullshit-monger). These think tanks, in turn, are financed by the fossil fuel industry (this is proven to the point of being an axiom 🙂 ). The same applies to most of the relevant politicians. Anthony is famously a “fellow” (or wtf) of Heartland.
Regarding specifically the funding of this site, while Anthony tries to muddle the matter (check the faq), it’s obvious that he gets major funding from Heartland, and Heartland helps channeling some big donors to it. Is that right, Anthony? You can come clear with an honest accounting now 🙂 It is also clear that some money comes from losers like you via small donations. The whole purpose of this blog is to be here so that the real sponsors can claim there’s “controversy” pointing to the few dozen sites like this. You and the other suckers are the fluff, the filling, the required ballast here.
“Why everyone knows the moon is made of green cheese. There is no point in providing evidence. It is self-evident.”
This is a standard, and unfounded allegation from you (the science deniers’ side). We (the rational side) always provide evidence or at least a way you can find it. I don’t know specifically what your problem here, in the faq of this blog Anthony writes about his misadvantures regarding finance.
So anyone being funded by “industry” is suspect, as is funding from individuals as they’re “losers”… given that every professional – by definition – gets paid by someone, what is that unimpeachable, no-strings-attached source of funding? What’s left besides government or educational bureaucracies that rely on bigging up threats to justify their own funding?
Nothing. You see it right. Congratulations!
??? Perhaps I was too quick to give you credit…
Anyway, now you apparently don’t deny industry funding (and the inevitable conflict of interests that arises), do you?
Lol
“This from the guy who claims that things must be true because it was peer reviewed.”
This from the guy who makes things up. Got a reference for your claim re the German floods? “There are a dozen floods of equal or greater magnitude during the the last 500 years.”
How much of your payday are you willing to fork over for the Green Net Zero Fantasy Raw Deal, CCP-Simon?
Put your money where your keyboard is…
Probably more than you.
Yep, won’t give a straight answer, just like all other the fakes. A climate hypocrite—not a surprise at all.
🙂 Exactly! These losers are willing to pay to the very scammers who fool them.
Once again, Simon declares that any fact that doesn’t fit his religious convictions, is just made up.
Took all of 30 seconds to find this one.
Of course Simon will reject it because youtube isn’t a climate scientist approved site, therefore it isn’t true.
Simon, aren’t you tired of making an ass of yourself yet?
Haha you are such a laugh. So I watched your little movie. Tell me Mark what does the first line say? “Nine” flood rich periods. But that’s all over Europe. And no indication of whether any of those produced rainfall like Germany just got. Maybe you need to take a little longer than 30 seconds…..
Ahh the Russia colluuuusion turd shows itself. Clown show indeed Simon.
And the Pencil-neck Schiffhead/Vindman/Chiaramella phone call hoax.
Yawn.
What a loser.
Are you talking about Lloydo again.. I agree.
Now onto your Russia colluuuusion 😉
So far this year, in the western USA, fire acreage is reported as
Acres: 5,073,241 . . .
while the prior 10 year average to Sept. 6th is …
Acres: 5,883,336
So roughly: 800,000 fewer acres this year than the 10 year average.
Makes one go “Hmm! ?”
“800,000 fewer acres this year” – they’re bigger acres, or something…
Australia was heavily into carbon farming. I call it tinder farming.
https://www.agriculture.gov.au/water/policy/carbon-farming-initiative
Well, I went to the trouble of looking up the ignition point/temperature of wood, which is 390F to 500F, or 250C to 300C, and unless some sort of furnace effect is underway, the claim is spurious. It is hogwash, baloney, twaddle, and a whole lot of fabrication made up of moonbeams and fairy dust.
The ignorance in this idea that forests spontaneously ignite is disgusting, especially when the assumption is that no ignition source is needed. Just BOOM!! and the wooded areas go up in smoke! Hogwash!
You have to understand that 1968, 1969, 1974, and 2002 are prehistoric, so they don’t count.
See these Sept 2019 BoM and Australian ABC media articles quoting the BoM stating that “sudden stratospheric warming” would worsen drought and fire conditions for the 2019-2020 summer.
There has been much amnesia about the above BoM/ABC Sept 2019 articles in Australian Federal and State Govt circles – who all want the “climate change” agenda pushed.
BBC gets Downunder climate change wrong 29 June 2021
http://www.warwickhughes.com/blog/?p=6752
and
ScoMo’s NRRA birthed in memory lapse 5 May 2021
http://www.warwickhughes.com/blog/?p=6696
So is Wikipedia a “reliable” source of information now?
Funny how it is when it supports the ideological bias here.
but it seems not.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Bushfires_in_Australia#1974-75_NT_fires
”1974/75 fire season[edit]The entries for the 1974/75 fire season are getting a little out of hand. We now have multiple entries for the same season (one for the whole season, one each for several states). Most problematic is the nature of these fires. The vast majority of the land being listed as burned were not bushfires but savanna fires, annual events that burn through enormous areas of grasslands. To add to the problem, there were also legitimate bushfires that season. I have checked the source material, and some of it explicitly refers to large areas of savanna grass fires. If this becomes a precedent, then there will be entries almost every year for areas averaging >25MHa. This will effectively bury actual bushfires where life, property or infrastructure was lost. I’m looking for comments or suggestions for resolution.
Although at present on a “sabbatical” I feel compelled (as ever here) to rebut “ fake news”
Yes, yes I know …. I can guess the angry wailing
https://moyhu.blogspot.com/2020/01/a-trap-with-bushfire-area-statistics-in.html
in short there are fires that are a danger to life and are natural, and than there are those that are controlled burns that cover vast areas, and that bother no one.
As is said on the Wiki page above the article is a mess with some years early on including the safe, controlled ones and others not.
Of course Soon chose to do no checking (?) and drilled the myth ever deeper into those entirely unsceptical “sceptics” mind’s …. From whence they never escape.
OMG he resurrects the 1974 Australian Savannah fire data ?! And this is meant to be ‘surgical’?
Is this like-bristle cone research?
No. Soon’s is plain bullshiting.
Point is, this has been known about for years. You can separate Aussie fires into vegetation wildfires, these are the one that do the damage and get the headlines, and savannah fires, these burn large areas but in a controlled, usually harmless way. Savannah fires are not usually included in the overall acreage burned for reporting purposes, but for some reason the wiki entry did include them for the 1974 season. Nick Stokes covered it in depth.
You can see from the graph below just how much of an anomaly this was. If correct, about 15% of the country burned.
This is obviously ridiculous. But not too ridiculous to make it into Dr. Soon’s presentation, along with the fake green activist arsonist. If this is ‘surgical’, what does dishonest propaganda look like?
If these are annual events, then why don’t they provide a baseline of fires every year?
Hard but maybe effective: what about life sentences for deliberate arson in forests?
That should make at least some of these people think twice…
Some ill informed people yes climate activists are also blaming the fires here in British Columbia on the supposedly man created climate changes. I say supposed because I am a firm believer in most if not all climate changes as caused by our Sun.