Jim Steele does not disappoint on correcting the constant dissemination of climate misinformation. Today, his ire has been directed towards NPR’s report attributing the destructive fire in Denton, Montana in December 2021 to climate change. Professor Jim Steele, an acclaimed geologist and ecologist, perfectly dissected the issue in a tweet, revealing the extent to which NPR missed or misconstrued the critical nuances of the story.
Steele wrote,
“I listen to NPR radio to hear what fake climate propaganda they’re pushing. Today was ‘Climate Change is Increasing the Fire Risk on the mostly treeless Great Plains’.”
Accusing NPR of fearmongering climate change, Steele goes on to explicate their flawed reasoning in blaming the Denton fire on global warming.
He continues,
“NPR blamed the December 2021 destructive fire in Denton Montana, on 70 mph winds, the supposedly unusual 56°F nighttime temperatures, and lack of snow on the ground, and suggesting it was all due to global warming. But NPR perverted well-established natural weather science.”
He points out that NPR conveniently ignored the fact that the fire was started due to high winds toppling a power line, rather than some climate-induced anomaly.
Steele also brings up the concept of the winter jet stream and its role in producing strong winter Chinooks or fohn winds in eastern Montana. Steele elucidates.
“The native Blackfeet of that region long ago referred to the Chinooks as snow-eaters because the dry warm winds remove the snow,”
According to Steele,
“Fohn winds dry as the water vapor in the rising winds, condenses leaving snow over the Rocky Mtns at higher elevations, but that also releases latent heat that warms the air which warms further as the winds descend onto the Great Plains.”
The unique climatic characteristic of the region was conveniently omitted from the NPR story.
Steele invokes historical data to emphasize his point, recalling two notable instances in Montana’s weather history.
“In December 1933 around Havre MT, just 130 miles north of Denton, Chinook winds raised temperatures 27°F in just 5 minutes, and over the next 36 hours temperatures rose by 53°F. The most extreme temperature change in a 24-hour period happened January 15, 1972, in Loma MT, just 70 miles north of Denton, when temperatures increased from −54 °F to 49 °F.”
His rebuke ends with a rhetorical question,
“I wonder how many people realize NPR is brainwashing the public?”
This is a call to the public to question the information they receive and to strive to understand the underlying processes that drive our environment.
Steele’s critique of NPR’s coverage highlights a pressing issue in the current climate conversation: the tendency to attribute extreme weather events solely to climate change. It is crucial to remember that weather is complex and influenced by many factors.
Misinformation and fearmongering narratives do little to inform the public. The need for reliable, accurate reporting that goes beyond simplistic narratives to encompass the complex reality of our climate, and scientific issues in general, has never been more important.
Has Jim received a response from NPR?
No, and I don’t expect to.
Jim, I assume it would be a futile gesture but have you considered sending your critique to the local and national NPR offices? At least they would be on notice that people are catching their propaganda with its associated anti-science narratives and providing people with factual climate information.
Dave, that’s a good idea. I’ll see what happens.
The content of my tweet has now been sent to NPR management expressing my concern for dishonest reporting.
Wonderful, Jim! Please let the people following you on WUWT know how it turns out.
automated message
Thank you for contacting NPR.
We’re always grateful to hear from NPR’s listeners and readers. We read every message and make certain that all feedback reaches the appropriate people for consideration. However, due to the incredibly high volume of mail we receive, we may often not be able to respond individually.
Our top priority is to keep you connected to what is happening in your community, across the country and around the world. Your feedback helps shape and inform that work, and we thank you for taking the time to send us a message.
Thanks, Jim. Do they have another level of contact? Maybe to the program director or author of the piece?
“However, due to the incredibly high volume of mail we receive, we may often not be able to respond individually.”
This is where my grandchildren will expect to find AI with an excellent artificial voice. In my youth people seemed to understand neither that automated answering service would become the default nor that the options would eventually lead to an undersea fiber optic cable. Those jobs are not coming back.
I wonder whether the network or one of its allies will find a way to respond? Their toolset is BA Journalism.
Gee, all along, I thought NPR’s toolset, regarding environment, etc., was BS Journalism
I found the email of NPR’s journalist Aaron Bolton and sent him this tweet. To his credit, he replied immediately. Below is his reply and what I replied
Bolton replied, “Thanks for reaching out. We actually did point out in the story that strong winds are typical during that time of year, making any fire start that does happen more risky. Weather records show that it was that warm. Weather records also indicate that temperature is well above the norm, which was also backed up by locals who’ve lived there since they were born.
The story doesn’t get into how fires are starting, though researchers and fire officials will tell you the majority are human caused. We focused how temperatures at that time were not normal and how they collided with very normal strong winter winds. The same thing happened with the Marshall Fire in Boulder.
Can you point me to specific scientific literature that backs up your point?
Also, here’s Victoria Donovan’s study in case you want to give it a read: https://newsroom.unl.edu/announce/unlagrohortnews/6839/38526
I just replied:
Your claim that “We actually did point out in the story that strong winds are typical during that time of year, making any fire start that does happen more risky” is a bit disingenuous.
First your title, Climate change is increasing the fire risk on the mostly treeless Great Plains, shows you are framing the conditions that fostered the Denton MT fire as a function of climate change.
Next your narrative suggested the winds were not normal stating “The last thing he thought he’d be doing is fighting a wildfire in December, but that’s exactly what happened a couple of years ago as 70-mile-an-hour winds pushed flames across 10,000 acres.” You did not state such high winds were normal.
You did mention December is typically windier, but not how strong the winds can be, and stated with the context of a global warming framework stating, “Researchers say the warming climate means more dry Decembers and a lot less snow cover across the Great Plains, meaning a lot more fire risk during a typically windier time of the year.”
You then have DON PYRAH state, “ And it was 56 degrees in the middle of the night. That’s not normal”
Now you claim “Weather records also indicate that temperature is well above the norm, which was also backed up by locals who’ve lived there since they were born.”
However according to Wikipedia nearby Great Falls avg maximum temperature in December is 55.4 F. And more importantly if you understood fohn winds, you would know that those winds cause above normal winds.
Your reply suggests to me 1) you do not have a science background or you would not ask me for references to well established weather science, 2) you have not spent much time in Montana or the western mountainous regions or you would be aware of chinooks, and 3) you blindly see everything within the politically driven framework of the CO2 global warming narrative, 4) and finally you failed to do the investigative research a good honest journalist should do.
With the hopes that you will refrain from misleading the public again, here are some scientific references and concepts you should have been aware of before you perpetuated the false fear mongering climate change narrative.
Synoptic Investigation of a Typical Chinook Situation in Montana McClain (1952)
“now-classic thermodynamic foehn principle: moist air traversing a mountain range precipitates moisture while ascending the windward slopes and gains the latent heat released; subsequent descent of the air along the lee slopes takes place dry adiabatically and the air arrives at lower altitudes drier and warmer than it was at corresponding elevations during the ascent. This same explanation is found today in most textbooks on meteorology and climatology.”
From the USGS 2019 Sublimation and the Water Cycle
“in the western U.S., there’s a wind called the Chinook, or “snow eater,” that vaporizes snow before it even has a chance to melt.”
“Chinook winds are westerlies from the Pacific whose moisture gets wrung out as it passes over the Rocky Mountains. Once these winds come down from the mountains onto the high plains, they can be quite mild and extremely dry, as warm as 60- or 70-degrees Fahrenheit — over 15 Celsius — with a relative humidity of 10% or less. The air is so dry that when it hits a snowpack, the frozen water evaporates, going directly from the ice to vapor and bypassing the liquid phase entirely. This is called sublimation, and it’s a common way for snow to disappear in the arid West.”
Regards my 2 examples of “abnormal warming in Montana
Horvitz, Andrew H.; et al. (13 September 2002). “On 13 September 2002, citing a unanimous recommendation from the National Climate Extremes Committee, the Director of NCDC accepted the Loma, Montana 24 hour temperature change of 103°F, making it the new official national record” (PDF) (Press release). American Meteorological Society.
My tweet claiming that “December 1933 around Havre MT, just 130 miles north of Denton, Chinook winds raised temperatures 27°F in just 5 minutes, and over the next 36 hours temperatures rose by 53°F.” is based on BATTLE OF THE CHINOOK WIND AT HAVRE, MONT. Math (1934)
Of course you wanted to really investigate the truth, you have just checked out
WIKIPEDIA’S “Chinook wind” page, “The föhns called ‘Chinook winds’ are seen throughout most of inland western North America, particularly the Rocky Mountain region. Montana especially has a significant amount of föhn winds throughout much of the state during the winter months, but particularly coming off the Rocky Mountain Front in the northern and west-central areas of the state.”
I can only hope my tweet, viewed by over 21K people, will offset your misinformation!
Jim Steele
Jim,
It looks like this government and viewer subsidized “Journalist”, has been proven to be an empty windbag good with words.
Thanks for the information, Jim. While you did give him a few written jabs, my response would have been much more negative but probably counterproductive.
Maybe if people gave the fearmongering “reporters” more feedback like this there would be some, minor impact.
Jim,
Thank you for the explanation.
About 10 years ago, I was driving from Vail to Steamboat Springs, in winter.
As we got closer to Rabbit Ears Pass, about 12000 ft, it started to snow, more and more, until it was a white-out.
Tail lights of the car ahead of me became nearly invisible.
Finally we got over the pass, and all of a sudden there was a clear sky, and the sun was shining, and Steamboat was clearly visible a few miles away.
A huge relief.
Thanks you, I have an explanation
I had a similar experience while driving southbound on Route Nationale 85 (commonly called La Route Napoleon) in the French Alps in February. The weather was cold and rainy with wind out of the northwest most of the way, as the road slowly climbed to an altitude of about 4,000 feet. Near the top of the pass, the rain changed to heavy snow. About two miles south of the pass (now going downhill), the snow stopped, and after another mile, the sun came out. When we reached the city of Gap in the valley, about 10 miles south of the pass, it was about 65 F with clear blue sky. This occurred in 1993, when CO2 levels were lower than today.
This warming and drying effect of a down-sloping wind can even occur with winds out of the north if the topography is appropriate. These winds are called “mistral” in southeastern France, and “tramontane” in northern Italy just south of the Alps.
Assuming their audience are idiots is a safe assumption for NPR.
True.
However, using the threat of force to require that I FUND their propaganda is particularly galling.
(I am sure my friends that also fund the BBC, CBC, and ABC propaganda against their will agree!)
Being a non expert in climate science – which is probably 99% of the human population – doesn’t make one an “idiot”. Most real people pay no attention to how the climate may be claimed to be changing .. while others simply accept what they see in the popular media because they defer to experts and common perception. Again, even climate change believers are not necessarily idiots, they may simply be misinformed.
I am including the rest of their “news” coverage in denigrating their audience. They are somewhat less strident than MSNBC, but only in tone. Perhaps True Believer leftists might be more fair than idiots, but there is no practical difference.
Ok, misinformed idiots.
Or just economically-middling citizens lazily assuming they won’t be asked their opinion unless it supports someone’s narrative and that everything it will be okay while they enjoy the pretty voices.
Believing that 1-2°C more will end the world as we know it means they’re idiots.
Believing that any level of gentle warming, 1-5°C say, is catastrophically bad for Canada, say, also means they’re idiots.
Of course I’m excluding anyone without a complete primary/elementary school education.
I doubt that most of the people who might answer in the affirmative if they believe humans cause climate to change believes that 1 to 2 deg C will end the world as we know it. Don’t conflate the average person on the street who has little to no education in climatology, physics, etc. and believes what they read with the radical True Believers.
It is literally impossible to persuade another person to your opinion on anything when you shout at them “Idiot!”. It matters what people come to believe because people vote.
Yes
I am saddened by the downvotes you might get for standing against mean-spiritedness.
If we don’t try to persuade people who might otherwise be persuaded, then who will? I know it’s popular to treat all others who have a different opinion as someone subject to mental incompetence or is brain defective (i.e., “idiot”). I guess one can earn brownie points for proving their ideological purity that way. But that doesn’t help the cause.
I definitely agree, If we dont who will. The problem is the science is complex and most people can only grasp it in baby steps. They dont have the backgrounds to distinguish good and bad science. Most everyone agrees there is a greenhouse effect and CO2 is rising. Those with an alarmist perspective, journalists and the public, then make simplistic horrible assumptions because they are easily understood.
So any unusual temperature is likely due to CO2. Most dont understand fohn storms because the physics is more complex. Warmer temperatures increase evaporation, so they are easily persuaded CO2 causes drought and dry land increases fire. Drought caused by natural oscillations that deliver more or less rain are more complicated to understand.
We need to help people understand in easily understood baby steps.
Highly educated idiots? Sorry, but I know far too many people with advanced degrees who simply refuse to even discuss the topic because of what they read in the NY Times or hear on NPR. To me, that makes them idiots – just like those who fell hook, line, and sinker for all the COVID bs, because they refused to consider that just maybe, big pharma paid big bucks to buy off the media and a lot of politicians. Quite a good investment on their part.
A lot of people are “highly educated” but not in the physical sciences.
When they read repeatedly that there is a “scientific consensus” on global warming, they won’t really have any basis on which to challenge that. Again, that doesn’t make them idiots – it just means that nobody who IS scientifically literate in the physical sciences has yet to educate them effectively on how global warming alarmism has little to no scientific basis.
Rather than label them “idiots” it behooves us to be that person who is scientifically literate in the physical sciences who says to them, “hey, wait a second … you should be more skeptical of what you read in the popular media. Actually there are LOTs of experts who disagree with the alarmists, not because they’re paid shills of the oil companies, but rather because they ARE scientifically literate and the case for man caused global warming is far weaker than you think.”
Approaching people respectfully like that is much more effective than calling them “idiots”. It’s the old “you catch more flies with honey than vinegar” thing.
The socialist boss of the NPR in Albany, NY just retired at the age of 81. His salary was 300K/yr. Not bad for a lefty! The station is 100% woke.
The question becomes, did his organization train a next generation? Probably yes. One political side seems much more apt at selling their case.
Saying their audience might be idiots is a bit strong. I would posit that their audience is ingesting the information sans a critical thinking filter. With no other knowledge on the circumstances controling CC would cause them to accept the pronouncements of NPR as gospel. I would condem the reporters before besmirching the audience.
The not-so-unique case of people without a thinking filter congregating, as in birds of a feather, …..
I’m guessing that the lack of a “critical thinking filter” is precisely what some are summing up as “idiots.”
After three and a half ever more strident decades of propaganda about the “climate” and our alleged impact on it, with nary a “prediction” that has reached its expiration date being anywhere remotely close to reality, people should be much further along in figuring it out.
The author admitted” “I listen to NPR radio to hear what fake climate propaganda they’re pushing.”
He might seem to be in an extreme minority there, but remember that the general population is about 50/50, and also wonder who might listen to car radio broadcasts.
They may be of diminished intellect, but NPR audience members have very high self-esteem.
Brain-washed, Media-besotted “NPR listeners”, who have been deceived to believe, they are an elite, special breed of people.
They think, anything from GOVERNMENT-SUBSIDIZED, VIEWER-SUPPORTED NPR, is as true as the Good Housekeeping seal.
We all know their audience is mentally ill. We finally have confirmation, which of course the MSM is trying to hide.
Try here for one of many current articles on their questionable mental state.
Thanks for the authentic meteorology lesson Jim!
I listen to NPR too. They have some great human interest and non climate science stuff.
But they have tunnel vision, fake climate crisis derangement syndrome that takes them to the land of exaggeration of extreme weather/climate and junk science as a rule, not as the exception.
This can’t be repeated enough and applies to your wonderful authentic science:
It really boils down to this (Cliff Mass can be counted on as an elite source for using objective, authentic science)
https://cliffmass.blogspot.com/2016/03/the-golden-rule-of-climate-extremes.html
The Golden Rule
Considering the substantial confusion in the media about this critical issue, let me provide the GOLDEN RULE OF CLIMATE EXTREMES.
Here it is:
The more extreme a climate or weather record is, the greater the contribution of natural variability.
Or to put it a different way, the larger or more unusual an extreme, the higher proportion of the extreme is due to natural variability.
I also listen to NPR because they have the best local weather information in the area. However, when I listen to a story about a topic I know little about, I always remind myself how deceptive and twisted their stories are on things I know a lot about. I heard this particular story this morning, and figured something major was left out. Thanks to Jim, now I know what.
Great point! We can’t all be experts on everything, which is a fact that many news reporting sources will exploit on many topics. They make a living by gathering information, then reporting what they find. In the process they can learn a great deal more than the average listener or reader knows about many topics. This introduces the opportunity to spin the news and information with a biased interpretation. Since most sources with a blatant political bias, like NPR have listeners that come there to hear biased interpretations of the news, reporters can spin, exaggerate and propagandize with impunity because their twisted stories are being received by brains that assume ALL of it is authentic with no skepticism.
Like the butcher’s thumb on the scale the media has their hand on the reality control knob. Nowadays it goes way beyond print, moving to aural and animated video. Even the food.
Authors like Bradbury (Fahrenheit 451) and Dick (The Penultimate Truth) exposed these mental distortions decades ago. However authors like the Sturgatsky brothers (Hard to be a God) had a different take on the ethics of reality control.
The Golden Rule of Government: Governments always lie to you.
Sadly true in many cases, Dave. Most people can clearly see lies from the political side that they oppose. That’s because we fact check things that we don’t want to believe.
However, when the political side that we align with tells a lie, it usually gets a free pass because we want to believe it.
the Scientific Method compels us to scrutinize what we believe in too…… fact check it to help reduce cognitive bias that all humans have.
NPR aside, Chinooks are an interesting phenomenon. Here above my weather station is the “Chinook arch”. This is caused by what Civil engineers of dams call the “hydraulic jump” where the high velocity of a stream down a slope reaches the slow moving body downstream and jumps to a new height. In the atmosphere, the lapse rate causes cloud to form as the local atmosphere moves upward. In this case, my camera overlooking the weather station is about 45 miles from the downslope of the Rockies in the distance, and the arch itself is 10-15 miles away. Later in the day it was overhead.
Where are you located Mac?
Near Calgary, Alberta.
Thanks!
i love your slogan “be part of the energy”. Canada’s #1 source for reliable fossil fuels by a wide margin being Alberta.
Gave up on NPR years ago. Stopped after Prairie Home Companion with Garrison Keillor went off the air. Lake Wobegon, where all the children are above average…
> “Lake Wobegon, where all the children are above average…”
Tomato Wars! People building greenhouses connected to their basement windows to get an early start. Keillor at his best.
And the men good are looking. Strong women? Meh.
I always loved Prairie Home Companion and sometimes wondered how they “got away with” family values and traditional roles.
For some odd reason, my radio won’t tune into NPR.
I found and read the transcript. The reporter is listed as Aaron Bolton, a Statewide health care reporter. He is a graduate of the University of Minnesota School of Journalism (2015). He’s a Goldy Gopher. Yikes!
He likely thinks a lapse rate has something to do with NASCAR or the Indianapolis Speedway.
He had several folks that seem knowledgeable but was so intent on his climate-scare approach that he did not hear what they were telling him. He should spend a year in Bozeman and take several intro physical science classes as a freshman Bobcat.
Most of the students I deal with in the journalism major take the easiest science class that will check the degree box and run from math like the plague. Their transcripts usually show “College Math” and one of the three: “Introduction to the Planet” (dumbed down bio course that should be taught in 7th grade), “Physical Science” (a bare bones repeat of 9th grade science,) or “Astronomy” (which is a very basic introduction to stars and gravity systems – these are the more ambitious ones.) After those two courses are knocked out, they never look to the maths or sciences again.
JH: “He likely thinks”
OG: “Most of the students“
I don’t know how any sane person can stomach listening to npr anymore. They are really beyond parody with their über-woke descriptions like non-binary undocumented immigrant sex worker. The only time I really enjoyed listening was in November 2016 when their tears were so delicious.
I stopped years ago when they aired a misleading story about maternity care in a California hospital. They compassionately reported how mothers were experiencing a myriad of birthing problems. After listening to the horrors for half an hour it became obvious that the “mothers” were undernourished but overweight hispanics who had no prenatal care. But the report laid blame on the evil capitalist hospital and staff.
Like the show 60 Minutes, every time NPR had a program on about something I knew about they misled or outright lied. Its been decades since I watched or listened to either of the propaganda outlets.
My ability to suffer NPR nonsense news completely dried up around 1990.
As much as I loved some of their music programs (Jazz, Bluegrass, Classical), I became unwilling to sit through five minutes of lies in order to listen to five minutes of music.
That some of NPR announcers continued talking through the music was especially irritating.
As I said above, I listen because they do the best weather coverage in my area (tornado alley). Otherwise I throw stuff at the radio–or at least I want to. But I don’t want to put a hole in the wall. And yes, November 2016 was priceless.
I used to set my clock radio to wake up with ‘Morning Sedition’ on WAMU (DC affiliate). Much more entertaining than using the snooze button was to see how long it would take Steve Inskeep to commit a logical fallacy or say something I knew to be completely bogus.
Morning sedation…,
Morning Sedition…
“se·di·tion noun
“
SI suffers his team’s shared burden – how does one continue a philosophy of rebellion against convention after one has become quintessentially conventional? The weight of materialism and existentialism crushes.
‘(H)ow does one continue a philosophy of rebellion against convention after one has become quintessentially conventional?’
NPR will not become conventional as long as there are any vestiges of ‘classical liberalism’ in existence. In other words, until all media becomes State media.
“Fohn winds dry as the water vapor in the rising winds, condenses leaving snow over the Rocky Mtns at higher elevations…”
Steele is still comma-challenged.
Thanks so much for your insightful comment Jeff. Indeed, editing my comment and rearranging sentences, I missed that inappropriate leftover comma. I am guessing though most intelligent people wont let my mistake interfere with the science presented. Hopefully you still learned something.
Thanks for all you do Jim. My mind automatically corrects misspellings and punctuation errors; not worth the effort to prove the author is less worthy than me.
Dave,
Interesting observation.
My linguist non-scientific wife always has a moan about bad spelling, grammer, syntax and general abuse of the English language. My non-linguistic brain autocorrects so while she’s trying to work out what is meant I haven’t even noticed the problem. I long ago decided that she reads assuming there are no errors in grammer, syntax, spelling and meaning and has dificulty coping when there are. WhatsApp messages with autocorrect often cause her great distress!
And you, Jeff, are still demonstrably challenged when it comes to discerning whether a matter is significant enough to warrant the offense given and embarrassment imposed when one publicly corrects someone.
Did you intend to ridicule Jim out of disagreement with the content, or were you simply oblivious to the effect of your words?
He likely is an NPR-listener; knows his punctuation
What an a.. hole
This has been a constant problem with Mr Steele’s posts. Don’t you think it’s important to proofread a thing or two, or have someone else proofread, when presenting something for international consumption?
No ridicule was intended, just an observation that no one else seems to care about.
And no, wilpost, not an NPR listener.
Frankly, I dont give a damn! That such a minor mistake would render you incapable of understanding the content, behave like a comma nazi, give priority to a comma vs NPR brainwashing, amplify it as a constant problem, act like an annoying troll, and fail to discuss the science only motivates me to ignore you completely!
Dr Steele, Thanks for the great article. Unlike folks such as Mr Fair or Mr Vorlich, my reading stumbles to a stop with things like misplaced commas. I no longer read at 3,000 wpm, but I am still accustomed to reading articles quickly. Those punctuation glitches make me stop, go back, and read slowly to extract the meaning. Not that I can’t, but it is disconcerting and annoying. Please understand that some of us both appreciate your gift of time, expertise, and insight and long for a perfect paragraph expressing it. I hope everyone would prefer good content to good presentation, but I confess to sympathy with the grammar National Socialist Workers’ Party from time to time.
Alleged instruction from a 1930s newspaper editor. “We are over budget on commas. Only use periods until further notice.”
John, I agree that ideally perfect punctuation would make for a perfect read and I appreciate your thoughts. I do strive to achieve that perfection.
Nonetheless, as I strive for a clear linear flow of thought, I rearrange my first versions several times by cutting and pasting. Fragments of the old versions sometimes remain in the wrong place. After reading numerous versions I go blind to certain minutiae. That’s why writers have editors. However, I don’t. If Jeff Alberts simply said “Your punctuation would improve by removing that comma” I would have been thankful.
But Jeff Alberts replied in a self-righteous insulting manner. So, despite his conciseness and perfect punctuation, he comes across as an a-hole who I will forever simply ignore.
Have you considered the fact that Jim is volunteering his time and talents? He’s not doing it to make himself feel important or overcome insecurity about being irrelevant or to prove to himself that he’s oh so smart.
The irony isn’t lost on me that I’m publicly correcting you for publicly correcting somebody.
Most English, English Literature, Journalism, American Literature majors have difficulty rising above minor writing errors. Instead, they are more likely to obsess over someone’s writing than to ‘let go’.
It gets better when two or more degreed English majors are present as they argue begin to with each other over grammar and words.
These arguments frequently get nasty.
From Merriam’s:
“comma nouncom·ma ˈkä-mə
: a punctuation mark, used especially as a mark of separation within the sentence
: PAUSE, INTERVAL”
N.B., note that a comma is not defined as ‘necessary’. It is a grammatical mark that aids the reader, but is not essential or necessary to the writing itself.
Critiquing somebody’s use of commas is a childish much ado about nothing.
It’s when people write sentences with multiple subject or object possibilities that bother me. Commas are a major failure to communicate contribution in sentences with multiple/missing subjects and objects.
Worst of all is when people write huge blocks of dense subject matter, often forgetting to start a new line when the subject/topic changes.
This is a common attribute of research papers where one alleged paragraph becomes impenetrable without identifying leading or critical subjects.
Commas used in research papers occlude and obscure findings as authors use run-on sentences, apparently purposely to to avoid clear definitive sentences.
Failure to use verbs or adverbs properly is another irk.
It is always dangerous when journalists pretend to be scientists or engineers, explaining technical subjects to the great unwashed masses.
Weather is highly variable and subject to well documented cycles of extreme events. Extreme just means a large variance from the mean, but not especially or necessarily unusual variations.
Fires are not weather or climate events, though recent weather can influence the rate at which a wildfire moves. Places that routinely experience wildfires are places that normally experience seasonal variations in precipitation, with a wet season and a dry season every year. Fires spread much faster in dry season, always, and it has nothing to do with “climate change”. And then there are longer term variable cycles in precip, year to year, multi year to multi year, decade to decade, century to century, and across multiple millennia. It is all “normal” variation, and does not mean that climate is changing.
Do we even know what is the statistical distribution of weather – locally over time? I suspect it is far from Gaussian, a usual assumption used to generate alarm.
It’s like “drought” in the South West of the USA. We get 7(ish) dry years and 3 wet in a decade. The mean rainfall (total rain/total years) is higher than any dry year, so by that measure we are almost always in a drought. But the median and modal averages say that the low “drought” years are normal. Oddly, when we get one of our rainy years, the same folks that claim dry years are droughts suddenly panic about the “catastrophic” deluge and wonder if the infrastructure can cope. Is there really a place that has average rainfall every year? Can we ship our idiots (term of art, used advisedly) there?
Does everyone understand that NPR is paid more whenever they mention “climate change?”
Can you demonstrate that is true?
I found this Tom Nelson podcast about media and the climate quite interesting…
https://youtu.be/yHhIdTH1oRc
I don’t intend to spend 43 minutes listening. Is there a transcript?
Is NPR one of the “news” organizations getting money for climate reporting? Here (if the copy and paste works) is AP’s crowing about their and other news organizations’ getting money from Leftist NGOs:
https://apnews.com/article/science-business-arts-and-entertainment-journalism-united-states-087d1d5dd7189c529fe5d7a21a1ffb5f
https://apnews.com/article/science-business-arts-and-entertainment-journalism-united-states-087d1d5dd7189c529fe5d7a21a1ffb5f
Anyway, numerous news outlets are accepting funding from Leftist NGOs to do “reporting” on items of interest to said NGOs. They all proclaim loudly that such a practice does not influence their reporting. Sure.
A quick check shows NPR recently stated: “Together, we are increasingly engaging philanthropic partners at high levels. These individuals and families are interested in supporting transformational, strategic advancements in public media’s capacity to meet major societal needs.” In other words Leftist propaganda, including climate crisis lies.
In 2010 NPR got $1.2 million from George Soros’ Open Society Foundation. According to NPR in 2017 as a percentage of revenues they got 10% from foundation donors and 10% from university licensing and donations. No bias there, Shirley.
Excellent stuff. We need more real scientists to call out this lie of attribution of individual events to AGW.
I presume the tweet is post Musk, hence it did not get removed?
Perhaps Jim and Ian Plimer should collaborate and engage with more scientists to help them start speaking out on this stuff.
Professors start at 40ish and retire at 70ish – so the current crop learned their politics between 1960 and 1990. It would be remarkable if an adult were to change what they believe based on what they read here (anywhere) – especially if the adult had spent their professional life guiding less experienced minds through a learning process.
In other words – big changes coming if you can wait 20 years. Post-1980 morality is going to be … interesting?
I have more confidence in Jim Steele than all of public broadcasting no matter what form.
They aren’t called National Propaganda Radio for nothing…
RE: “Climate change is increasing the fire risk on the mostly treeless Great Plains”
Why does this reporter seem surprised about grass fires on the plains?
http://www.rmtrr.org/data/Brownetal_2015_CJFR.pdf
See “fig 3” for historical fires (since 1600’s) along the front range, Boulder, Colorado
According to CSU professor Peter Brown
4.1. Fire and stand age history
As in ponderosa pine forests throughout its range, widespread episodic fires ceased largely coeval with Euro–American settlement. The last fire recorded in more than one plot occurred in 1859 (Fig. 3), the beginning of the gold rush that brought intensive Euro–American settlement along with accompanying changes in land use. Widespread livestock grazing was probably the initial cause of fire cessation. A pattern of fire exclusion after introduction of grazing is common in dry conifer ecosystems throughout western North America.
Big fires – at least hot enough to scorch trees – were not uncommon before settlers along the front range of the Rockies.
Bill Parsons demonstrates the value of the Internet to anyone willing to read to the bottom – someone else will identify the important question, find its answer and post a link.
My morning commute had been marked by NPR’s daily Gulf War death count. I remember the way it always seemed to happen at a particular spot on the drive every day. The voices got so excited as the number approached 1000. Then, after the 2008 election, the daily death count disappeared. Any number of things might have happened – maybe I’m not the only listener who noticed the misplaced joy and anticipation and the producer cancelled the bit. I chose to attribute the instant change to politics. The car I drive to work today has Bluetooth audio, so I listen to podcasts instead.
Thank you Jim. Your story made me think of the Marshall Fire, December 30, 2021, which NPR reported as “the most destructive wildfire ever in Colorado history.” We’re in familiar territory with: “Climate change is increasing the fire risk on the mostly treeless Great Plains”. You remind us that the foehn winds or chinooks are likely fanning the fires across the plains. I did a bit of research to see that these fires were not uncommon in the past.
Fanned by the chinook winds grass fires can be every bit as devastating as forest fires, and that is what the Marshall Fire was. A wet spring, unmentioned in news reports, led to heavy grass growth, followed by a dry summer. Before White settlers, fires were no doubt a feature along the foothills, fuelled as much by the ponderosa pine and juniper as by the profuse grasses. European settlers brought mining, logging and grazing animals, and our memories of the devastating fires has faded.
Now we consider the grasses and abundant steppe flora along the foothills a treasure and Boulder Open Space Parks keeps an inventory.
The grassland plant communities on Marshall Mesa are native mixedgrass prairie and xeric tallgrass prairie. Dominant native grass species in these communities are western wheatgrass, blue grama, buffalograss, big bluestem, little bluestem, needle and threadgrass, and purple three awn. This vegetation is relatively short in stature (usually less than 2 feet high), especially under the regular cattle grazing regime. (E-mail from Boulder Open Space Parks Manager)
As exercised as they were about Marshall Fire, NPR’s “All Things Considered” was hyperventilating about the March “NCAR Fire” which crept up Table Mesa toward greens’ climate Mecca (NCAR is the National Center for Atmospheric Research). There were rumblings about suspicious activities, but who needs a pyromaniac if you’ve got AGW?
Boulder Fire Chief Brian Oliver expounded, “Climate change… is bringing the fires into the city.”
Secretary of the Interior Deb Haaland was dispatched for briefings here along with Senatory Michael Bennet, and Democratic congressman Joe Neguse claimed, “It is clear that fire seasons no longer exist here in Colorado, we have fire years.”
Forest Service Chief Randy Moore opined, “We got a significant problem here across the West. Not only do we have overgrown forests, not only do we have warming climate, not only do we have bugs and insect problems — but when you look at the amount of homes being built in the urban interface…”
The USDA launched a 131 million dollar plan to mitigate prime wildfire locations many of which are in Colorado.
I think what sets these front range fires apart from other recent fires in the U.S. is that their primary vector appears to be grass, not forest.
According to CSU professor Peter Brown
4.1. Fire and stand age history
As in ponderosa pine forests throughout its range, widespread episodic fires ceased largely coeval with Euro–American settlement. The last fire recorded in more than one plot occurred in 1859 (Fig. 3), the beginning of the gold rush that brought intensive Euro–American settlement along with accompanying changes in land use. Widespread livestock grazing was probably the initial cause of fire cessation. A pattern of fire exclusion after introduction of grazing is common in dry conifer ecosystems throughout western North America
file:///C:/Users/bpaul/AppData/Local/Temp/msohtmlclip1/01/clip_image002.jpg
http://www.rmtrr.org/data/Brownetal_2015_CJFR.pdf
Brown et al states:
… over the long term, managers — and more importantly, policymakers and the general public — must consider permitting managed wildfire use where naturally ignited fires are allowed to burn over selected areas under less extreme weather conditions.
Historical (1860) forest structure in ponderosa pine forests of
the northern Front Range, Colorado
Peter M. Brown, Michael A. Battaglia, Paula J. Fornwalt, Benjamin Gannon, Laurie S. Huckaby, Chad Julian, and Antony S. Cheng
So the question is what has brought the grass fires back into the public consciousness. The Chinook winds haven’t changed. The geography is the same, the grasses are (as far as I know) by and large the same with the addition of some invaders. My speculation is that it’s the population growth along the front range. Instead of the “urban / forest interface” it is now an “urban / grassland interface” that threatens. And that can be just as deadly.
Good analysis Bill! I too was taken aback by NPR reporting on the Marshall Fire and blogged “Colorado’s Marshall Fire: Has Funding Needs Corrupted Climate Science?” https://perhapsallnatural.blogspot.com/2022/01/colorados-marshall-fire-has-funding.html
Amazing how Journalists and School teachers think they know far more than the average person when in reality the vast majority of them get the easiest degree at college and are still in the bottom quartile of graduating class.
“Journalists and School teachers think“
“Steele also brings up the concept of the winter jet stream and its role in producing strong winter Chinooks or fohn winds in eastern Montana. Steele elucidates.
If a weather event has happened often enough and long ago enough to be given a local name, how would it happening again be an indication of “Climate Change”?
The person reporting it never experienced if before, it is “unprecedented”. It had an unhappy outcome. Alternatively, things came out OK, but it was scary. Scary weather that I’m personally unfamiliar with is clearly Climate Change (TM).
The weather has gotten a lot worse since they put video cameras in cell phones!