
The Associated Press (AP) claims in “Wildfires Used To ‘Go To Sleep’ At Night. Climate Change Has Them Burning Overtime” that human-caused climate change is causing fires to burn later into the night and earlier in the morning. Dozens of media outlets picked up the story. This is false. Wind-driven wildfires have burned intensely at night throughout recorded history, and the article relies on selective data, model correlation, and climate framing rather than historical context and fire science.
The AP asserts that “burning time for North American wildfires is going into overtime” and that the number of hours favorable for wildfire is 36 percent higher than 50 years ago. It ties this to warmer nighttime temperatures and implies that fires “used to die down or even die out at night” but now persist because of climate change.
That framing is historically inaccurate.
Wildfires do not “go to sleep” because the clock strikes sunset. They slow when humidity rises, temperatures fall, and winds calm. When those meteorological conditions do not improve at night, fires continue to burn. That has always been true.
Both of the major fires cited by the AP were driven by extreme wind events, not by some novel nighttime warming effect.
The 2025 Eaton Fire in California was sparked by electrical power system failures during a severe windstorm event. The Palisades Fire was determined to be intentionally set by an arsonist. Ignition sources matter. Neither fire began because of climate change. Both were driven by powerful, sustained winds common to the areas during that time of year, which remained intense overnight.
When winds remain strong, fires burn. When humidity remains low, fires burn. When fuels are dry and abundant, fires burn. Day or night.
The AP acknowledges that its analysis “looked at times when conditions were ripe for fire, but that didn’t mean fires occurred during all that time.” In other words, the study measured modeled fire-weather conditions, not actual fire behavior. It created a computer model correlating atmospheric variables and fire status. That is not the same as demonstrating a causal trend in wildfire intensity.
Models are not observations.
The article also claims that U.S. wildfire area burned from 2016 to 2025 averaged 2.6 times the 1980s average. That statistic is frequently cited without context. As documented in Climate at a Glance’s review of U.S. wildfire data, the apparent increase since the 1980s largely reflects data handling changes and forest and fire management changes. Concerning the former, the National Interagency Fire Center removed large pre-1983 fires from its database and altered methodology. When those earlier fires are restored, the long-term upward trend disappears, as seen in Figure 1 below.

Graph by Anthony Watts
In fact, historical wildfire acreage in the United States was far greater in the early 1900s than in recent decades. Before modern fire suppression, millions of acres routinely burned each year. The 1910 “Big Blowup” fire burned approximately three million acres in Idaho and Montana in a matter of days. That was well before “climate change” became the universal media boogeyman for anything abnormal or new.
Indigenous burning practices across North America sustained frequent, widespread fires for centuries. The idea that intense fires are a new nighttime phenomenon is ahistorical.
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Sixth Assessment Report (AR6) shows no global increase in burned area attributable to climate change. AR6 states there is low confidence in long-term global trends in burned area due to inconsistent data and regional variability. See Figure 2 below.

In fact, global satellite records indicate a decline in total burned area over recent decades, largely due to agricultural expansion and land management changes.
What has changed in the American West is land management. Decades of aggressive fire suppression and reduced logging have allowed fuel loads to accumulate. Climate Realism has documented the impact of changed forest management policies on wildfires in dozens of posts. Forests are denser than they were historically. When ignitions occur under strong wind events, the resulting fires are intense. That is a fuel problem compounded by ignition sources, not proof that nights have become climatically incapable of suppressing fire.
The AP also emphasizes that nighttime temperatures have warmed slightly since 1975. But a 2-degree Fahrenheit increase over 50 years does not override wind speeds of 40, 60, or 80 miles per hour. The Lahaina fire, for example, was driven by hurricane-force downslope winds associated with a pressure gradient event. Wind shear and turbulence do not cease because the sun sets. NASA reports:
The National Weather Service reported wind gusts as high as 67 mph in the area, which helped to quickly spread the wildfire across much of Lahaina during the afternoon hours of August 8. The intense winds was further aided by a sharp pressure gradient caused by Hurricane Dora, a Category 4 hurricane approximately 500 miles south of the islands when the fire began. As Hurricane Dora exerted its influence, the gap wind persisted from August 7 to 9, creating ideal conditions for the rapid progression and expansion of a small brush fire to a wildfire that would consume much of the town of Lahaina.
Fire behavior is dominated by meteorology plus available fuel, oxygen, and heat. Wind supplies oxygen and spreads embers. When winds are strong, flames intensify. When winds persist overnight, so do fires.
The AP has taken a computer-model correlation study, stripped it of historical context, ignored ignition causes and fuel build up, downplayed wind events, and presented it as evidence that climate change has fundamentally altered fire physics. It hasn’t.
Wind-driven fires have burned at night before. They will burn at night again. That is not a new phenomenon.
The AP’s story does not represent accurate reporting. It is climate narrative reinforcement layered on top of selective data and incomplete history. The Associated Press should be ashamed to foist this sort of “junk journalism” on readers.

Anthony Watts is a senior fellow for environment and climate at The Heartland Institute. Watts has been in the weather business both in front of, and behind the camera as an on-air television meteorologist since 1978, and currently does daily radio forecasts. He has created weather graphics presentation systems for television, specialized weather instrumentation, as well as co-authored peer-reviewed papers on climate issues. He operates the most viewed website in the world on climate, the award-winning website wattsupwiththat.com.
Originally posted at ClimateREALISM
Is there no journalist in the world of the woke who does not know that fires in forests are normal and natural and have occurred from even before animals with backbones arrived on the land.
Maybe they do not know that wood decomposing bacteria and fungi evolved later than wood itself, and while lignin and plant celluloses could not be decomposed the fixed carbon accumulated as coal deposits all over the lands which supported tree growth. That was the time of peak oxygen level in the atmosphere making fires very easily started. The fires recycled the carbon as carbon dioxide but could not match the accumulation so the carbon dioxide level eventually fell so low that photosynthesis was becoming very inefficient and all life on earth was threatened.
Sure, forest fires go to sleep at night, everyone knows that! That’s so they wake up refreshed the next day, to get on with the destruction with renewed vigor!
I’m no Einstein but it’s hard for me to imagine the lack of intelligence and common sense that would make it possible to entertain a stupid idea like this for more than several nanoseconds…much less publish it. I guess all of them, the computer study authors, the reporters, the editors, the layers of fact checkers, are all as dumb as doorknobs…
Ebenezer Scrooge’s doorknocker was fairly smart.
The AP is no longer a news organization, it does paid public relations for philanthropic organizations opposed to fossil fuels. According to Google:
The Associated Press (AP) receives funding from several philanthropic foundations and organizations that actively promote a transition away from fossil fuels and support climate change initiatives. These donors, such as the KR Foundationand The Rockefeller Foundation, have provided millions of dollars to support the AP’s climate reporting, a practice the AP maintains does not influence its editorial independence. http://www.ap.org
+2
Key details regarding AP’s climate funding include:
The AP reports that it works with these organizations to expand its reporting resources on topics like environmentalism, water, and climate change.
This could be easily tested by a rich republican donating a similar amount for AP to create and staff a Climate Realist Desk to present non model based climate data and temperature actuals
A great idea that would fail.
Sensationalism sells.
Words matter, especially hyperbole, but facts, especially inconvenient facts, do not.
Which would then show APs real Slanted “Editorial Independence” wouldn’t it?
And the AP also has the nerve to ask for donations from on-line readers of their articles…saying you should support “independent” journalism! Of course they are not independent, nor do they represent journalism – they are locked-in to the leftist point of view, and what they do is propaganda not journalism.
From what I’ve been able to determine, it’s not just the fact of sustained winds in SoCal that plays a major factor into feeding the fires, it is the physical mechanism that creates… not only the winds but also lower humidity.
SoCal has unique geography in that it has high desert and mountains surrounding the valleys in the area with the unique shape that allows the Santa Anna winds to exists. When the high desert is cool the cool, desert air tends to seek the ground but, because the ‘ground’ is a few thousand feet below, the ‘falling’ air finds the multiple paths from the high desert to to valleys below and then the fun starts.
As the cool desert air falls the few thousand feet to the valley floor it encounters adiabatic heating, i.e. when a gas is compressed, causing its temperature to rise without any heat exchange with the environment. But, not only is the air heating up but it is ‘drying out’, relative humidity speaking.
The way I’ve seen it described, it is now that the fun… and geography… begins to really come into play. As the air ‘falls’ and heats up, the air in the high desert experiences a slight loss of pressure and the air that has fallen to the ‘floor’ has both increased in pressure and heated up forcing the valley air to rise in the atmosphere, ultimately flowing into the ‘lower’ pressure in the colder high desert and… ultimately, setting up a circulating flow from the high desert to the valley and back to the high desert.
Wind speeds in the recirculating pattern can reach hurricane force with the air reaching the valley floor being both dry and accelerated to hurricane force on a sustained basis.
It takes a tremendous change in atmospheric conditions to break up these Santa Anna winds but, in the meantime, as long as there is fuel the recirculating winds just continue to fan the flames until something changes, weather-wise.
I worked the San Diego fire as a volunteer and one thing was clear when I talked to the fire crews that were fighting the fires, nobody in the firefighting profession were in control of the fire and the only thing that allowed the crews from around the US to gain control of the fires was moist, cool, ocean air penetrating deep enough into the SoCal plains that they destroyed the dynamic that fed the fires in the first place.
The fires might ‘go to sleep’, so to speak, at night but only because of the temperature gradients being such that the circulating pattern of the ‘falling air’ doesn’t create the conditions to have the same velocity as they have during the day because the valley has ‘cooled’ after the Sun went down.
I’m an experienced backpacker and have made many small fires to cook and boil water. But for years I camped only in the eastern US. When first I backpacked in the west in the 1970s, in Kings Canyon National Park, I found out first-hand the drastic and alarming difference in fire ignition and spread. It was bone dry, with just a little wind. So I cleared an area about 10′ in diameter and made a small fire to boil water. The small twigs burned easily and intensely. Almost immediately some sparks escaped the cleared circle and in turn started other little fires. I spent the better part of an hour trying to stamp out all the little fires that started and for a while I didn’t think I’d be able to put them all out!
The combination of bone dry fuel, low humidity, and even a little wind can allow even one tiny spark to start a huge forest fire.
Oh there you go. Confusing everyone with facts and science. /s
A very good explanation. Thank you.
When the King of England can waltz in front of Congress, babble on about the end of polar ice and no one in the press or elsewhere will do anything but cheer him on, it’s a lost cause.
Expecting the press to be anything other than a cheerleader for the apocalypse is simply wishful thinking.
Another dossy: The Chinchaga Fire of 1950. Burning in Canada, it caused the “1950 Great Smoke Pall”, observed across eastern North America and Europe. Communications were slow in 1950 and some thought it was the end of the world. I {in Pennsylvania} was simply fascinated by the glowing orange sun and the darkening of the sky as the smoke thickened.
WildForest fires don’t go to sleep at night. Fire fighters go to sleep at night and Forest Fires grow overnight. The planes that fight fires can’t fly at night as terrain changes are impossible to see in the dark and difficult enough through the smoke during daylight. So Fire progression is slowed during the day but can explode overnight.Here’s a link to the study.
https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.aed0725
Junk science. They used satellite imagery to observe wildfire size during recent seasons then used computer models to estimate how many hours they think wildfires burned in the past, with no validation of their computer-generated estimates of the past. Computer models are not observations. Predicting future trends from artificial models that haven’t been validated with observations is modern haruspicy; examining goat entrails and prophesying the future. It appeals to the doomscrolling public…and that’s it. It’s entertainment, not science. Headline-seeking journalists, most of whom imbibe the same doomsaying apocalyptic Kool-Aid, have no incentive to critically analyze and notice the easily discernible problems with this junk “study” because it happily fits their gloomy narrative.
ass well as their paychecks.
Do these AP reporters think fire is a union labor force that puts its tools down at quitting time?
Humor – a difficult concept.
— Lt. Saavik
The California towns and cities in areas always under threat of wildfire should have mandatory rooftop sprinklers. There should be fire breaks kept cleared, with defensive lines of impact sprinklers that can be turned on at the right time as a fire approaches. It would have to be soon enough to soak the vegetation so the fire stops, but not too soon or the wind would evaporate the water. To go along with the sprinklers, there must be reservoirs to feed them, and kept functional – unlike the empty ones and dry fire hydrants they had this last time.
There’s a historic village in Japan where the buildings have thatched roofs, and there’s a yearly wildfire danger. The village is protected by an array of hidden water cannons which can soak the entire village in minutes. The periodic tests of the deluge system have become a tourist attraction. For buildings with far less fire *poof* materials, just keeping them damp enough to snuff out embers that land on them is enough protection.
Some people in California proved that homes could be protected by simple changes to landscaping and strategically placed sprinklers, with independent water tanks. They’re easy to spot, standing unscathed with ashes all around. The fires burned so fast that in many places palm and some other trees were barely scorched. Their water content protected them long enough for the fire to burn near-by buildings and move on.
Better yet, intelligent building codes in “wildfire prone” areas should require homes to be constructed of steel reinforced concrete, which last time I looked, does not burn.
Building WOOD FRAMED houses in the “wildcard interface” essentially guarantees those houses will burn. It’s not even a question of IF they will burn, but WHEN.
They might as well marinate the lumber in gasoline.
JP Morgan in their 15th Annual Energy Paper (March 2025) noted that from
“1990 to 2020 California built 1.5m homes in the wild fire-urban interface and from 2020 to 2022 insurance companies declined to renew 2.8m homeowner policies in California”
Modern construction has made it even worse – they’re not only “wood framed”, they don’t even need to use dimensional lumber anymore. They can now use engineered wood I-beams that burn a lot faster. There are videos that do a side-by-side of a floor constructed either way and the new floor is pretty much gone in about 5 minutes. Takes 20 for the traditional lumber one.
SEE! SEE! SEE! The upward trend since 1980???? It’s the END OF THE WORLD!!!!! GLOBAL COOLING!!! Errr, GLOBAL WARMING!!!! Errr, CLIMATE CHANGE!!!!! Yeah, that’s the ticket!
Yes, “SINCE.”
For thinking individuals, this should instantly reveal the cherry-picking and baselining subterfuge.
Does anyone really think no information exists for wildfires that occurred before 1980?!
Here’s a cup of coolaide. Drink up. /s
History began last year? Where do they get this from?
I was with the Red Cross assisting firefighters on wildfires in So.Cal during the early 80s – from direct first hand experience I can say that I never observed this phenomenon.
Fire fighting agencies know fires are burning at night but less strongly.
They are paying Coulson Aviation to fight them during the night.
A helicopter with night vision equipment and a safety monitor helicopter.
Nighttime Aerial Firefighting – Coulson Aviation
So, according to AP, all those nights I spent fighting wildfires in the dark didn’t happen?