Re: The unspoken truth about wildfires

On 7/31/26 1:28 PM, Tara wrote:
> On Jul 31, 2026 at 4:02:41 PM EDT, "Tara" <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
>> On Jul 31, 2026 at 3:46:18 PM EDT, "dart200"
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> On 7/31/26 12:35 PM, Tara wrote:
>>>> On Jul 31, 2026 at 3:11:12 PM EDT, "dart200"
>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 7/31/26 11:25 AM, Julian wrote:
>>>>>> On 31/07/2026 19:06, Tara wrote:
>>>>>>> On Jul 31, 2026 at 12:40:32 PM EDT, "Wilson" <[email protected]>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 7/30/2026 3:50 PM, Tara wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Julian <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 30/07/2026 19:56, Tara wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On Jul 30, 2026 at 2:53:09 PM EDT, "Julian"
>>>>>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 30/07/2026 19:29, Tara wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Jul 30, 2026 at 2:04:17 PM EDT, "Julian"
>>>>>>>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sadly he was proved right. So was I. After I warned in these
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> very pages
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> last year that government policy was worsening the fire risk on
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> moorland, it gives me no pleasure to say: ‘I told you so.’
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Matt Ridley
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Indigenous peoples in North America have been conrolling the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> threat of wild
>>>>>>>>>>>>> fires with prescribed/controlled burns for centuries. Canada is
>>>>>>>>>>>>> looking to do
>>>>>>>>>>>>> the same in co-operation with our native people. We have a
>>>>>>>>>>>>> problem doing this
>>>>>>>>>>>>> however because of the acessibility and vastness of our forests.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> But in a
>>>>>>>>>>>>> country the size of Britain (and other European countries), it
>>>>>>>>>>>>> seems to me
>>>>>>>>>>>>> that controlled fires are a no brainer.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Are inaccessible fires in vast forests really a problem?
>>>>>>>>>>>> I think they're as likely good for the land's long term health.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> There is that, but an uncontrolled fire can massively grow and
>>>>>>>>>>> send a lot of
>>>>>>>>>>> smoke to people populated areas.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> A bit like a volcano.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Yeah like that.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The northeast US is hundreds of miles from the wildfires yet we've had
>>>>>>>> serious air quality warnings this year and last. A few weeks ago it
>>>>>>>> literally dimmed the sun for several days, making what was otherwise a
>>>>>>>> clear day look cloudy.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> https://www.cbsnews.com/news/wildfires-smoke-millions-exposed-
>>>>>>>> midwest-northeast-us/
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Those pictures are not an exaggeration. That's what it really looked
>>>>>>>> like.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Meanwhile the idiot treehuggers think they know what's best.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I am an admitted tree hugger but I am also a realist and think that
>>>>>>> one answer
>>>>>>> here is controlled burning. Another is education and strictly enforced
>>>>>>> laws
>>>>>>> against those who are careless and start fires through laziness and
>>>>>>> ignorance,
>>>>>>> clearing vegetation around and near dwellings and building fire resistent
>>>>>>> homes.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That would probably be more effective than increasing the price
>>>>>> of petrol, gas and electricity for already stretched workers.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> jooliean you truly are a useless fucking retard. this ofc isn't written
>>>>> for u cause ur determined to take ur damned ignorance to the grave, but
>>>>> for the record:
>>>>>
>>>>> not only are boreal forest are far too vast to effectively mitigate
>>>>> increased risk from climate change, meaning we haven't even been
>>>>> engaging in serious fire suppression for the much of forest so that's
>>>>> _not_ the cause like cons desperate wants to believe; just controlled
>>>>> burns don't even effectively mitigate risk as the ecology of a boreal
>>>>> forest is different than a temperate one, so it requires fuel management
>>>>> strategies that are far more labor intensive
>>>>
>>>> Ummm. if you care to look back a bit, the problem with boreal forests (in
>>>> Canada) has already been addressed.
>>>
>>> why are you such a dumb fucking liar tara???
>>>
>>> all u discussed was the size of the forest, u did not discuss the fact
>>> the conventional controlled burns do not effectively mitigate fire risk
>>> in boreal forests, nor the increased costs of the various techniques
>>> that must be employed instead
>>>
>>> and you still haven't even after i've pointed it out in several posts.
>>> clear evidence of refusing to face the facts like a retarded boomer
> 
> Of course we can't do anything about fires in the boreal forest. That's a
> given ffs We can only do what we can to protect the boundaries. !!!
> Idiot!
> 

great so u never mentioned that to joolian or his mindbogglingly stupid 
article

u only admitted it after i pressed for several comments, so i have no 
reason to believe u would have ever mentioned it otherwise.

> 
>>>
>>>> classic fucking abdfg con
>>>>
>>>> #god
>>
>>

-- 
why are we god?
let's end war 🙃