Re: The unspoken truth about wildfires

dart200 <[email protected]> wrote:
> 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.

Chill. I think I said something to the effect that we have vast forest that
we can’t do anything about. Maybe not but I don’t understand why you’re so
on about it. Pick the battles that matter. Or maybe just take a break eh 



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