Re: The unspoken truth about wildfires

On Mon, 03 Aug 2026 12:31:11 -0400, Noah Sombrero <[email protected]>
wrote:

>On Mon, 03 Aug 2026 12:22:15 -0400, Noah Sombrero <[email protected]>
>wrote:
>
>>On Mon, 3 Aug 2026 11:53:48 -0400, Wilson <[email protected]>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>On 8/2/2026 3:30 PM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
>>>> On Sun, 2 Aug 2026 15:19:59 -0400, Wilson <[email protected]>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> On 8/2/2026 1:10 PM, dart200 wrote:
>>>>>> On 8/2/26 9:31 AM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
>>>>>>> On Sun, 2 Aug 2026 12:21:43 -0400, Wilson <[email protected]>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I think the expectation is a warming climate will be dryer and that will
>>>>>>>> increase wildfires.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Satellite data only goes back to the 1980s. But there's solid scientific
>>>>>>>> evidence based on fire scar date from tree rings on old growth trees and
>>>>>>>> studies of sediment data that shows reconstructed wildfire history over
>>>>>>>> thousands of years.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> That evidence indicates that during the 20th century in North America
>>>>>>>> there's been fewer acres burned than in previous periods. They're
>>>>>>>> calling it a "wildfire drought".
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11811286/
>>>>>>>> https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.1112839109
>>>>>>>> https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3295264/
>>>>>>>> https://www.researchgate.net/publication/388852965
>>>>>>
>>>>>> (it's worth noting that's only 2 studies, 2 links each)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Strange how you can come up with results that show the exact opposite
>>>>>>> of accepted research.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Aren't awards for crappy research, crappy ideas?  Unnobel?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *sigh*, noah the research isn't crappy, what's crappy is wilson's
>>>>>> conclusions from it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> a) the research is largely generalized across the continental us, which
>>>>>> does not even have boreal forests, so off to great start there
>>>>>>
>>>>>> b) it's not climate change that lead to the wildfire deficit, it's human
>>>>>> activity as noted in _both_ studies. being a complex system ofc several
>>>>>> factors can affect wildfire rates, and human activity obviously does.
>>>>>> human activity has caused a deficit. which is getting "corrected" by the
>>>>>> increased risk from what is still largely nominal climate change across
>>>>>> most american forests. this risk is still increasing and we've only
>>>>>> gotten started
>>>>>>
>>>>>> c) the study that does include some of canadian boreal region, records
>>>>>> it as the only region burning at a higher rather than historical trends,
>>>>>> 159% in fact. probably cause it's largely wilderness and far less
>>>>>> subject to the impact of human activity suppressing fire
>>>>>>
>>>>>> d) one of the studies literally admits extent is largely not the problem
>>>>>> for most american forests, but severity is:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> | Although contemporary fire extent is not unprecedented across many
>>>>>> | North American forests, there is abundant evidence that unprecedented
>>>>>> | contemporary fire severity is driving forest loss in many ecosystems
>>>>>>
>>>>>> it's honestly quite eye opening to see just how poor wilson's ability in
>>>>>> utilizing evidence is
>>>>>
>>>>> The point is and remains, the wildfires over most of North America are
>>>>> cyclical and overall have not increased in recent years compared to the
>>>>> long term history.
>>>> 
>>>> The point being that current trends no longer seem to be cyclical.
>>>> They seem to be more and more year after year.
>>>
>>>You're looking at your personal experience and media reports of events 
>>>over the past 20 years and thinking that can't be part of a greater cycle.
>>
>>No, I am thinking that your news sources are biased, and mine a
>>reliable.  I get no science for news media.
>
>In other words, I trust the ny times to tell me if there is fire in
>spokane, but I do not trust them to tell me whether this is part of a
>new pattern of seasonal fires.  Nor do I trust your guys to tell me
>that.

Ok, wilson, just for fun, here is a good source:

Fire activity continued to slowly increase the first half of July, but
a rapid acceleration in activity was observed beginning July 14
through the end of the month due to two major lightning events
in the northwestern U.S. The Great Basin, Rocky Mountain, and
Southwest areas remained active through the first half of July before
the North American Monsoon began and reduced activity for
the rest of the month although the northern Great Basin observed an
increase in activity at the end of July. The Eastern Area had a big
increase in activity early in the month that persisted most
of the month, but the Northwest had the greatest increase due to the
lightning events. With the significant increase in activity mid-month
and beyond, the National Preparedness Level increased
to five (on a scale of 1-5) on July 18. As of July 31, over 6 million
acres have burned across the country, which is 165% of the previous
10-year average. So far this year 44,004 wildfires have
been reported, also above average, at 128%.

https://www.nifc.gov/nicc-files/predictive/outlooks/monthly_seasonal_outlook.pdf

Notice the extensive and detailed discussion. This is not a
popularizer report in fact, it says:

"The objective is to assist fire managers in making proactive
decisions that will improve protection of life, property, and natural
resources, increase fire fighter safety and effectiveness, and reduce
firefighting costs." 

Intended for professional use. There is no other place to get the
straight dope.  If you find the text above your level of
understanding, suggest you get some education.

Now hurry up with the poopos, wilson, I want to hear you shouting all
the up to here in ontario.  As you do that you might consider why I so
seldom bother to give you such real info.
-- 
Noah Sombrero mustachioed villain
Don't get political with me young man
or I'll tie you to a railroad track and
<<<talk>>> to <<<YOOooooo>>>
Who dares to talk to El Sombrero?
dares: Ned
does not dare: Julian  shrinks in horror and warns others away