Yesterday I showed how the National Climate Assessment is committing blatant fraud about heat waves by hiding the data that shows their claims are inverted from reality.
Extreme Fraud In The National Climate Assessment | The Deplorable Climate Science Blog
In this post, I show how they are doing exactly the same thing with wildfires. They show that U.S. burn acreage rapidly increasing.
The graph was taken from page 38 of the Fourth National Climate Assessment document released in November 2018.
Fourth National Climate Assessment, Volume II: Impacts, Risks, and Adaptation in the United States
But why did they start their graph in 1983? The US has very detailed burn acreage data going back for more than a century and it was much higher prior to 1970.
Indicator 3.16: Area and percent of forest affected by abiotic agents
I overlaid the National Climate Assessment Graph on the Forest Service graph, and it becomes clear exactly what they are doing.
Like in the heat-wave graph, they picked the lowest point for their start date, so that they could show an upwards trend – and deceive the public.
They hid essentially all of the essential data, which shows that burn acreage is down 80% in the US over the past 90 years.
Burn acreage was very carefully tracked and reported during the 1930s. People split the atom and built the Golden Gate Bridge during the 1930s.
It is not surprising that they also knew how to do the basic mathematics which climate scientists seem to be incapable of.
The same story in California. Last year had very high burn acreage, but the trend since the 1930s is generally down.
In 1936, forest fires were seen as the greatest threat to prosperity.
05 Dec 1936, Page 7 – Santa Cruz Evening News at Newspapers.com
And as always, the fraudulent work of the National Climate Assessment is backed by many other fraudsters, like the Union of Concerned Scientists.
Is Global Warming Fueling Increased Wildfire Risks? | Union of Concerned Scientists
Read more at Real Climate Science
I’m not impressed by Irrelevant-Conclusion fallacies. The article’s title is: “Extreme Wildfire Fraud In The National Climate
Assessment”, so this is about extreme wildfire behavior.
Extreme wildfire behavior is caused by low atmospheric humidity and low fuel moisture, not heatwaves.
Extreme wildfire behavior is not the total acreage burned per year, but the:
Size and intensity per fire
Fires that are more difficult and take much longer to contain
Record-setting amounts of property damage and lives lost per fire
Now, who is practicing fraud?
Are you saying that the wild fires between 1960 and 2019 were worse than those between 1922 and 1958?
Due to poor forest management there is a lot more fuel for wild fires to burn than there use to be. This of course results in more intense fires. This is a more reasonable explanation for more intense fires than a temperature increase that is less than what is often seen in the differences in temperature from one year to the next.
A big factor in property damage and deaths is a larger population and especially people moving into areas where wild fires are a risk. We live in the Cascade Foot Hills in the middle of a forest and can not see any of our neighbors. The house was built in 1990.
It’s worse than that. I’m saying that wildfires since the turn of the century have been worse than those before the turn of the century. The first list on this page lists the 20 largest by acreage, wildfires in California history: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_California_wildfires
Only three of the 20 are from before the turn of the century.
I agree that in recent decades, people have built more new towns and suburbs in wildlands. I’ll also suggest descriptions such as “foolish” and “arrogant”.
However, the second list on that page shows that of the 20 deadliest fires in California, nine were from before the turn of the century. Therefore, the more recent building of homes in wildlands doesn’t account as well for them.
This reminds me of the major paper on ocean acidification. They used the year 1988, the year that the oceans were furthest from acid, as their base line. This made it appear that the oceans were moving more towards acid. They then hid data before 1988 that clearly showed that their thesis was wrong.
The National Climate Assessment did the same thing by picking 1960, a low year for fires, as their base line. With wild fires there is another factor. It was around 1960 that the federal government made good forest management impossible. This has caused wild fires to increase. This was clearly shown in Arizona. There were two devastating wild fires that went out when they reached the Apache forests. That is because the Apaches had more freedom to use good forest management.
Why is there so much fraud in data around the issue of climate change? The answer is obvious. The real data analyzed without bias doesn’t support the political climate change agenda.