Archives

June 2022
M T W T F S S
« May    
 12345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
27282930  

Don’t believe the bedwetting BBC climate catastrophists!

Monday blog

It’s climate change! It’s climate change!

The last few weeks have been wonderful for the bedwetting Biden Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) climate catastrophists and others in the Biden-adoring mainstream media. In the USA we first had the Californian wildfires on the West Coast and then Hurricane Ida and massive flooding on the East Coast.

This resulted in excited reporters from the BBC and C4 News and others of their ilk hyperventilating as they featured a living cadaver, President Joe Biden, lecturing us that the West Coast wildfires and East Coast flooding once again showed the horrific effects of anthropogenic climate change and once again demonstrated the urgency of acting now to supposedly fight supposed man-made climate change.

I try to keep my blogs short. So I propose to use today’s blog to test whether U.S. wildfires really are caused by a rise in atmospheric CO2 from human activities. Then tomorrow, I’ll look at the U.S. hurricane and floods.

Fire! You’re going to burn, burn, burn! (Arthur Brown)

If the U.S. wildfires are caused by increasing atmospheric CO2, then we would expect to see a correlation – as atmospheric CO2 rose, so too should the acreage destroyed by wildfires. Here’s a chart of CO2 levels (the red line) and CO2 emissions (the blue line) since 1750:

(left click on chart and then left click again to see more clearly)

And here’s a chart from the U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service of the estimated acres of forest burnt each year in wildfires since 1916:

Ooopps, Houston we have a problem.

As you can see, the greatest loss of forest to wildfires was during the scorching 1920s and 1030s – the years that featured in John Steinbeck’s famous novel Grapes of Wrath. But clearly there is absolutely no correlation at all between rising atmospheric CO2 levels during the 20th Century and the level of U.S. forest acreage burnt.

Of course, we don’t yet know how much forest will be lost to wildfires this year. Maybe it will be high, maybe not. But even if this year’s burn is high, one year of exceptional wildfires does not make a trend. You and I understand that even if the mainstream media and Joe Biden do not.

When is a ‘record’ not really a record?

And, of course, while the mainstream media excitedly claim that this year’s wildfires are the worst ever, we shouldn’t forget the massive wildfires of September 1899:

Nor should we forget the huge wildfires of 1825, 1871, 1881 and 1894;

So, are this year’s wildfires a record? And are they proof of catastrophic CO2-driven climate change?

Probably not!

4 comments to Don’t believe the bedwetting BBC climate catastrophists!

  • A Thorpe

    What has temperature got to with forest fires? Paper burns at Fahrenheit 451 and wood even higher. Warmer temperatures will dry dead wood out but temperatures never start the fires. Poor forrest management is the real problem. Private forests managed for profit don’t burn down, only badly managed public forests. Lightening strikes and humans are the causes of fires not higher temperatures.

  • Loppoman

    Exactly Thorpe. Lightning or human with swan vestas.

  • A Thorpe

    Forget the BBC, Sky is all we need now. Latest radio advert – Sky News, news without an agenda.

Leave a Reply

You can use these HTML tags

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>