The US government deletes more than 50 years of early data on forest fires in order to make it look like forest fires are more widespread, and linked to CO2. Should be Investigated under the RICO Act.
There’s a reason why Smokey the Bear has been around more than 75 years with his message. “Only you can prevent forest fires.” The US government had known for decades that forest fires were a serious problem – much more serious than today.
They have forest fire data going back over 100 years. But suddenly, since January of this year, the US government is acting like there had never been a Smokey the Bear before 1983 and that forest fires are just a recent problem caused by manmade climate change.
It’s all a fraud, explains data analyst and software expert Tony Heller in his latest video.
Dataset now starts only in 1983
The government wants us to think data recording began less than 40 years ago, and that no data existed prior to 1983, which is absurd as we are about to see:
Image cropped here.
Through this massive deletion of historical data, the government is shamelessly abusing statistics and wants us to believe forest fires in USA are rising because of CO2 missions with the following plot:
Annual burn acreage and CO2 concentrations since 1983. Image cropped here.
“They want people to be afraid that if we keep using fossil fuels, they’re likely to burn in a forest fire,” says Heller. “That’s a pretty scary thought.”
What are they hiding?
Obviously there’s a reason the government is using data going back to only 1983, when we know the datasets go back much further in time. What are they hiding?
Fires much worse in first half of 20th century
Heller then presents old New York Times newspaper clippings that report how forest fire acreage burned was way higher in the 1930s dustbowl years, and shows a plot of the data going back to the year 1916:
Fives time more acreage was burned in the 1930s than today. Image cropped here
Now we can see how the most recent 4 decades have not been anything spectacular in terms of forest fires and that forest fires were far worse in the 1st half of the 20th century, when CO2 were at levels the government wants us to go back to.
No link between CO2 and forest fires
Heller also shows there’s also no correlation at all between forest fires and CO2 concentrations in the atmosphere:
Image cropped here
Just another systemic fake crisis by deceptive scientists
It’s clear that U.S. government scientists are again in the business of trying to create another fake crisis to justify the declaration of an emergency, more restrictions and even more control over our lives.
“Burn acreage down 80%”
“Burn acreage is actually down 80% in the United States as carbon dioxide has risen over the past century,” says Heller, a trained geologist and software expert. The government is trying to erase. reality. The National Interagency Fire Center has the data going back to 1926, but now refuse to show it to the public.
Critics say this reminds us of how Stalin used to photoshop pictures to try and change history.
“So sometime since January, the Biden Administration has deleted all of the critically important data,” says Heller. “Democrat politicians like to make up scientific information. And when they are not making it up, they are simply erasing it.”
To claim that acreage burned by forest fires today is climbing to record highs is preposterous. The intentional deletion of decades of data in order to make it possible to claim a climate crisis is fraud and a scandal. This all borders on racketeering and should be investigated under the US RICO laws. The government is not above the law.
12 responses to “US Government Tries To Erase Historical Forest Fire Data To Fabricate Another Fake Crisis”
There are other confounding factors you’ve not covered. First, fire suppression until about 20 years ago had led to an unnaturally dense forest base of brush and weeds along with increased tree density which increased disease. Second, its become very difficult in places like California to manage the forest and do prescribed burns when necessary to control the undergrowth. Third, the fertilizer effect of increased CO2 is likely increasing the density of the undergrowth and when you combine that with poor forest management practices pushed by eco-zealots, we get to a more dangerous fire situation. The unfortunate thing is that the political emphasis is on climate change and reduced CO2 emissions. Even if there are secondary effects of CO2 (fertilization), the mitigation of CO2 emissions won’t even be observable for 50 years and will depend upon the actions of the “developing” countries in Asia. Forest management on the other hand, is done locally by those most impacted and would show results in 5 years.
Much more important than any of the factors you mention is the fact that the US Forest Service (where the pre-1960 data come from) was classifying intentional burns on unprotected lands as wildfires throughout the early 20th century following a hardline policy against any burning practices. Thus the early data are showing something completely different than the later data, making it an Apples to Oranges comparison. From the USFS*:
In addition to the area-reporting bias in the USFS summary reports, analysts should be aware of other inconsistency and uncertainty in the wildfire activity estimates that are included,especially for unprotected areas. Intentional (‘controlled’) burning was used extensively for vegetation management on non-federal lands, especially in the south-eastern US during the early20th century. Although now used to a lesser extent (but on both federal and non-federal lands) in the US, intentional burning is not classified in the current reporting systems as ‘wildfire’ unless the controlled burn escapes and requires a suppression response. However, the early USFS wildfire activity summaries do include millions of hectares of intentional burning on‘unprotected’ lands, which, until approximately the mid-20thcentury was viewed by the USFS as akin to wildfire, as something that should be prevented and ultimately eradicated(Pyne 1982).
Heaven only knows why the NIFC had the incongruous dataset up on their website for so long.
Governments have an agenda (political goals) and “scientists” can be bought to serve the agenda. It is that simple.
Don’t forget that with the fertilizer effect of increased CO2, you have greener trees and brush, even in drought situations, or especially in drought situations. This may well counter the additional fuel due to increased CO2, but not the additional fuel to to fire suppression and poor forest management, continuing today in areas like California.
US acres burned have no no known statistical or logical correlation to slight increases of the global average temperature.
Globally, the Active Fire Index has had a downward linear trend line slope since 2000 (NASA Earth Observatory measurements by satellite)
– The primary cause of the huge spike of US acres burned in the 1930s was mainly due to prescribed fires in the southeastern fire district, not ordinarily known for forest fires. When not busy planting trees, the Civilian Conservation Corp set prescribed fires to burn underbrush and create fire breaks. Those southeastern states were not so dry as to make prescribed fires dangerous.
The rest of the United States did NOT have that HUGE spike of acres burned in the 1930s, but it was not a good decade for forest fires.
CAUSES OF ACRES BURNED:
Amount of forest management
Increasing number of people living near (and in) forests, with electricity transmission lines going to their homes and businesses,
Improving ability to contain fires with modern aircraft dropping chemicals.
Improving ability to measure acres burned using satellites, since the 1970s
HOW DO FIRES START?
Roughly 90% of forest fires are blamed on humans (including fallen transmission lines), so how could a slight temperature increase have any effect on accidental or deliberately set fires?
Would a few tenths of a degree warmer suddenly cause people to head toward the forests and start fires?
As the population of a nation grows, there are expected be more accidental and intentional fires.
Any bad news eventually gets connected with “climate change” by the climate change religion zealots. Sometimes they have to truncate or “adjust” the data to create the desired narrative. Lying and deceptions don’t matter when you are desperately trying to save the planet … for the children !
The climate of our planet is ALWAYS changing, so I guess you could blame anything on climate change. So why not blame forest fires on climate change?
I often see this claim regarding earlier controlled burns, yet I never see it quantified. I suspect the basic shape of the graphic would remain, just not as dramatic, and the non correlation to CO2 would remain.
As people are the primary cause of wildfires, I suspect more people ( massively more people and infrastructure) as the primary cause of more fires.
To be picky, I don’t think that “father” stalin had photoshop – but (as the linked article in the post states) he kept an army of airbrush artists busy “correcting” old photographs.
And shortly post-stalin, there was this classic:
“Following – or perhaps even before – a closed trial in December 1953, Beria was executed and his name officially expunged from public memory. As a symbol of his “non-personhood,” the editors of the Great Soviet Encyclopedia sent out a discreet notice to all their subscribers recommending that they cut out “with a small knife or razor blade” the entry on Beria. They provided as a replacement text an entry on the Bering Sea.”
Also, I do wonder if the flunkies doing these sorts of alterations of the forest-fire-past realize that they are doing the same job as did the fictional Winston Smith of the “Ministry of Truth” in 1984…
Having a larger area burnt in Australia is associated with increased rainfall months later. They even found more soot in the old (100s to 1000s yrs old) ice cores in Antarctica than they expected. Hot & dry changes in Australia started long before 1800.
One cannot call the charlatans behind these deceptions “scientists”. They are criminals, or would be if they were in the financial markets.
There is plenty of govt money to be squeezed out by falsely claiming there is a crisis – lots of research grants, subsidies for useless windmills & panels, and consultancy jobs to “assist” in the rush to net zero. Money that could be far better spent on real issues and solving real problems.
In Australia all our last major fire catastrophe occurred in the cooler wetter coastal regions, & not in the much hotter drier inland regions.
The coastal regions are where the forests are the thickest & the undergrowth build up the greatest.
Totally disproves any claim it was caused by hotter conditions.
[…] P. Gosselin, June 8, 2021 in […]
[…] Zdroj: https://notrickszone.com/2021/06/08/us-government-tries-to-erase-historical-forest-fire-data-to-fabr… […]