Yep. More Fake News from National Public Radio.
Yesterday evening, I was listening to their regular weekday evening Fake News broadcast called, absurdly, “All Things Considered,” when they did a story on the aftermath of the “Camp Fire.” Here’s how Wikipedia describes the Camp Fire:
The Camp Fire was the deadliest and most destructive wildfire in California history to date. It is also the deadliest wildfire in the United States since the Cloquet fire in 1918, and is high on the list of the world’s deadliest wildfires; it is the sixth-deadliest U.S. wildfire overall. It was the world’s costliest natural disaster in 2018. Named after Camp Creek Road, its place of origin, the fire started on November 8, 2018… [Editor’s Note: and it continues on from there to provide descriptions, history, statistics.]
Burned area: 153,336 acres (62,053 ha)
Fatalities: 86 civilians
Non-fatal injuries: 12 civilians and 5 firefighters Location: Butte County, California
The Camp Fire was horrible, and actual reporting about it made a lot of sense. It said that the principal reason for the Camp Fire was forest mismanagement in recent decades.
You see, for decades in California the policy has been — for reasons of corruption, land development, graft, greed, stupidity, bribery, and the exchange of lots and lots and lots of money, at thousands of different levels — to prevent, suppress, squash forest fires as soon as they arose. The result has been a steady build-up of ready-to-ignite tinder in the forests of California for a very long time.
The inevitable result of all that was: the Camp Fire.
So, on comes NPR with their feature on the aftermath of the Camp Fire. And in that feature the idiot reporter said something very close to the following: “in an area prone to increasingly intense forest fires due to climate change.”(1)
So, no, NPR-doofus reporter, the area is not prone to increasingly intense forest fires due to climate change. If it’s prone to increasingly intense forest fires at all, that’s due to… government mismanagement of the lands. That’s my opinion, just as the “Climate Change” thing is your… opinion.
Regardless of whether you even believe, first of all, that the area is prone to increasingly intense forest fires in the first place… why that might be is always a matter of… opinion.
Opinion is not news. It never was, and it never will be. Opinion is what someone believes, not what someone… knows. It’s funny that a non-journalist would have to point that out to a hoity-toity, nose-in-the-air, oh-so-sophisticated “news” organization like National Public Radio! You know, the ones who are always telling you how “in-depth” their “reporting” is, and how you should turn to them for “objective reporting” of the “news?” And how they’d always give it to you straight, and never, ever spin anything? Yeah, that NPR.(2)
Really, though, only a pathetically amateurish hack “news” organization would ever include, in something called a news feature, a schlock phrase like “in an area prone to increasingly intense forest fires due to climate change.”
Furthermore, what virtually all climate and forestry scientists now say is that, far from “prone to increasingly intense forest fires” the area of the Camp Fire is now nearly completely immune from serious forest fires!
And why might that be? Anyone? Anyone at all?
That’s right: it’s because there’s no more material to burn in that area, and there won’t be any burnable material in that area for a very long time to come.
And, there was a whole bunch of really burnable material in that area just before the Camp Fire. Then the Camp Fire happened. Hmmm… well, well. It’s almost as if conditions in that area were set up to allow for a massive, catastrophic, deadly forest fire to take place.
Simple as that. Sometimes real science can actually be pretty simple.
“Climate Change” — capital “C’s” — is not science(3), it’s religion… and politics. It allows people who say they’re reporting “news” to put obvious opinion into their stories and still call those flights of fancy “news.” Maybe that’s why they call them “stories.”
When my daughter was very young, each night before bedtime, I used to tell her a bedtime story of my own devising. She heard thousands of these stories, and I made up every last one of ’em… just like National Public Radio does.
(1) I don’t know whether that’s the exact quote, but it’s very close, and the meaning has been preserved.
(2) I’m amazed at how often one has to put scare quotes around words like news and reporting when one speaks or writes about National Public Radio. The reason, of course, is that there’s no news on NPR at all… it’s merely cleverly, and sometimes not so cleverly, disguised leftist opinion.
(3) Real climate science would start with the premise that the climate does nothing but change. If that extremely basic understanding were widely known, then the politics of Climate Change becomes very, very different. Very, very much less favorable to the Environmentalist movement.