Sensational Findings Published in Nature Blow Politicised Wildfire Climate Scam Out of the Water
Sensational new findings published in Nature Communications effectively blow the politicised wildfire climate change scam out of the water. Far from human-caused climate change making wildfires worse across the United States and Canada, it was found that recent fires occurred at a rate of only 23% of that expected from a review of the previous historical record going back to the 17th century. The researchers note that a current “widespread fire deficit” persists across a range of forest types and the areas burned in the recent past “are not unprecedented” when considering the multi-century perspective.
Needless to say, there has been no mention of these finding in narrative-driven mainstream media. In fact one Nature pre-publication peer-reviewer commented on the clear danger the paper presented to this important climate scares promoting the Net Zero fantasy. “I see this paper as potentially being used by deniers of climate change impacts,” the reviewer notes. “Consider if possible some rephrasing to put even more emphasis on impact rather than on burned area,” is the suggestion. In other words, concentrate on the emotional impact of individual fires, allowing legacy media, aided by junk computer modelled attribution studies, to concentrate on speculation and fearmongering rather than the facts. Another clear example of what might be termed Ultra Processed News, designed to make the individual consumer sick with worry and induce mass climate psychosis.
A group of 19 scientists led by Sean Parks from the USDA Forest Service used accurate data from the North American tree-ring fire-scar network (NAFSN) to gain precise annual data on the areas burnt. Interestingly, it was found that recent ‘record’ fire years such as 2020 burned 6% of NAFSN sites and this compared with the 29% recorded in 1748. “Overall, contemporary fires (1984-2022) burned NAFSN sites less frequently than fires during the historical reference period (pre-1880), indicating that a substantial fire deficit persists and is still accumulating across many forests and woodlands across the United States and Canada,” it was noted.
In a conclusion that should (but it won’t) destroy the non-stop mainstream wildfire fearmongering, the scientists found that based on the fire scar record, the NAFSN sites would have been expected to burn 4,346 times from 1984-2022, yet they burnt only 989 times, a figure that is just 23% of what would have been expected under the historical fire regime. While these factual findings are dramatic, they should not come as a great surprise. Much to the chagrin of climate activists and the attribution artists, the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has detected no human involvement in fire weather activity to date and expects none going forward to 2100.
In a recent article for the BBC on the Los Angeles fires, Matt McGrath ignored the evidence showing that they were made worse by local Democrat eco-mismanagement and pointed out the conclusion that a warmer world increased the chances of devastating wildfires occurring. The inevitable Net Zero plug followed: “As more fossil fuels continue to be burnt, those chances will continue to rise.” In the world of Ultra Processed News, the actual facts are often missing from the pre-determined narrative. Chief climate bunkum writer at the Guardian Damian Carrington might also care to read Parks et al. before he repeats a recent claim that “globally, scientists agree that climate change is increasing the global risk of wildfires starting and spreading”.
Back to the facts. The prevalence of non-fire years was found to occur “significantly more often” in the contemporary period than in the historic record as shown across all NAFSN sites. In fact this might be an underestimate given the relatively low sample size in the first few decades of the historical period. Current fire occurrence is still far below the historical levels despite large and ‘record-breaking’ recent fire years, such as 2020 in the western US. “Individual years with particularly widespread fire during the 1984-2022 period were not unprecedented in comparison with the active fire regimes of the historical period across most of the study region,” state the researchers. Areas burned by wildfires during the last few decades “remain relatively low”, they note.
The graph below shows that US wildfires were much worse in the past and its veracity is confirmed by Parks et al. Dramatic improvements are shown since the end of the 1920s. But in 2021, at the height of the Biden Green Mania, the chart was withdrawn by the National Interagency Fire Centre and replaced with information from the conveniently low point of 1983. Excuses were made that the past data were unreliable.

The replacement of course meant that trusted messengers could report that wildfires had been increasing in the US, creating the obligatory ‘record’ years. The American meteorologist and founder of the climate site Watts Up With That? Anthony Watts was less than impressed. “This wholesale erasure of important public data stinks, but in today’s narrative control culture that wants to rid us of anything that might be inconvenient or doesn’t fit the ‘woke’ narrative, it isn’t surprising,” he observes.
Chris Morrison is the Daily Sceptic’s Environment Editor.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
The graph clearly shows that there is an upward trend in wildfire acreages since the turn of the century, however it would be instructive to learn what these figures represent in percentages of the forest areas concerned.
A quick check on line indicates a slight growth in coverage since 2000 but there is no indication whether this is new plantings or simply lack of effective forest management due to increasing environmental activism.
The latter is of course reckoned to be the cause of increased fire risk.
True. What is the cause? I suspect lack of forestry management in this period ie clearing the undergrowth,and also not maintaining electricity power lines.
Happy for this to be disproven if I am wrong.
“What is the cause”? Arsonists
Where’s today’s news round up?
In another thread @Hardliner reported software problems today.
Given that DS can still publish new articles (2 today) I’d suggest publishing a short two liner article as both an announcement of the problem and an invitation to subscribers to mention and link newsworthy stuff in the comments.
Thankyou👍👍
I really miss Reading through the topics on the news round up, especially before a nice fry up!😋
I hope your pun wasn’t intended!
A fry up is the way I distinguish between weekdays and weekends now that I have retired.
Whut? You don’t have a fry-up every morning? 🙂
Maybe the Telegraph subscription has run out..?
I dont bother with any newspapers, I get my news from the sceptic, you guys and common sense youtubers, msm sucks
I like the author’s phrase “ultra processed news” it does fit the bill and like you I get a lot of news from DS and then other sites like TCW.
A fry up is a very good start to the day and protein consumption becomes even more important as we age (and it keeps the body temperature up by a 1/2 degree apparently according to someone’s Marine soldier friend who should know about keeping warm in cold weather.)
Back to the subject in hand there is a book about the Children’s writer Laura Ingalls Wilder who was famous for her Little House in the Woods, Prairie etc books (6 in total in all). She describes her childhood in USA in 1860s and the biography Prairie Fires — a new biography of Laura Ingalls Wilder goes into much detail about the devastating prairie fires of old and how the smoke drifted over New York at times. Very good read.
Perception is all. Good to see “a group of 19 scientists led by Sean Parks from the USDA Forest Service” setting the record straight and tellling it how it is.
Now can NOAA, NASA, Met Office, Imperial College, etc, etc, etc, please dispassionately examine the metrology and meaning of their own temperature records?
Long overdue to put climate claptrap in the dustbin of scientific horrrible history where it belongs, and to restore energy provenance and provision to rightful pole position as the prime parameters upon which modern civilisation fundamentally depends.
No power means no food, no running water, no heating – doesn’t get more fundamental than that.
Lets suppose that wildfires are getting worse, for whatever reason, lets also include droughts and floods. These events are so catastrophic that they demand that every spare dollar is spent on … resilience, rather than on changing the composition of the atmosphere.
Problem for the Doom Industry is that resilience is just more of the status quo, it does not entail changing the economic and political system, nor does it provide a Gravy Train, which of course are the true objectives.
Well said. The problem is, they’re hampered from properly managing the surrounding forests by tomes of regulatory barriers, plus environmental activism, which prevents them from the thinning and prescribed burning that would normally take place to keep the city safe. Instead the environmental activism and green agenda continues apace with the goal of, as you point out, playing God with the climate.
I suspect most of the changes are the result of forest management, and has absolutely nothing to do with climate change. Even the upward tick this century is probably the result of changed methods or resources.
If we make an effort we can recall that the news media were full of the devastating wildfires in Greece and elsewhere around the Mediterranean in 2021.
In April 2012 Dr. GAVRIIL XANTHOPOULOS wrote an excellent paper discussing poor forest management as a cause of wildfires around the Med.
No doubt Lessons Will Be Learned. Ha!
This article in the City Journal explains in great detail how the LA fires were caused. It briefly sneaks in a mention of “climate shifts” at the very end, but the thrust of the piece is that the fires were a result of mismanagement of surrounding forests and other policy barriers. So humans CAN be blamed for this disaster, but not because of any contribution to climate change.
https://www.city-journal.org/article/la-wildfires-forest-management-regulatory-reform
I do like the concept of Ultra Processed News. Hope it sticks.