{"id":262119,"date":"2023-06-14T22:37:09","date_gmt":"2023-06-14T20:37:09","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=262119"},"modified":"2023-06-14T22:37:20","modified_gmt":"2023-06-14T20:37:20","slug":"wrong-mainstream-media-climate-change-didnt-cause-canadian-forest-fires-or-the-smoke-in-u-s-cities","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=262119","title":{"rendered":"Wrong, Mainstream Media, Climate Change Didn\u2019t Cause Canadian Forest Fires or the Smoke in U.S. Cities"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n\n\n\n

From\u00a0ClimateRealism<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

ByAnthony Watts<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Last week, mainstream media outlets were abuzz with stories claiming that smoke from wildfires in Canada visibly polluting the skies in New York City, Washington, D.C., and many other cities in the northeastern United States was due to climate change. This is false. Data and history show that wildfires in Canada have not increased number or severity, and that, driven by prevailing winds, smoke from Canada\u2019s annual wildfire season has darkened U.S. skies multiple times in the past.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Many media outlets, including The Washington Post<\/em><\/a>, The New York Times<\/em><\/a>, USA Today<\/em><\/a>, AXIOS<\/a>, and National Geographic<\/em><\/a> were quick to blame Canada\u2019s wildfires and the smoke from them on climate change without citing any credible evidence, because none exists.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Among the media\u2019s claims are:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

As climate change dropped its calling card on the East Coast last week in the form of thick, dangerous smoke<\/a>, millions of Americans and Canadians shared the jarring experience \u2014 forced to retreat indoors, cancel plans, wear masks and breathe hazardous air. \u2013 The Washington Post<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Canada\u2019s devastating fires and toxic smoke might not recur every year, but the heat from climate change increases the risks of a wide range of disasters. \u2013 The New York Times<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cWe\u2019re seeing events that are unknown in the historical record,\u201d said Robert Scheller, a professor of forestry at North Carolina State University. \u201cIt\u2019s hard to talk about without painting a grim picture.\u201d \u2013 USA Today<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The harmful veil of smoke<\/a> that enveloped the country\u2019s economic and political power centers this week presented bankers and lawmakers with an in-your-face demonstration of what climate change<\/a> looks, feels and smells like. \u2013 AXIOS<\/p>\n\n\n\n

As climate change drives an increase in wildfires, we\u2019re seeing more smoke lofted into the upper atmosphere each fire season. \u2013 National Geographic<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

History and real-world data disprove each and every one of these claims.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Long before anyone used fossil fuels to generate electricity or for transportation, this exact scenario happened before. For example, May 19, 1780 became known as \u201cNew England\u2019s Dark Day<\/a>\u201d where fires in Canada caused so much smoke that candles had to be lit at midday to see.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Such \u201cyellow days,\u201d have also happened periodically before and since then, as recorded by the New England Historical Society<\/a> (NEHS). The NEHS reports smoke from Canadian wildfires created \u201cyellow\u201d or \u201cdark,\u201d days in the eastern United States on May 12, 1706; October. 21, 1716; August, 9 1732; May 19, 1780; July 3, 1814; November, 6-10, 1819; July 8, 1836; September. 2, 1894; and September 24-30, 1950.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Data presented in Climate at a Glance: U.S. Wildfires<\/em><\/a> shows that compared to the first half of the twentieth century, the number of wildfires occurring in the United States over the past decade are significantly lower, and the fires have been less severe. Even in the worst wildfire seasons occurring recently, wildfires typically burned one-fifth to half as much land as many wildfire seasons during the early twentieth century, and much less the average acreage burned in previous centuries<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The same is true in Canada, where, this week, the mainstream media seemingly discovered wildfires occur and produce smoke. Data from Canada\u2019s\u00a0National Forestry Database<\/a>\u00a0for both the entire country as well as the province of Quebec, where many of the recent wildfires occurred, show declining trends for both the number of fires and area burned over the past 31 years, as seen in Figure 1, below:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Figure 1: Screen capture data graphs from 1990 to 2021 for all of Canada (left) and the province of Quebec (right) show no increasing trend for wildfire frequency nor area burned. Source: Canada\u2019s National Forestry Database<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Indeed, a\u00a0study by scientists with the Canadian Forest Service<\/a>\u00a0attributed the decline in forest fires in Canada over the past few decades to the combined effect of carbon dioxide\u00a0fertilization and modestly rising temperatures, which resulted in improved soil moisture conditions.\u00a0Because plants lose less water via the process of transpiration under conditions of high CO2<\/sub>\u00a0and higher temperatures, less moisture is drawn from soil.

Globally, NASA has recorded a significant\u00a0decline<\/em>\u00a0in the number of wildfires. In\u00a0Researchers Detect a Global Drop in Fires<\/a>, NASA reported \u201cGlobally, the total acreage burned by fires declined 24 percent between 1998 and 2015, according to a new paper published in\u00a0Science<\/em>.\u201d (See Figure 2, below)<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Figure 2: Global area burned by wildfire from 1998 to 2015, source: NASA Earth Observatory<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Clearly, if \u201cglobal warming\u201d aka \u201cclimate change\u201d was affecting wildfire trends, it would show up somewhere in the real-world-data. This evidence factually disproves any claim that the Earth\u2019s mild warming trend is increasing the number of wildfires or making more severe wildfires.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The media likes to blame climate change for enhancing or even creating the fires, but climate scientist Roger Pielke Jr. PhD., had this to say about the Canadian fire outbreak in What the media won\u2019t tell you about \u2026 Wildfires.<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cLooking at data from the NFDP, we can see that the majority of fires in Quebec and the area that they burn over the past decade are caused by humans, with the balance caused by lightning\u2026,\u201d Pielke, Jr. wrote.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

He added that the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has found no evidence of a \u201cclimate signal\u201d in wildfire data, and that the fire outbreak was due to a combination of non-climatic events:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In short, the IPCC does not provide a basis for strong claims of detection or attribution of \u201cfire weather\u201d to climate change. The IPCC is silent on trends in fire numbers and area burned. These conclusions are contrary to almost all media reporting.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u2026<\/p>\n\n\n\n

But the disaster was caused by<\/a> a combination of a wind storm, managed open space with invasive species, a rainfall deficit, decades of land use decisions that placed neighborhoods alongside combustible lands, homes build of flammable materials and more. Sure, say that climate change played a role if that suits, but after that is said, a far more important discussion has to happen about development, building codes. land use and management, open space, prescribed burns and so on.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In summary, Pielke said the following:<\/p>\n\n\n\n