Tucker: Democrats, fires and the climate misinformation campaign

  • Thread starter Thread starter Cathoholic
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I’m not sure what you’re driving at, but you’re welcome to try to make the case if you specify the criteria you think are different for the two countries. Have at it.
I don’t need to make the case. I think the onus is on you to prove they are the same, since you are claiming arson based on some sort of sameness.

USA may have one standard for their maps and Canada may have a different standard.
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
IE Can you prove that the Canada Extreme is the same as the USA Extreme?
Can you prove that the Canada Very High is the same as the USA Very High?

Are both nations using an “International Standard” or are they using their own Individual Standard?
 
Last edited:
I found these links in about 5 seconds.

https://www.nps.gov/articles/understanding-fire-danger.htm

https://cwfis.cfs.nrcan.gc.ca/maps/fw

As you can see, they use the same terms and similar descriptions for those terms.

US
High (Yellow) —Wildfires are likely. Fires in heavy, continuous fuel, such as mature grassland, weed fields, and forest litter, will be difficult to control under windy conditions. Control through direct attack may be difficult but possible, and mop up will be required. Outdoor burning should be restricted to early morning and late evening hours.

Very High (Orange) —Fires start easily from all causes and may spread faster than suppression resources can travel. Flame lengths will be long with high intensity, making control very difficult. Both suppression and mop up will require an extended and very thorough effort. Outdoor burning is not recommended.

Extreme (Red) —Fires will start and spread rapidly. Every fire start has the potential to become large. Expect extreme, erratic fire behavior. NO OUTDOOR BURNING SHOULD TAKE PLACE IN AREAS WITH EXTREME FIRE DANGER.
CANADA
HighModerate to vigorous surface fire with intermittent crown involvement. Challenging for ground crews to handle; heavy equipment (bulldozers, tanker trucks, aircraft) often required to contain fire.
Very HighHigh-intensity fire with partial to full crown involvement. Head fire conditions beyond the ability of ground crews; air attack with retardant required to effectively attack fire’s head.
ExtremeFast-spreading, high-intensity crown fire. Very difficult to control. Suppression actions limited to flanks, with only indirect actions possible against the fire’s head.
I would conclude their standards are not far from each other.
 
Last edited:
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

If we are agreed that the standards are the same, i will post this as the Washington state fire risk map that seems comparable to the Canada Wildlands map you posted 2 days ago. Where British Columbia has a small sliver of red extreme danger, the Washington map has almost all of Eastern Washington in red.
 
Last edited:
Wow!

That is a lot of arsonists Zzyzx_Road!

I knew the problem was bad, but I didn’t know it was this bad.

Thank you for posting.

These poor self-destructive people who do this sort of thing
are very sick in my opinion.
 
And then you find tasteless memes like this:
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
 
Last edited:
This is very good satire. Close enough to the truth to sting a bit. For that thought crime, it is judged tasteless.
 
So you are going ad hominem on who shared a meme?

Stop deflecting,

Respond to the content of the meme itself.
 
And then you find tasteless memes like this:
I would say the meme is tasteless, but that is what we actually hear. One of the best examples was Terry Crews and Don Lemon. Terry actually told Lemon the question in that meme, and Lemon said. That is NOT what black lives matters is about. Is about police brutality. So, I agree with the meme.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top