Climate Change Isn’t to Blame for Wildfire Deaths, It’s Insufficient Tactics

The Democrats want to spend trillions of dollars to address climate change. They claim that it’s taking more lives and that the human race is teetering on the edge of extinction. Some have even gone so far as to demand that climate change be listed as the cause of death on death certificates.

What proof do we have that climate change is real and that it’s something we need to focus so much money on? Wildfires. That’s the number one thing that progressivists point to when they want to argue that climate change is a major issue.

Okay, so the reason that there are so many wildfires has to do with climate change?

No. The reason there are wildfires is because of warmer temperatures and a lack of rainfall. This has always been the case during the dry months of the summer.

A spike of two or three degrees as a temperature high over the past decade isn’t going to suddenly create more wildfires.

Some of the largest wildfires in the history of the United States occurred long before we were dealing with air pollution, higher concentrations of carbon dioxide and methane, and more. The 1881 Thumb Fire in Michigan and the 1902 Yacolt Burn are among the top concerning – and those both happened over 100 years ago.

This is proof that it’s not about changing the environment. Climate change is a part of evolution, and it’s going to happen whether we like it or not. We could reduce emissions, kill the cows that fart methane, and do countless other things – and we’ll still get fires.

The reason there are so many wildfires (and wildfire deaths) is not because of climate change. It’s because we’re still not able to get the wildfires out as quickly as needed. It’s not uncommon for the fires in California to burn nearly uncontrollably for months at a time.

It’s not as if the United States is the only one to deal with wildfires. We’re simply the only ones people ever hear of because they burn so many acres and burn for such long periods of time.

The firefighters are doing all they can. They risk their lives every day to put out the fires. But maybe, just maybe, we shouldn’t be spending trillions to address climate control. Maybe, we should be investing a fraction of that money toward figuring out a new way to tame the wildfires that continue to plague the West Coast.

Many countries are exploring their fire management policies to figure out how they can get the fires out more effectively. The established approaches are not working – and something has to be done since wildfires have been occurring since the dawn of time. The only difference is that they’re more frequent. Evolution, not climate change, is what’s allowing their frequency.

More people are in the path of fires. As populations rise, many people look to move out of the overpopulated cities and close to forests and parks. This means that when a wildfire starts, more people are likely to be in the path of the fire. Homes can burn and people can die.

While it would be great to prevent the homes from burning and the people from dying, it’s going to continue to happen as people choose to live in areas that are prone to wildfires and choose to build homes within the path of fires.

So, again, it’s not that climate change is to blame for wildfire deaths. Many of those deaths are completely avoidable if people would take the time to educate themselves on risks. Meanwhile, countries need to look at more effective ways to control the fires knowing that they’ll start no matter what we do about the climate.

Some countries are much better at putting out fires than the U.S. It’s clear we need to be investing in fire management controls and research, not in a vague concept of climate change.

Georgia Certified Results but the Fight Is Far from Over

Could This End Schumer’s Time as Senate Minority Leader?