There is no evidence that any of the fires were started by protesters Even if they did, it makes no difference to the severity of the fire. I already said there can be many causes that can spark a fire but that has no bearing on the severity. Once the fire is started, the severity is determined by the quantity of fuel and the supply of oxygen, not the spark.

Also, there would be no 4 feet of dead wood if not for the severity of the drought. The forests have NEVER been cleared out and yet these fires are record breaking. Obviously then, NOT clearing the undergrowth is NOT the underlying cause of the severity of these fires.

BTW, most of the fires burning in California are on land managed by the federal government under
Trump. So you may want to change your excuse if you don't want to implicate the fuhrer.

As for draining the water, No. That water wasn't taken out of the sky which is what you need to save the land from drought. That water came from surface water which does NOT prevent drought OR fires. But since you mentioned it. The drought that YOU folks caused, is a major factor in why the surface water is being drained... It's not being replenished with the ice packs that supply most of the water in west, because there's no snowfall in a drought.

So, no none of what you mention has any bearing on the severity of the fires. The drought does, as caused by global warming, as caused by Republicans catering to the fossil-fuel industry.

Thanks!

Not much of a counter argument. Probably because you HAVE no counter argument. If you have a history of voting Republican Carol, you ARE responsible for the loss of those lives. The families, dogs, cats, horses, they died because of you. Of course it would take a bigger person to own up to this. Not something you see among Republicans, so your response really isn't surprising.

Of course there are many causes that spark the fires raging across the western states and we really can't track them down to one cause. But there's more to starting a fire than a spark. You need three things... heat (such as a spark) oxygen and fuel.

It's the fuel that makes these fires so much worse now than they used to be. There's more of it. Why? because of increased drought conditions... the lack of rain kills the vegetation and dries the biomass into fuel for fire. Of course droughts have always been a problem in the western states and so have fires, but for some reason the current drought which started in 2012, has been more severe and prolonged than any previous drought on record and with it comes a series of record-breaking fires with every year getting worse.

Scientists at NOAA are saying this drought would have been bad anyway but not nearly as bad as it is due to... yup, I'm going to say it... Global Warming.

I can remember reading the studies as far back as 1978 that predicted these conditions... if we don't curb our emissions, because of the greenhouse effect. Then I watched that concern turn into a political battle with Democrats asking for the concern to be addressed and Republicans downplaying the studies and denying the science upon which they were based. Obviously, the Republicans were protecting the oil business which didn't want to sacrifice any part of their profit for a cleaner environment.

The Republican people voted big oil tycoons to the White House and sent their loved ones to fight wars to advance oil profits. Republicans have always been on the side of burning fossil fuels without any concern for the consequences.

42 years after I first read about global warming and it's potential outcomes, I am witnessing exactly what they predicted. We did NOT curb our emissions. The Republicans got in the way. Everytime we tried, the Republicans would reverse our efforts. I watched it happen... for 40 years!

So when I see those fires raging, blotting out the sky, destroying forests and structures, killing people and animals alike, I blame the Republicans. I don't accept ignorance on this one. There is no lack of information on this. After 40 years, if people STILL don't get it, it's because they choose not to. Therefore the lives lost in the fires was by choice. The choice made by Republicans... election after election.

And that goes for ALL people who have voted Republican over the last 40 years. Even those of you reading this. Yes, I am telling these Republicans with the utmost clarity... YOU are to blame for the fires and all the lives these fires will claim. 100%!

What good is placing a ban on Chinese nationals only? Did you think a virus floating around China is going to be picky about whether the body it infects is a Chinese national or an American visitor? I mean, seriously... duuuugh!

It only takes one American tourist or businessman to bring the virus back. In fact, it doesn't even require that... We get tons of cargo from China that can also carry the virus. I'm not saying restricting travel from China is a bad idea it can certainly help to reduce the international transmission. But it's utterly ridiculous to suggest that alone is enough for Trump to earn a trophy.

Besides, the first case was already confirmed in the U.S. on January 21 weeks before the ban. So it was already too late. The virus was already here. So, an approach to dealing with THAT reality was already needed and that's where Trump failed... miserably.

I'm really starting to wonder why ANYONE would want to defend Trump. It just makes people look like idiots that can't think for themselves.

I'm aware that the virus was first discovered in China, but there is no evidence to suggest they "created" it on purpose. Nor can I find a motive for doing so.

Smedly, when you post something more intelligent than 3rd grade playground talk, I'll respond.

I don't even know who drlarrygino is. But I do know that opinions are not equal. Just like there is a difference between a wild guess and an educated guess. There are also informed opinions and ridiculous opinions and there ARE things people can do to validate the basis for an opinion and subscribing to a political narrative is not one of them.

I guess it depends on what you call frenzy. I am basing it on a level that would be detrimental to public safety because anything less would not justify the downplay that Trump is trying to excuse.

Yes, many people who are informed by qualified doctors are freaked out but I don't see them threatening public safety, do you?

And since you put "qualified" in quotes, making your opinion of doctors quite clear, let me note that I am not referring not their ability, which neither of us can assess without direct interaction, I am referring to their university degrees and documented experience because short of direct interaction, that is the best gauge we have to go by.

Mostly from all the conflicting quotes. Look, I suspect you won't believe anything unless it comes from Trump or his supporters so I'll just leave you with this report on Trump's own assertion that the CDC has been misquoted.


linda... Do you really not understand how updates work? I explained as plainly as I could. Science doesn't work like religion where the truth is pre-packaged. In science people have to work to reveal the truth which can take some time. They start with what they know, they research further, find more information and update their knowledge with the new findings. Yes, sometimes that means invalidating what they said before.

Again, this is not a medical opinion... this is common sense, which should NOT be so hard for people living in the world today to understand.


I don't have a medical opinion because I'm not qualified to make one. But yes, I am guiding my arguments with the medical opinions coming from qualified doctors and dedicated organizations like the CDC and the WHO.


Well, I appreciate your admission to being clueless, but don't assume everyone else is. I may not know the truth but I can triangulate the professional opinions of experts with my own common sense and at least have a clue.


Well, the changes in knowledge are obvious, as they should be while research is still ongoing. It doesn't mean they don't know what they are talking about, it just means the data is getting more accurate.

Apparently, you have no clue what the masks are for, so let me explain... The masks are meant to slow down the spread of the virus by obstructing the airflow from your mouth and nose, thereby decreasing the range over which the disease can pass. Got that so far? Now, social distance is also recommended to help other people remain outside that range. When the Speaker of the House was speaking she was socially distant from her audience, so the mask came off so people could understand what she's saying. But as soon as she's done she always puts the mask back on before returning to the closer proximity of those around her.

No one is expecting you to wear a mask at home or in your car or anywhere that crowds of people won't pass through your breathing range. No one is expecting people to commit to total isolation either. There are some risks, such as sharing a house with a family that considered low enough to be worth taking.

Really, it just comes down to common sense, which is really easy if your not bent on trying to defend Trump's lack of it. Saying things like "try eating with your mask on" is just asinine.


They have tried, but Trump isn't allowing it. According to several articles, most recently this one from the Washington Post, Trump is trying to capitalize on the crisis and he doesn't want the judgemental Democrats to interfere.


It sounds like you're not able to isolate the issues. You've just exposed a predetermined judgement based on your overriding dislike toward Democrats. What a shame.

BTW, your advice on media is just down-right stupid. CNN and MSNBC still follow the standards of journalism. They might be incorrect from time to time, but they tend to acknowledge that, which is a part of the practice of journalism... correcting yourself when contrary evidence is found. The point of journalism is to earn the trust of of the audience through integrity. Just because you don't like what they report doesn't mean they are wrong.

I've been professionally involved in Internet technologies and media for over 30 years and if there is one thing I can say that I AM sure about - it's that the well-established networks we call mainstream media *IS* far more trustworthy than social media.

Very impressive. Can you draw dick pictures too?

Well DASHY, I never told you to get your "medical knowledge" from me, nor did I suggest I am any kind of expert. What I mentioned in my post is the kind of common sense that comes from living in the 21st century. In other words, nothing I said is beyond the capacity for even a school kid to understand.

Common sense doesn't require a medical degree linda


Yes, it's called "updating". That's what happens during the research process, previous assessments are replaced when new information is discovered. Again, something common sense could help you understand.

What blows me away is how he says he didn't want to create a public frenzy. As if people weren't being informed anyway. Americans have all been told the the truth, it just didn't come from Trump. And really, the only people who listen to Trump are his cult-followers. That's a very small percentage. I know it's estimated that as many as 45% of the people might VOTE for him, but that doesn't mean they believe anything Trump says... it just means they are THAT opposed to giving the Democrats any power. Most of that 45% do NOT believe a word Trump says and they would gladly swap him out for for a better Republican on the first chance they get.

Ironically, the people who worked themselves into a frenzy we're not the people being informed by qualified doctors and scientists about the truth but the people who instead chose to believe crackpot conspiracy theories that undermine their trust in qualified professional advice.

I can only imagine how the damage-control meeting went...

"Sir, most of the American people already knew the truth anyway and they didn't panic."
"You're fired! Next?"
"Ah, well sir, first of all I want to thank you for being our saviour - you are the best president the world has ever seen and your hair is fabulous."
"OK, go on..."
Well sir... uh, your highness... telling the people that you didn't want to start wide-spread panic is really the only thing we got."

I understand that people sometimes get all their medical knowledge from social media. Let me try and help you not look like an idiot for doing so... first of all, the CDC is being misquoted left, right and center so unless you have a link or a verifiable quote, your numbers are pretty much meaningless.

Secondly, people who die from ANY disease, from AIDS to SARS almost ALWAYS die from complications created by the disease rather than the disease itself. This is why some people run a higher risk than others. This recent effort on social media to cite these complications as proof that it wasn't caused by COVID-19 depends on people being ignorant of this.

Finally, simple logic should have prevented you from falling for this one... As of today, there have been over 190,000 Americans with COVID-19 that have died. I'm sure most of them died from complications caused or exacerbated by COVID-19, but the point is without COVID-19, mortality rates from these other complications were not nearly as high.

Trump did NOT keep the rates low by any stretch of the imagination. He actually made it far worse by downgrading the epidemic response capacity of the federal government and by downplaying the situation to the public. He is even admitting to the later, but only because his overworked damage-control unit is telling him the evidence is getting too big to hide.