Advertisement

Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Tuesday, January 14, 2025

PBS does a long fact check on the California wildfires, pointing the misinformation being spread by the incoming President.

More

Alternate links: Google News | Twitter

So, they are discussing tying the money California desperately needs cause of the wildfires to giving Trump the ability to give the richest people in this country massive tax cuts. Fucking evil. ow.ly/5E2C105WIUB

[image or embed]

-- Maxwell Frost (@maxwellfrost.bsky.social) January 13, 2025 at 5:08 PM

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

MAGATS are too retarded to read this.

#1 | Posted by LegallyYourDead at 2025-01-13 08:26 PM | Reply

This is a hilarious article, my neighborhood is still under one day a week (Wed) watering rationing rules, just started 1 year ago, previously was on 2 a week since after COVID. Record rains for 2 years in a row, and rationing is worse. Go figure.

I spend $240 a month on my water bill. Only $20 of which is actually water.

State is in disrepair, but being paid as a State employee, Or a PUC is a great job.

#2 | Posted by oneironaut at 2025-01-14 10:30 AM | Reply

Here some facts.

Prior to 1800, California lost an average of about 4.5 million acres to fires every year.

As scientific land management and fire suppression. measures were introduced, that dropped to around 250,000 acres a year by the end of the 20th century.

But in 2020 California lost 4.3 million acres to wildfires in a single year. Between 2019 and 2023 the average was about 1.5 million acres a year.

Going as planned I'd say.

#3 | Posted by oneironaut at 2025-01-14 10:33 AM | Reply

Here's another strange thing ..

In 2019 Democrat assembly HALTED a fire safety project in Pacific Palisades to replace wooden electric poles with steel ones, and the installation of wind and fire-resistant power lines.

Why?

Because an "amateur botanist" complained that utility workers were trampling too many Braunton's Milkvetch, a perennial herb in the pea family.

Yet, the plants the botanist was concerned about were destroyed by the recent wildfires anyway.

Wild...

Crews for the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power recently bulldozed hundreds of federally endangered plants in Topanga State Park, and both state and city authorities have launched investigations into DWP's actions, part of a wildfire prevention project aimed at replacing 200 aging wooden power poles with steel ones.

"In response to recent community concerns about protected plants in the construction area, the LADWP has halted construction and is working with biologists and other experts to conduct an investigation and assessment of the site," Stephanie Spicer, a spokeswoman for the city water and power agency, said late Wednesday in response to inquiries from The Times.
www.latimes.com

#4 | Posted by oneironaut at 2025-01-14 12:19 PM | Reply

Posted by oneironaut

LOL!!!

What a complete idiot.

#5 | Posted by Angrydad at 2025-01-14 06:22 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Take Oneironaut's claims with a grain of salt.

He claimed the LA fire chief got canned. Found not true with a 5 second google search.
He also claimed that 60 vehicles from Oregon were not used due to emissions. Also untrue. it was 75 vehicles and they were used.

#6 | Posted by Alexandrite at 2025-01-14 06:57 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

Taking a step back about the water issue.

Let me ask, what municipal water supply system is capable of supplying the water needed to doused the flames of a wild fire of this magnitude?

Normally, when a house is burning, one or two firetrucks show up, attach a hose or two to the hydrant and try to extinguish the flames.

Now extrapolate that to a whole neighborhood, 100's of houses, burning down under near-hurricane force winds.

What municipal water system is designed for that?



#7 | Posted by LampLighter at 2025-01-14 07:02 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Record rains for 2 years in a row, and rationing is worse. Go figure.

Maybe you should learn what drought means before worrying about watering your lawn in an arid climate, dumbf&^%.

#8 | Posted by jpw at 2025-01-15 09:27 AM | Reply

What municipal water system is designed for that?

None.

But do you actually expect Trumper morons like onerironshortbus to actually think about it?

#9 | Posted by jpw at 2025-01-15 09:28 AM | Reply

OneIronAut seriously could be one of Putin's trolls. Russian and Russian-proxy troll farms are real

#10 | Posted by hamburglar at 2025-01-15 09:38 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Rumor: Wildfires are burning out of control in LA. Fact check: False. There are no fires. Since California passed strict air quality regulations to combat global warming wildfires have been banned. However, if there were wildfires, Donald Trump is a convicted felon.
Rumor: Fire trucks were turned away at the border due to failing emissions test. Fact check: False. Trucks were turned away, but it was because they lacked the required rainbow sticker on the bumper.

#11 | Posted by visitor_ at 2025-01-15 11:24 AM | Reply

"Take Oneironaut's claims with a grain of salt."

You are gonna need access to a salt mine.

#12 | Posted by donnerboy at 2025-01-15 12:42 PM | Reply | Funny: 1 | Newsworthy 1

"There are no fires. Since California passed strict air quality regulations to combat global warming wildfires have been banned."

There are no rapes or rape babies in Texas because Gov Abbott abolished rape and rape is against the law!

And they were not just "fires". They were wildfires. Being blown with 50- 100 mph winds and fire Fccking tornadoes. No city on earth is built to withstand such an extreme weather event.

"There is a set of weather and climate conditions that are so extreme under which there's not a whole lot that even a very well prepared city can do to manage the most extreme wildfire events."

Could the region have been better prepared? Yes. We could all be better prepared. Unfortunately (like gun control) not enough death has occurred to convince republicans regarding climate induced weather events yet. Apparently.

#13 | Posted by donnerboy at 2025-01-15 12:54 PM | Reply

Visitor is allergic to facts.

It's what makes him such a devoted Republican.

#14 | Posted by ClownShack at 2025-01-15 12:58 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

look at this from a risk management perspective.....

several risk factors had to be present at the same time.

high winds
low humidity
fairly dense housing
billions of $$ of property at risk in the event of a wildfire

These are all factors that had to be present at the same time in order for this to happen, right?

IOW, if you remove any of those factors....the chance of this level of devastation occurring is significantly reduced or even eliminated.

#15 | Posted by eberly at 2025-01-15 01:05 PM | Reply

and to add onto it....

let's pretend there is no risk transfer mechanism (property and casualty insurance) available to purchase.

we have to self-insure this risk.......what changes would we make if we had to self-insure it all??

we'd look harder at the probability of those risk factors all being present at the same time (and any other factors I failed to mention).

#16 | Posted by eberly at 2025-01-15 01:08 PM | Reply

These are all factors that had to be present at the same time in order for this to happen, right?

Yes. The problem is air conditioning. Without A/C, no one would have built a gigantic city there.

#17 | Posted by REDIAL at 2025-01-15 01:08 PM | Reply

You are gonna need access to a salt mine.

Posted by donnerboy at 2025-01-15 12:42 PM | Reply

Send her my way. We have one here.

#18 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2025-01-15 01:09 PM | Reply

-We have one here.

several, actually.

#19 | Posted by eberly at 2025-01-15 01:12 PM | Reply

look at this from a risk management perspective.....

several risk factors had to be present at the same time.

high winds
low humidity
fairly dense housing
billions of $$ of property at risk in the event of a wildfire

These are all factors that had to be present at the same time in order for this to happen, right?

IOW, if you remove any of those factors....the chance of this level of devastation occurring is significantly reduced or even eliminated.

#15 | Posted by eberly

You left out extreme and highly abnormal winter drought in that area.

No extreme drought, no massive wildfire.

But no, let's skip planning for climate change causing this on a regular basis in the future because climate change is fake, right?

#20 | Posted by Sycophant at 2025-01-15 01:41 PM | Reply

We have one here.

several, actually.

Posted by eberly at 2025-01-15 01:12 PM | Reply

We only have one here. The other two are brine well extraction. Cargill and Morton.

#21 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2025-01-15 01:42 PM | Reply

Rumor: The infrastructure was inadequate for fighting wildfires. False. All the hydrants were 100% operational and had plenty of pressure. In fact the firefighters had too much water. Larger diameter pipes are unpossible and two water systems like the ones in San Francisco don't exist.

#22 | Posted by visitor_ at 2025-01-15 01:58 PM | Reply

21

I see....I stand corrected. Thanks.

-You left out extreme and highly abnormal winter drought in that area.

Is that mutually exclusive of the humidity? What's the significance of drought separate from low humidity?

humidity can be measured.....how do we measure drought?

I'm just asking...not arguing.

#23 | Posted by eberly at 2025-01-15 02:05 PM | Reply

Rumor: The infrastructure was inadequate for fighting wildfires. False. All the hydrants were 100% operational and had plenty of pressure. In fact the firefighters had too much water. Larger diameter pipes are unpossible and two water systems like the ones in San Francisco don't exist.
#22 | Posted by visitor_ at 2025-01-15 01:58 PM

Fact: The wildfires were adequate to overpower the infrastructure.

#24 | Posted by redlightrobot at 2025-01-15 02:06 PM | Reply

"humidity can be measured.....how do we measure drought?"

Moisture content of the soil at different depths in a given area.

#25 | Posted by donnerboy at 2025-01-15 02:10 PM | Reply

25

okay....is there data available that captures the level of drought on a day to day basis in a given area? specifically this area where the fires are occurring?

I'm trying to get to a point where a probability of all these factors happening at once can be calculated.

I keep seeing "abnormal conditions" being written. Meaning low probability of it all occurring together.

how low of a probability? from a PR perspective it would helpful to illustrate how of a probability this was of happening to combat the camp of people who are blaming local officials and the state of california in general for inaction and incompetence.

I'm sure many folks in high profile positions had data of this nature right now.........

#26 | Posted by eberly at 2025-01-15 02:26 PM | Reply

and to the drought questions I posed in 26......it's because wind speed and humidity levels day by day is probably available. It's why they both are solid risk factors.

#27 | Posted by eberly at 2025-01-15 02:28 PM | Reply

is there data available that captures the level of drought on a day to day basis in a given area?

I'm sure there is. The fire chief said they had no real rain for 250 days so the drought has been more or less the same for at least that long.

The winds are a more recent thing. I'm sure there have been many fires in the last 6 months that have been contained and extinguished. Nothing is going to stop a wildfire in near hurricane force winds.

#28 | Posted by REDIAL at 2025-01-15 02:36 PM | Reply

"The winds are a more recent thing"

Santa Ana winds typically occur in fall and winter, peaking between September and March.
Gusts often exceed 60 miles per hour (97 kilometers per hour), and extreme cases have recorded speeds of up to 100 miles per hour (160 kilometers per hour).
The winds bring extremely low humidity, often below 10 percent, significantly drying out vegetation and increasing wildfire risks.
Santa Ana winds typically occur 10 to 25 times each year.
These occurrences can last anywhere from one to seven days, with the average duration being three days.

www.surfertoday.com

so the wind gets above 60 mph somewhat frequently seasonally. IIRC, winds were 100 mph during these fires, right?

60 mph seems really high if it comes with low humidity....and that happens a lot.

#29 | Posted by eberly at 2025-01-15 02:47 PM | Reply

21

I see....I stand corrected. Thanks.

-You left out extreme and highly abnormal winter drought in that area.

Is that mutually exclusive of the humidity? What's the significance of drought separate from low humidity?

humidity can be measured.....how do we measure drought?

I'm just asking...not arguing.

#23 | Posted by eberly

From what I can tell, yes, very different from humidity.

They use a variety of indices to measure drought. The big factors are Precipitation, Temperature, Streamflow, Soil moisture and Snowpack. But the indices lag behind wildfire conditions and actual drought conditions obviously.

Obviously the big one for that area are Precipitation and Soil Moisture. Both are incredibly and unusually low.

Then you toss in the 40-80 mph winds...

#30 | Posted by Sycophant at 2025-01-15 02:54 PM | Reply

so the wind gets above 60 mph somewhat frequently seasonally

Yes. Usually it's called wildfire season. This one is just more newsworthy since it's burning LA rather than some random hillside.

#31 | Posted by REDIAL at 2025-01-15 02:56 PM | Reply

30/31

Thanks to you both for the context.

I grew up on a farm. "Drought" was a term used by farmers to point out the lack of precipitation. well....to bitch about it really..

I suspected there were far more detailed factors that truly defines a drought and how to measure it......but I don't know anything about it.

#32 | Posted by eberly at 2025-01-15 03:01 PM | Reply

I grew up on a farm. "Drought" was a term used by farmers to point out the lack of precipitation. well....to bitch about it really..

I suspected there were far more detailed factors that truly defines a drought and how to measure it......but I don't know anything about it.

Posted by eberly at 2025-01-15 03:01 PM | Reply

It's always been drier where you are from. Especially during the Dust Bowl days.

#33 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2025-01-15 03:06 PM | Reply

Yes. Usually it's called wildfire season. This one is just more newsworthy since it's burning LA rather than some random hillside.

#31 | Posted by REDIAL

Except...this isn't wildfire season in California. That's June and July maybe until October/November.

#34 | Posted by Sycophant at 2025-01-15 03:37 PM | Reply

Except...this isn't wildfire season in California.

My bad. I thought Santa Anna season was the same time.

#35 | Posted by REDIAL at 2025-01-15 03:43 PM | Reply

"What municipal water system is designed for that?

None.

But do you actually expect Trumper morons like onerironshortbus to actually think about it?"

Maybe the one in an area wit the outright potential for fires of this magnitude, with known climate change exacerbating the liklihood.

How f'n hard is it for people defending the lack of preparedness for this that it could be seen coming from a long way away yet nothing was done. And then calling out that lack of preparation somehow make those calling it out somehow the dumb one.

#36 | Posted by kwrx25 at 2025-01-16 09:43 AM | Reply

okay....is there data available that captures the level of drought on a day to day basis in a given area?

#26 | Posted by eberly

I don't think there is a daily measure of drought level. But nationally, this report seems to do it weekly...

www.drought.gov)%20to%20depict%20drought%20conditions.

#37 | Posted by Whatsleft at 2025-01-16 10:41 AM | Reply

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy

Drudge Retort