Numerous articles and statements weaponizing weather events to push an agenda have shown up of late. This is predictable given the time of the year when we are experiencing both hurricane season and and election cyclone. I coined the term, “weaponizing the weather” several years ago and it forms part of the title of my new book. Given the onslaught I see, I almost wish I had not, because it seems people didn’t realize it was a warning, not a recommendation.
It seems we get a new weather exaggeration every day.
Kamala Harris joined in saying, “California, like so many other parts of our country, has experienced extreme weather conditions. It is incumbent on us, in terms 
of the leadership of our nation, to take seriously these new changes in our climate, and to do what we can to mitigate against the damage.”
So lets deal with some aspects of the horrid wildfires, which for the areas hit hardest, are the worst on record, but cant’ hold a candle to what happened in the 1930s nationally when 4-5 x more acreage burned. I wonder if Senator Harris knows this?
The problem is that you don’t see that part of the graphic that I am showing you here, unless you are reading articles like this. They won’t show you what happened.. And the increase we see the past. few decades is conveniently linked to man-made climate change, case in point what Ms Harris and Gov Newsom are saying. I agree man has something to do with it, but not in the way its being portrayed to a large degree, The man made part has to do with a change in land usage, water usage, inherent in a population that has increased 2 and a half fold since the 1950s!
Journalists used to love to look underneath what they were being told. And the agenda driven zealots weaponizing weather and climate for their own purposes are never going to look at anything that can possibly get in the way of their true goal.
Solet’s look beneath the surface. Summers in the west are always drier compared to their winter seasons. It is overall a dry climate in summer , and patterns can lock in dependent on certain planetary signals. A warm winter in the east for instance is a product of many factors, This years Atlantic hurricane season for instance is countered by what is close to a record LOW year of cyclonic energy in the Pacific basin, which is home to over 75% of global tropical cyclone activity. The planetary tropical energy production is only 60% of average. Very often when the Pacific basin gets shut down, the western Atlantic and gulf become active in the tropics, and , the western US has upper air ridges that are stronger than average. The result is hot dry weathe there. Anyone screaming climate change bringing this up? Any journalist looking at this? Of course not.
Now the last 5 years have been drier than average in the pac northwest, but near average in California:
In addition much of the nation has been wet, OPPOSITE OF WHAT WAS BEING PUSHED AFTER THE HOT DRY SUMMERS OF 2010, 11, and 12.
The 1950s were opposite, dry in California but wet in the north.
The 1930s showed the opposite again.
But look at the large amount of dryness in the nation! In addition summer max temperatures were hotter 1931-1960 over much of the nation:
So the west is warmer the past 30 years, but there is compensating cooling further east.
By the way , the decade of the 30s featured the summers of 1934 and 1936 which had a Palmer drought index like this.
And max temperatures like this.
Imagine a Joe Biden on the campaign trail then. I mean coming out of his basement every now and then, since it would likely be too hot to campaign. And too dusty (height of the dust bowl)
Why is man making it warmer in one place, but cooler in another? Answer: he is not. Why is man making it rain more in one place, not rain as much, then flipping it around? Answer: he is not. Nature is. However none of this is shown because the dogma of this agenda shuts down questioning
So the weather swings back and forth. The perma-drought being forecasted for the plains after the hot dry summers of 2010-2013 reversed the same way it did in the 1950s. California had plenty of rain a couple of years ago to balance their so called permanent drought. But no matter what happens, climate change is blamed. How can you say there is a perma -drought, have it rain, then claim the rain was for the same reason that the perma -drought. Then when it gets dry again, claim that to be your answer. It could snow cheese in Los Angeles and that would be climate change. Its almost like any answer goes. Everyone gets a climate trophy if you blame climate change and the capitalist system that is driving it. But if one simply examines what has happened before, one sees a pattern of back and forth where the swings have been extreme before, and will be so again.
We have something we use called the Palmer drought index ( I showed the mid 1930s above). How come it would be worse now in the west ( though for much of the nation it is great for growing food, something at last look, was a benefit to man not associated with a crisis), than it was in the 30s-50s when rainfall was actually a bit less? Well lets look at the definition.
The Palmer Drought Index is based on a supply-and-demand model of soil moisture. Supply is comparatively straightforward to calculate, but demand is more complicated as it depends on many factors, not just temperature and the amount of moisture in the soil but also hard-to-calibrate factors including evapotranspiration and recharge rates
Recharge rates. Hmm, how much water is coming back into the system.
Well lets see. The population in the late. 1930s, the decade of the most acreage burn in the US, of the 3 west coast states was 8.5 million. In the late 1950s. 18 million Now over 50 million, Can you imagine the demand on the water supply, how much it has increased?
Looks at the 5 year period 1955-1959.
1935-1939.
What happens when it rains too much in the winter? Once the weather warms foliage explodes for a time, but it is going to dry out. In a strange sense, too much rain can lead to enhanced fire seasons, because there is always going to be dry weather, there is always going to be thunderstorms going off that can set this off. Not to mention all the other man-made causes, accidental or in sick cases, arson. In fact look at this statement from the forest service as to what causes most of these fires.
The most common direct human causes of wildfire ignition include arson, discarded cigarettes, power-lines arcs (as detected by arc mapping), and sparks from equipment.
The most common cause of wildfires varies throughout the world. In Canada and northwest China, lightning operates as the major source of ignition.
Forest management, I won’t get into that, I am just bringing up other points that are not considered when wildfires are weaponized for agenda driven purposes
Finally while this year is likely going to be the number one year out of the last 10, the record year of 2017 was. 5 times less than the average of the 1930s as you saw above
So what is the conclusion. 1) No question the climate is changing. it always has and always will. 2) Man is contributing to the problem, but not in the way that is being portrayed as the main reason. More people, more usage, the rise in wildfires the last 20-30 years has coincided with the rise of CO2 and temps in the west, but also the explosion of population. 3) Adaptation, management and progress, not simply a one size fits all draconian solution, is the way to deal with this. Finally, journalist should at least stop and take the time to examine other aspects of this. I never ask anyone to believe what I say, just to look at competing factors.
The total picture is where the answer lies, not just assuming man is now the climate control knob, when he has never been before. Seems a tad arrogant in the face of what is an infinite untamed system. Questioning is what we were taught many years ago and perhaps the biggest aspect of all this is the lack of willingness to do so in people that used to be the first too.