Did the Governor of California start the wildfires that are currently devastating the state?

Can we see some links? That sounds very tin hat.

There is a double negative in your question, so it makes it hard to figure out what you are asking.

And it is a nonsense question, so flagging.

lololol

@janbb
https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/5074326-donald-trump-gavin-newsom-california-wildfires/

I rest my case.

That source says it all.

Disinformation and propagating it exactly what Alex Jones was found guilty of.
Don’t be irresponsible.

Blaming a Dem is the first response of Trump. G-d forbid he should show some empathy ever.

Oh Lord! What will he come up with next.

Answer: No . . .

During the first Trump term/folly as POTUS, Trump and his followers also blamed California for having wildfires, including arguments that Jew-controlled space lasers set the fires.

Well, at least we know the source of all the hot winds.

If his mouth is moving – he’s lying.

@zenvelo the double negative is intentional. You should keep up with American politics…

It’s always amusing to me how little Americans (politicians in particular) understand about wildfire, wildfire prevention, and the vicissitudes of a semi-arid climate (especially those who live east of the Mississippi, where rain is abundant and there is no dry season to speak of). Just in case there was any doubt, pumping more water from the north would only be relevant in a discussion about drinking water availability and reservoir levels; it has nothing to do with a parched landscape that has not received any rainfall in 10 months being battered by dry winds.

@Demosthenes We’ve actually had our first serious drought this Fall. it is no fun.

At this point, I assume all wildfires are caused by gender reveal parties gone wrong until the practice is banned.

Yes, I saw him personally, sneaking around in the mountains and lighting fires.

Well, Marjorie Taylor Green blamed it on “Jews with space lasers” in 2018. Here

Sheesh. The world has gone mad.

Still under investigation as of today. Its incredibly sad.
I also heard State Farm removed fire coverage recently!

Some show called Redacted or something that my dad is watching seems to think that all this is because of liberal policies. What policies? The ones the liberals wrote duh you think they’d tell you???? What are facts?

Edit, it is not Redacted that is something else.

@SergeantQueen I’m not saying I’d put it that way myself, seems ridiculous. Heres a link though.
https://www.hoover.org/research/how-california-wildfires-fan-political-and-policy-flames

Thanks. I was watching a bit of it and I am blown away by the lack of sources. And then they started attacking DEI and a woman chief or whatever.

But the original question seems to be asking if he can get in trouble for not doing something that wouldn’t have fixed anything…?

Everyone says the Santa Ana winds were coming out of the hot canyons at 100 mph. I dont think anyone could have stopped it. So no how can they prosecute an act of God?

Yeah that is what I’m saying^

and that news source he was watching was called Redacted News

By twisting it into some thing else @KNOW?

You mean kind of like how Trump lied about how immigrants were “eating the cats! . . . they’re eating the dogs! . . . they’re eating the pets!”, or about how an immigrant was responsible for the recent attack in New Orleans, or about endless other scapegoating lies with zero basis in truth?

^It was likely Newsome, sharing someone’s pet over an open fire, with illegal immigrants.
Clearly the fentanyl can sneak up on you, and suddenly Fido is fire…

The only other possible explanation, is Jewish space lasers. I wish Jewish people would just leave the world alone.

One of my “QAnon” friends posted about the wildfire in CA and her thread filled up with people talking about human trafficking, wrath of God, etc etc. Most are probably real people maybe one or two are bots. A few posts about CA not doing things to help prevent large forest fires, some of which actually have some merit, but since Trump has mentioned them most Democrats dismiss that too.

I wonder what Trump plans to do with FEMA. My guess is they will cut its budget by a lot.

This question is like a kid putting a bag of flaming poo on your doorstep so they can step back and watch.

@JLeslie Like what? Provide some actual, specific examples. What was not being done in the Santa Monica Mountains that could’ve prevented the Palisades Fire?

If we want to talk policy, let’s talk about Newsom’s support for fracking and drilling and other actions that exacerbate climate change.

Where’s Trump’s commentary when flooding occurs in Appalachia? What are the failed conservative policies that led to that?

@Demosthenes @janbb The Appalachians’ problems will be solved by a new Trump/Musk-trained AI, which will have them drafted to replace all current FEMA staff, and their job will be to go to emergency locations and tell the survivors what losers they are, and that if they don’t want to become a 3rd world shithole, they’ll need to get more jobs or be deported.

@Demosthenes I can try to find that show I saw or if someone can search fluther when we talked about fire previously I put the link a long tome ago. I’m sure some of the fires cannot be prevented.

In 2020 trump said California needs to rake your forests.
He is mind numbingly stupid.

@JLeslie There are plenty of wildfire mitigation efforts, like forest thinning, removal of dead trees, prescribed burns, but some of those things don’t apply to certain landscapes (a chapparal or grassland landscape is not a forest), some can’t be done in certain circumstances (you can’t do a prescribed burn during the dry season, and there are challenges when it’s close to the WUI, not to mention private land), and yeah, if you’ve had 10 months without rain and high winds, some fires are not going to be prevented even by the best preventive measures.

Another prevention method is simply not building homes in wildfire-prone areas, but I’d say the ship has sailed on that one (and the definition of “wildfire-prone areas” continues to expand as the climate gets drier).

@Demosthenes I accept everything you said.

As far as building, that’s a mix of people being able to build on their own land and how much power should the government use to prevent it in the name of safety or possible expense in the future. Developers and builders pushing for permits and good ol’ friendships mixed in. That happens everywhere in every state.

When I lived in North Carolina there was constant talk about the strain on the public water system and too much “urban sprawl” is what they called it. In Florida we build in flood zones. In Arizona they have a serious water problem. It’s not just California; it just takes other forms in other states.

As far as Trump when he made a statement many years ago, my objections was and is most Democrats just did their typical immediate dismissal instead of having an educational conversation like how you explained some things to me. The show I saw was also very interesting. That type of dismissal and name calling gives Republicans room to not listen to any explanations or counter arguments. Additionally, Democrats don’t have comprehensive information either.

That’s my frustration. Both sides helping the division and ignorance instead of engaging in conversation. Not here on fluther obviously.

I’m all for engaging in conversation, but coming out and trashing a Democratic governor and a blue state you hate while people are dying and their homes are burning isn’t a conversation. You can’t have an honest conversation with someone who is coming to the conversation in bad faith and just wants to score political points. I’m sure those in flooded areas of North Carolina didn’t want to be chided and browbeaten about all the things they did wrong by people from L.A. And if discussing climate change is not even on the table, then a major piece of the conversation is missing.

Ohhh. Of course @Demosthenes. Didn’t think of that.

@Demosthenes I half agree. The time to get improvements is usually when there is high emotion. First should be caring for those affected, but simultaneously or immediately after there can be evaluation and motivation for change. I happened in Florida after the school shooting some gun laws were changed even with a Republican governor. I think it can be difficult to find the right balance.

I hate the political part of it, but the part to improve through critical analysis is worthwhile. When should it happen? Ideally during a calm time when planning is well thought out. Unfortunately, it too often doesn’t happen that way.

People outside of Florida do not hold back criticizing Florida when hurricanes come through. They don’t hold back from making it political too.

It’s not so much about when you say it, as what you are saying. When, for example, it was discovered that a major fire in 2021 was caused by PG&E power lines and that this was the second such fire in this same area caused by the same power lines in a few years, there was immediate discussion about power shut-offs and why they didn’t happen during a massive wind event, the responsibility of PG&E and what kind of restitution they would have to pay, etc. When the Caldor Fire destroyed a large swath of land in the Tahoe area that I’ve been visiting since I was a young kid, I found myself questioning why that fire was “allowed to burn” for several days while resources were diverted elsewhere, when in my opinion that fire should’ve been top priority.

But that is a far cry from railing against a politician you don’t like, making your usual anti-whatever-party-you-don’t-like comments, and offering half-baked “solutions” that betray a lack of understanding of wildfire mitigation. Are you actually trying to talk about the methods and practices of disaster prevention and relief or are you just trying to gloat about politics you disagree with?

^^Agree.

My understanding is that there were very few massive wildfires, before the Europeans came to North America.

I’m pulling this, from a few articles I had read during Trump’s first term, or the memory I guess.

But the native Americans, did not attempt to extinguish fires outside of their own living space.
The fires would have naturally burnt themselves out, after mainly just clearing the forrest floors.

The European immigrants, who came from more permanent cities and villages, feared letting fires burn so they often tried to put them out. Over time, the lack of naturally occurring forrest fires fulfilling their role in the cycle of a healthy forrest ecosystem, led to debris building up over many years.
So. The fires now, are the results of the lack of natural “raking,” that doesn’t happen, and of course proximity to humans, means more cigarette butts, car exhaust pipes on dry grass, and out of control poorly tended campfires…

Of course there were @MrGrimm888 before the Europeans! But there were almost no people on the continent to see them.

^No there were people here. They just went somewhere else, until the fire burnt out…

“Cahokia,” was a massive native American city on the Mississippi, close to present day St. Louis, Missouri.
It was likely the center of trade, and all sorts of things, from circa 1000AD-1400AD.
They left, because the soil changed.

West of the Mississippi, Native Americans were more nomadic. They followed ison migration, and moved with the seasons.

As they never had congested midevil cities, they never saw what an uncontrolled fire would do to an urban area.
The Europeans, had learned many different ways of “fighting fire,” before they ever heard of North America.
It was not stupidity, the European immigrants, built similarly and rightly feared fire…

I didn’t write those articles. But the theory is logical. We know that God isn’t burning it because of the homosexuals in CA…

If I recall, there were mentions of perhaps using prisoners, to manage the forrests undergrowth.

Fire departments throughout the world, use “controlled burns,” to get rid of the undergrowth that would give rise to bigger fires.
That’s something the European immigrants, didn’t do in places like CA. They employ all sorts if tactics now.
Unfortunately, climate change, is also playing a role. So. We have a lot of catching up, to do.

They are using prisoners for the fire fighting in California. I saw a special on it a few years ago and they mentioned it in the reporting of these current fires. What I don’t remember is if they are paid a fair wage, which I would like to know.

@MrGrimm888…of course there were people here! A few million of them by the 1400s. But they probably witnessed .005% of the wildfires, compared to the 100% of us see today.
To say “it was different then” is absurd.
Also, the destruction level is partially calculated by how badly it devastates human populated areas. That’s what’s making the SoCal fires a bigger catasrophy.

JL, they have used prisoners to fight the fires for awhile in CA.
Apparently the firefighters are paid very poorly…
I’m not from the west coast, and I’m not saying that what I have heard is 100% accurate.
But. It’s very logical…

The Native Americans, did not choose to inhabit places that had environmental dangers.
Which is why I gave you “Cahokia,” as an example.

There are thousands of ancient cities, that were abandoned, for environmental reasons.

California, from a purely logical perspective, should not have massive cities. There is great difficulty in providing water, to vast swaths of California.

Gold brought people there, and people kept coming. But that doesn’t mean, it was a good idea to build golf courses and houses with swimming pools, and grow crops like almonds…

Many areas affected by natural disasters, are suburbs and expanded living areas, for bigger cities. Cities, are typically planned. If flooding is a risk, then there is usually an area that is designated a flood plain. Never really intended, for residential or other uses, these are simply places that are designed to soak up water so as not to flood a nearby city.
Over time, people become victims of gentrification, and move further and further away from the city, to be able to afford to live with increased rent in cities.
This phenomenon, is how most people end up living in places that were wild previously.
As these areas were never really intended for development, they are often more susceptible to natural disasters.

LA, in regards to water access, is a terrible place for such a big city. The American southwest, has a LOT of such places, that take a LOT of resources to manage.
When I went to Scottsdale Arizona, several years ago, I couldn’t believe the place.
As you drive around this desert, you notice every yard is a healthy green, and 90% of homes have a swimming pool.

I’m not blaming, anyone. It is just how things worked out.

^^In Florida many flood areas are re-landscaped to create retaining ponds and dry areas. Reclaimed water for irrigating lawns take from the ponds to help prevent flooding too. Areas can still flood in the newly creates X zones, but it’s much less likely.

^When parts of Florida are eventually under water, permanently (most climatologists claim this WILL occur in the next 50–100 years or sooner,) people will leave.
I imagine that a LOT of people, are rethinking whether to rebuild again, or move. It’s REALLY sad, and I’ve personally experienced it, but it happens.
As the sea level rises, many highly populated cities, will have to be abandoned.
Currently Indonesia, is in the process of moving their capital city from Jakarta to Nusantara, because Jakarta (est population of 11,436,000 people as of ‘24,) is “sinking,” due to sea level rise.
That’s just one example, currently affecting almost 12 million people…

At any rate. I saw some video of the Rose Bowl parking lot, where a lot of firefighters and volunteers are, and it’s like a little town. It’s a beautiful thing, to SO many people united.
Hopefully, they will be successful.

@MrGrimm888 No doubt some coastal areas might wind up underwater permanently. We’ll see how well we can mitigate flooding. I feel confident we won’t be in front of a lot of it and won’t be able to stave off all of the destruction that is predicted.

There are cities around the world that are below sea level and dams and levees control the water. Seawalls can help with this, although seawalls hold steady the land more than anything I think.

Even New York City pumps water out of the underground daily although I don’t know if it is considered to be below sea level as a city. Charleston is below sea level if I remember correctly. Miami, Amsterdam, I don’t know the whole list.

I saw a special about a country in Europe that has been forcing some people out of their homes to redirect water. It’s not a happy thing what is in the future for many people. The climate change will cause migration due to heat and flood. Much of the migration can be within country, but some will cross borders. The effects of weather will probably become one of the largest migration issues of our time.

^That’s what I’m saying. Weather, environment, whatever is the biggest constant in Anthropology. Maybe tied, with wars…