# The sky is falling, the sky is falling ....



## shawnlee (Apr 13, 2010)

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/a...ed-on-black-friday/ar-BBQ1DzR?ocid=spartanntp



Apparently leading the world for the last 13 years is not enough,...….let me guess , they just need more money ! 





*But a White House spokeswoman did send me a lengthy statement saying that “the United States leads the world in providing affordable, abundant, and secure energy to our citizens, while also leading the world in reducing carbon-dioxide emissions.” (This is only true if you start counting in 2005,when U.S. emissions peaked.) The spokeswoman said this new assessment was based on the “most-extreme scenario,” and promised any future report would have a “more transparent and data-driven process.”

The report is a huge achievement for American science. It represents cumulative decades of work from more than 300 authors. Since 2015, scientists from across the U.S. government, state universities, and businesses have read thousands of studies, summarizing and collating them into this document. By law, a National Climate Assessment like this must be published every four years.
*


----------



## Bob M. (Nov 5, 2018)

its msn.com. I'd say more but honestly shouldn't have to.

I think it is amusing how things like this say "The report warns, repeatedly and directly, that climate change could soon imperil the American way of life, transforming every region of the country, imposing frustrating costs on the economy, and harming the health of virtually every citizen."...and yet they fail to add: "Or it could not." and most fools fail to realize that is the balance to 'could'.

"I could vomit....or I might not.", "I could win the lottery this week...or I might not..."...funny how bias 'news'/stories work.

Also it is important for people to realize hack writing and reporting when they run into it. it often contains a ton of personal opinion, and insinuation this is what someone means, and not usually full quotes (only selective ones at most often used out of context.) because 1) full qoutes would generally show the reader what was really said and meant and 2)they want to lead the reader with their bias, not allow them to think correctly for themselves, although honestly most peoples reading comprehension seems fairly low these days.


----------



## gilberte (Sep 25, 2004)

It's not so much reading comprehension as it is critical thinking.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

Is the actual paper acceptable? It's endorsed by NASA, NOAA, the Department of Defense, and 10 other scientific agencies. Or should you listen to a man that thinks raking the leaves from the forest floor will help? And no, the Finnish President has stated he never said anything of the sort. Make America Rake Again. LOL 

https://nca2018.globalchange.gov/


----------



## NRA_guy (Jun 9, 2015)

Ever wonder how Himalayan salt came to be high up in the Himalayan Mountains?

Or how all that salt came to be in the Bonneville Salt Flats in Utah?

Or how limestone hundreds of feet thick came to be 200 miles inland from the Gulf of Mexico?

I suppose it was climate change caused by dinosaurs since mankind was not around back then.

Weren't Miami and New York City supposed to be under water by now according to Al Gore and his comrades? Or did ethanol use, electric cars, solar panels, and windmills prevent that catastrophe?


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

There is no arguing with that kind of logic.


----------



## Bob M. (Nov 5, 2018)

Exactly NG. People seem to try to claim others "Do not believe in climate change" as a straw man fallacy, when pretty much everyone believes in climate change. The Climate changes. period, always has and always will. Ask the dinosaurs. ask the mushrooms the planet used to have that grew fruit that was up to 25 ft tall. These people then try to use strawman again and claim climate change is happening faster, for of course their reasons and agendas/ie man made decisions and products they of course do not agree with only, and that doesn't really work either.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

Irish Pixie said:


> Or should you listen to a man that thinks raking the leaves from the forest floor will *help*?


Making fire breaks help.
That includes raking leaves and cutting brush.


----------



## SLADE (Feb 20, 2004)

Bearfootfarm said:


> Making fire breaks help.
> That includes raking leaves and cutting brush.


If you pee on the fire when it's just getting going it will go out.


----------



## shawnlee (Apr 13, 2010)

Bearfootfarm said:


> Making fire breaks help.
> That includes raking leaves and cutting brush.


 Being in California since 1970, that's exactly what they used to do, until the tree huggers stopped them, fire breaks kill the forest......controlled burns pollute the planet.


----------



## shawnlee (Apr 13, 2010)

SRSLADE said:


> If you pee on the fire when it's just getting going it will go out.



The new trend is shut off the water so they can`t pee when needed...….


----------



## NRA_guy (Jun 9, 2015)

Self-proclaimed elites tell other self-proclaimed elites that non-self-proclaimed elites should listen to their self-proclaimed elitism.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

shawnlee said:


> Being in California since 1970, that's exactly what they used to do, until the tree huggers stopped them, fire breaks kill the forest......controlled burns pollute the planet.


When did the tree huggers make them stop raking the forests?


----------



## Terri (May 10, 2002)

Wasn't the polar ice caps supposed to be melted and gone by now? I do take Climate Change seriously: it is those agencies I no longer take seriously! 

The earth does heat and cool off-archaeologists have told us so and I see no reason to not believe them- but I believe that climate change will occur when it does occurs and not when the government agencies predict. And, I think that another Minimum is just as likely as Global Warming.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

Terri said:


> Wasn't the polar ice caps supposed to be melted and gone by now? I do take Climate Change seriously: it is those agencies I no longer take seriously!
> 
> The earth does heat and cool off-archaeologists have told us so and I see no reason to not believe them- but I believe that climate change will occur when it does occurs and not when the government agencies predict. And, I think that another Minimum is just as likely as Global Warming.


If you no longer take NASA, NOAA, the Department of Defense, and others seriously, where do you get your information regarding climate change?


----------



## Clem (Apr 12, 2016)

And, of course, burning up all the landlocked carbon and putting it in the air so we can breath it surely helps, right??

The functioning idea here is simple: I'm old, I'm gonna die fairly soon anyway, so screw my children and grandchildren, they'll just have to make do.


----------



## Star School Farm (Mar 24, 2018)

But “mah 12 year ultimatum” after “mah ice caps melting by the year 2000”…


----------



## Clem (Apr 12, 2016)

Wish I knew what mah references. All I know is that it's a measurement of electrical storage, milliamp hours.


----------



## Hiro (Feb 14, 2016)

Clem said:


> And, of course, burning up all the landlocked carbon and putting it in the air so we can breath it surely helps, right??
> 
> The functioning idea here is simple: I'm old, I'm gonna die fairly soon anyway, so screw my children and grandchildren, they'll just have to make do.


I was unaware that trace amounts of CO2 (0.04%) was harmful to animals. Maybe that is why they pump it into greenhouses...to harm the plants. Wait....


----------



## Clem (Apr 12, 2016)

It's not religion, and I don't knows. It's fact. Doesn't really matter if you "believe" everything is OK.


----------



## Hiro (Feb 14, 2016)

Clem said:


> It's not religion, and I don't knows. It's fact. Doesn't really matter if you "believe" everything is OK.


What is fact?


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

SRSLADE said:


> If you pee on the fire when it's just getting going it will go out.


If you rake the leaves away from around your campfire you can pee somewhere else.

I realize y'all hate Trump so much you feel compelled to argue against everything he says, but it's still reality.



Irish Pixie said:


> If you no longer take NASA, NOAA, the Department of Defense, and others seriously, where do you get your information regarding climate change?


Those are all Govt agencies who want more funding to fight this "global climate change". 

History shows the climate always has and will always be in a state of "change".


----------



## Terri (May 10, 2002)

Irish Pixie said:


> If you no longer take NASA, NOAA, the Department of Defense, and others seriously, where do you get your information regarding climate change?


Other places on the internet, and yes I check the sources.


----------



## Wolf mom (Mar 8, 2005)

When someone talks about the effect the sun is having on our climate, then I'll listen.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

Terri said:


> Other places on the internet, and yes I check the sources.


Can you be more specific? I like to read all the information I can find.


----------



## Clem (Apr 12, 2016)

Hiro said:


> What is fact?


Did you not read the link that inspired this thread, or are you intentionally being obtuse?


----------



## Terri (May 10, 2002)

Irish Pixie said:


> Can you be more specific? I like to read all the information I can find.


This should get you some good sources: she is a scientist who believes we are going into a minimum, and she is giving a lecture to people who believe in global warming. Between them there should be plenty of things for the search engines to look up






Right now I am still gathering info: I have no real opinion. However if the lady is correct then we should see signs of another minimum in 1-2 years

I did see one weak spot in her presentation: if the world cools a bit we will no longer have the big harvests in the Northern part of the grain belt, true, HOWEVER we should get larger grain harvests in the areas that are currently too warm to raise large harvests of grain. 

As for the rest of her presentation, parts of it look good and logical and parts of it I did not understand. 

Yet


----------



## Hiro (Feb 14, 2016)

Clem said:


> Did you not read the link that inspired this thread, or are you intentionally being obtuse?


Not obtuse. Just responding to your intellectually vapid post about carbon in the atmosphere. Carbon is an element. No one is putting just carbon in the air unless you are pumping the graphite tubes meant for lubrication into atmosphere for some obscure reason. 

If you are talking about CO2 emissions, we can have a discussion about it. Particularly, how they are dropping in the developed world and rising in the emerging world. So, should we bomb the coal plants providing electricity in the developing world to reduce carbon emissions? Those poor people that have gone so long without electricity and heat are killing the planet.


----------



## Clem (Apr 12, 2016)

Just like the rest of us here at HT, I'm well past the halfway point, and I am aware that my days are numbered. So, screw it all, and future generations can fend for themselves. Let's ignore science and reality, ignorance is what we need to make America great again.
And insults, of course. That comes from the very top.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

Irish Pixie said:


> Can you be more specific? I like to read all the information I can find.


Nothing is preventing you from finding anything you look for.


----------



## shawnlee (Apr 13, 2010)

Irish Pixie said:


> When did the tree huggers make them stop raking the forests?



I am not, sure, I try to listen to those crazies as little as possible.

When you live out against the mountains in the fire areas here, you are required to clear quite a bit of the trees and brush away from the property line, they even inspect and issue fines when you do not, not soo much now.

They used fancy modern rakes, such as chainsaws and bulldozers to rake giant places so they had a chance to stop people and houses from burning.....something that has been happening for thousands of years in California , not just since climate change.

So yes, they stopped them from raking the forests...…..if you cut down a oak tree here you go to prison...


We used to take care of the forests here and rake them...…..until the environuts. 


Another one not talked about is about hundreds of millions of the national forest trees here were dead wood from the drought...…..places had been warning they needed to be raked up, but no one listened, the forest service warned of the tragic events that could happen if we had a bad fire, but the state and tree huggers fought to not rake them up.....

https://www.vcstar.com/story/news/s...a-drought-millions-more-trees-dead/716277002/


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

shawnlee said:


> I am not, sure, I try to listen to those crazies as little as possible.
> 
> When you live out against the mountains in the fire areas here, you are required to clear quite a bit of the trees and brush away from the property line, they even inspect and issue fines when you do not, not soo much now.
> 
> ...


If you cut a tree that isn't yours it's called theft and you can go to prison. It happens around here with loggers that don't watch property boundaries. 

I understand firebreaks and clearing brush, but OSG said Californians should rake leaves (not branches, downed limbs etc) like the Finnish (who don't actually do that) from their forests. I know it's embarrassing but that's what he said. 

Your statement that I have bolded- are you talking about raking leaves or cleaning dead fall? Be honest. 

Also, why do you live in California? You obviously hate everything about it. Leave. Move. It might actually make you happy.


----------



## keenataz (Feb 17, 2009)

shawnlee said:


> I am not, sure, I try to listen to those crazies as little as possible.
> 
> When you live out against the mountains in the fire areas here, you are required to clear quite a bit of the trees and brush away from the property line, they even inspect and issue fines when you do not, not soo much now.
> 
> ...



Perhaps you could go to your legislature and get money for it.

And what caused those drought killed trees? Perhaps climate change


----------



## keenataz (Feb 17, 2009)

Irish Pixie said:


> If you cut a tree that isn't yours it's called theft and you can go to prison. It happens around here with loggers that don't watch property boundaries.
> 
> I understand firebreaks and clearing brush, but OSG said Californians should rake leaves (not branches, downed limbs etc) like the Finnish (who don't actually do that) from their forests. I know it's embarrassing but that's what he said.
> 
> ...



No it's not her, it's the environuts.

You know those crazies whowant clean air, water, protect endangered species and issue fake climate change reports.


----------



## JeffreyD (Dec 27, 2006)

Irish Pixie said:


> When did the tree huggers make them stop raking the forests?


It started with the Wilderness act of 1964. That act prohibited the use of mechanized travel on Federal land. Fiensteins bill also outlawed wheelchairs and chainsaws.


----------



## JeffreyD (Dec 27, 2006)

keenataz said:


> Perhaps you could go to your legislature and get money for it.
> 
> And what caused those drought killed trees? Perhaps climate change


Bark beetle...


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

JeffreyD said:


> It started with the Wilderness act of 1964. That act prohibited the use of mechanized travel on Federal land. Fiensteins bill also outlawed wheelchairs and chainsaws.


Links? I don't see the connection between your post and raking forests...


----------



## farmrbrown (Jun 25, 2012)

Irish Pixie said:


> Links? I don't see the connection between your post and raking forests...


Some of us who view nature every day don't need links to see connections.
That's why the good Lord gave us that thing that sits on the top of our shoulders.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

farmrbrown said:


> Some of us who view nature every day don't need links to see connections.
> That's why the good Lord gave us that thing that sits on the top of our shoulders.


Are you just trying to be rude? If not, there is no connection between what you posted and my request to see the laws that were referenced.


----------



## oneraddad (Jul 20, 2010)

farmrbrown said:


> Some of us who view nature every day don't need links to see connections.
> That's why the good Lord gave us that thing that sits on the top of our shoulders.



So you live in Northern California ?


----------



## haypoint (Oct 4, 2006)

Irish Pixie said:


> Is the actual paper acceptable? It's endorsed by NASA, NOAA, the Department of Defense, and 10 other scientific agencies. Or should you listen to a man that thinks raking the leaves from the forest floor will help? And no, the Finnish President has stated he never said anything of the sort. Make America Rake Again. LOL
> 
> https://nca2018.globalchange.gov/


When I was in Florida a few years ago, I saw where pine tree plantations had experienced fires. Little fires that burned the needles and small brush. I learned that to prevent losing their mature trees, they kept the flammable needles and sticks burned.


In my community, a large swampy area was burned each spring. Dead cat tails, willow brush, swamp grass was set afire. The wild blueberries flourished and the community benefited. But for the past 25 years, the area wasn't burned. Now, if there were a fire, it would be so fierce it would be uncontrollable.

30 years ago,Yellowstone National Park abandoned the policy of letting lightening strike fires burn without human intervention. They fought fires. Eventually, they realized that by stopping the fires, the underbrush built up and the fires were far worse and uncontrollable. Today they are back to letting nature take its course.

Clearly, California needs more controlled burns and a plan to reduce underbrush.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

haypoint said:


> When I was in Florida a few years ago, I saw where pine tree plantations had experienced fires. Little fires that burned the needles and small brush. I learned that to prevent losing their mature trees, they kept the flammable needles and sticks burned.
> 
> 
> In my community, a large swampy area was burned each spring. Dead cat tails, willow brush, swamp grass was set afire. The wild blueberries flourished and the community benefited. But for the past 25 years, the area wasn't burned. Now, if there were a fire, it would be so fierce it would be uncontrollable.
> ...


How do you do _safe_ _controlled_ burns in an area that is almost always in drought? Swampy areas I can understand completely.


----------



## ShannonR (Nov 28, 2012)

Irish Pixie said:


> How do you do _safe_ _controlled_ burns in an area that is almost always in drought? Swampy areas I can understand completely.


Um, in the winter. We just got 6 inches of rain last week, and another few inches again since yesterday. I'm having difficulties with intentionally lighting my brush piles...some diesel may help, lol


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

ShannonR said:


> Um, in the winter. We just got 6 inches of rain last week, and another few inches again since yesterday. I'm having difficulties with intentionally lighting my brush piles...some diesel may help, lol


OK. Since you live there, what is the rationale of why it's not done?

ETA: Is it common to get that much rain in the winter?

ETA: And it's only certain areas of California that have even had rain, correct? Southern California is still under severe drought, even in the winter.


----------



## ShannonR (Nov 28, 2012)

Irish Pixie said:


> How do you do _safe_ _controlled_ burns in an area that is almost always in drought? Swampy areas I can understand completely.


Or just clear the surrounding communities and light it up... any time of year will do. It's no different than what's happening here anyway. The new forest that grows back will be more drought resistant!


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

ShannonR said:


> Or just clear the surrounding communities and light it up... any time of year will do. It's no different than what's happening here anyway. The new forest that grows back will be more drought resistant!


So you're willing to give up your farm? Again?


----------



## haypoint (Oct 4, 2006)

Irish Pixie said:


> How do you do _safe_ _controlled_ burns in an area that is almost always in drought? Swampy areas I can understand completely.


It is dangerous in times of drought. In the Christmas tree plantations I've worked they use access lanes every ten or twelve rows. These serve as fire stops. In Michigan State forests, trails are maintained that create a fire break. Each area needs a plan suited to the weather, topography and plant type.
But even in California's drought, there have been rains.
Controlled burns, small fires allowed to burn, then extinguished, then a connecting small fire, then extinguished, provides swaths of land with no fuel for a wild fire.


----------



## Meinecke (Jun 30, 2017)

I love threats like that...it shows how black and white people got...only my way or no way...
Is it true that climate changed and will ever change? 
Sure it will and was...
Did we cause the Ozone hole? Who is doubting that?
Do we have a globe or a flat earth...so funny...
Everyone is entitled to his own beliefs...since even a few people in the world think god is real and other's dont
But a few thinks ARE unquestionable...
We are ruining this place...call it as you like...
We are polluting everything like we would have a second chance
We are driving gazillion species to extinction 
We are using the worlds resources in a speed like we would have no limit to come.
From burning and destroying Rain Forrest for Nutella and Bio Diesel to over fishing the oceans...
It is like someone told us, Hey...go ahead...if this planet is wasted, just use the other here in the basket...
Just turn of Fox news and start traveling, read news from not mainstream media...leave Facebook and begin to think
If we are something, than def not a mammal created after god's example...we are more like a cancer/virus/disease fro every environment we touch...


----------



## ShannonR (Nov 28, 2012)

Irish Pixie said:


> So you're willing to give up your farm? Again?


Um, have you seen the pictures I posted of the place?
1. There is no vegetation left to burn. The dead stobs here and there will not sustain fire, no matter how horrific of a firestorm it is. The fuel is gone.
And..
2. There isn't a whole lot left of the farm, and I'm not living on it anymore...you think I care? Burning some of this vegetation off serves the greater good, whether or not you or I or anyone else likes it.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

ShannonR said:


> Um, have you seen the pictures I posted of the place?
> 1. There is no vegetation left to burn. The dead stobs here and there will not sustain fire, no matter how horrific of a firestorm it is. The fuel is gone.
> And..
> 2. There isn't a whole lot left of the farm, and I'm not living on it anymore...you think I care? Burning some of this vegetation off serves the greater good, whether or not you or I or anyone else likes it.


There you go, it won't affect you so burn it all. Right? SMH. 

On a happier note, I noticed you skipped my question regarding rain in other areas of CA, my daughter sent pics of my granddogs in raincoats because it's raining in San Diego.


----------



## SLADE (Feb 20, 2004)

Meinecke said:


> I love threats like that...it shows how black and white people got...only my way or no way...
> Is it true that climate changed and will ever change?
> Sure it will and was...
> Did we cause the Ozone hole? Who is doubting that?
> ...


Very nice post. Thank you


----------



## haypoint (Oct 4, 2006)

I love threats like that...it shows how black and white people got...only my way or no way...

*While I think you should have said this another way (there is enough racial strife) this is nearly the only thing we agree upon.*

Is it true that climate changed and will ever change? 
Sure it will and was...

* 
Climate is changing, always has, always will. I don’t think that is the controversy.*

Did we cause the Ozone hole? Who is doubting that?

*Chlorofluorocarbons caused a hole and it has since closed*.

Do we have a globe or a flat earth...so funny...

* 
Just proof that there are people that can easily be mislead.*

Everyone is entitled to his own beliefs...since even a few people in the world think god is real and other's don’t

* 
84% of the world’s population are religious, 11% are atheists*.

But a few thinks ARE unquestionable...

*Things, not thinks*
We are ruining this place...call it as you like...

*Numerous incidents, prior to mankind, have wiped out much of this earth.*

We are polluting everything like we would have a second chance

* 
Polution levels in the US have been going down for some time now*.
We are driving gazillion species to extinction

*Dozens of living things go extinct each year, always have, always will. Mankind has helped push some into extinction while some thrive in the changes of human development.*

We are using the worlds resources in a speed like we would have no limit to come.

*Try for a moment of introspection. Have you cut your utility bill in half? Do you buy from companies that pollute? Car pool? Take kids to school when there is a bus available? Water your lawn? Flush a toilet?*

From burning and destroying Rain Forrest for Nutella and Bio Diesel to over fishing the oceans...

* Not sure how we order other countries not to cut their trees or what to plant. Some bio-diesel uses old cooking oil, saving it from going to a land fill.*

It is like someone told us, Hey...go ahead...if this planet is wasted, just use the other here in the basket...

*“Where am I going and why am I in this hand basket…..”*

Just turn of Fox news and start traveling, read news from not mainstream media...leave Facebook and begin to think

*So, now its Fox News that caused climate change? There is enough misinformation on CNN for everyone. Enjoy.*

If we are something, than def not a mammal created after god's example...we are more like a cancer/virus/disease fro every environment we touch...

*The couple dozen animals that humans selected to domesticate or otherwise use have benefited by better health, vaccinated from diseases, treated for cancers, and better nutrition. Many other animals have thrived due to the human created habitat improvements. Deer, raccoons and Coyotes to name a few. *


----------



## farmrbrown (Jun 25, 2012)

oneraddad said:


> So you live in Northern California ?


No.
Why?


----------



## farmrbrown (Jun 25, 2012)

Irish Pixie said:


> Links? I don't see the connection between your post and raking forests...





Irish Pixie said:


> Are you just trying to be rude? If not, there is no connection between what you posted and my request to see the laws that were referenced.


The 1st post is the one I quoted, but if I had to guess about your 2nd one, you want a link about laws with some specific wording in order to poke more fun at something
I had to google the 1st one because I haven't been paying much attention to the news lately. Apparently the "raking" comment had to do with Trump.

https://www.mercurynews.com/2018/11...-forest-fires-hint-its-not-because-of-raking/


----------



## ShannonR (Nov 28, 2012)

Irish Pixie said:


> OK. Since you live there, what is the rationale of why it's not done?
> 
> ETA: Is it common to get that much rain in the winter?
> 
> ETA: And it's only certain areas of California that have even had rain, correct? Southern California is still under severe drought, even in the winter.


Well, you see.... It's like this. I have you on ignore, so I just do that most of the time... unless I happen to hit that button at the bottom of the page. Saves on needless drama and headaches...

First question: we did and do prescribed burns in the area. For all the good it did. Every single year. Prescribed burning only helps so much, logging would be more helpful.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.redding.com/amp/537082002
https://m.facebook.com/ShastaTrinityNF/posts/2101171193448262

Second question: yes, it happens almost every winter. We get a good amount of rain.

Last question: Apples and oranges. San Diego is, and always has been, a desert. Sorry your daughter doesn't get any rain, but I'm guessing there are also a significantly smaller number of trees to burn there too. And for whatever it's worth, the news says that area is getting quite a bit of rain at this current moment.

Graze it, log it, or watch it burn. People can be such Fools.

I'm tired, and am going to bed now.


----------



## shawnlee (Apr 13, 2010)

keenataz said:


> No it's not her, it's the environuts.
> 
> You know those crazies whowant clean air, water, protect endangered species and issue fake climate change reports.


 Everyone wants clean air and water and to protect endangered species...….

The nuts are the ones who want to save every single last thing and make it illegal for me to cut a tree on my property and put a stop to controlled burns, fire clearances and a host of other things...…...if they were allowed to properly trim the trees and brush from the power lines there would have been a much less chance of that sparking a fire...…


But they want them to cut it a 1/4 inch from the line and come back the next day and trim again, instead of 100 feet wide path, which makes them nuts...environuts.


----------



## farmrbrown (Jun 25, 2012)

A few important details have been mentioned, but ignored in this discussion.

First, every area has different challenges, California has more than their share.
There are some preventive measures that apply universally though, like good forest management.
In 1998, Florida had a teachable moment and studied which structures survived, and why.
https://www.sjcemergencymanagement.com/wfdepth.html

Second, there's one problem that hasn't been mentioned and it IS man made.
Arson and/or carelessness.
It's uncomfortable to think about but many serious fires and deaths have resulted from stupid humans doing stupid things and not necessarily on a global scale.
A simple look back into many of these fires will lead you to a few idiots who caused them. It's hard enough to deal with Mother Nature, but screwed up human nature puts wild cards in the deck that create just as much havoc and destruction.

Of course being able to admit that a few among us are causing this destruction of life is a real challenge too.
It's often easier to find something ELSE to blame.


https://www.nationalgeographic.com/environment/2018/08/news-california-wildfire-arson-human-cause/



> While most commonly the culprit, people aren't always to blame for large fires. Wildfires are sometimes caused by lightning strikes or other natural conditions, but the California Fire Department estimates that those factors account for only about 5 percent of the fires started in the state.


----------



## haypoint (Oct 4, 2006)

Yes, humans caused wild fires. But nature starts lots of fire, too.


----------



## Redlands Okie (Nov 28, 2017)

Several of the post above mention the ozone layer issue as a problem solved. Actually it seems they ozone hole issue is not over. Scientist got to wondering about some issues on it. Discovered large scale use of the products the world banned still in use in China. 


https://www.livescience.com/63953-china-using-banned-ozone-substance.html

https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-44738952


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

farmrbrown said:


> The 1st post is the one I quoted, but if I had to guess about your 2nd one, you want a link about laws with some specific wording in order to poke more fun at something
> I had to google the 1st one because I haven't been paying much attention to the news lately. Apparently the "raking" comment had to do with Trump.
> 
> https://www.mercurynews.com/2018/11...-forest-fires-hint-its-not-because-of-raking/


So it was just to be rude? Thanks for responding.


----------



## farmrbrown (Jun 25, 2012)

haypoint said:


> Yes, humans caused wild fires. But nature starts lots of fire, too.


Well, since "reliable sources" are important, this came from an NPR story.
http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2017/02/21/1617394114

The consensus is, at least 80% are caused by humans in the U.S. and as high as 95%.
Blame nature if you want to, but the stats say different.


----------



## farmrbrown (Jun 25, 2012)

Irish Pixie said:


> So it was just to be rude? Thanks for responding.


Sure, if you consider your request for info as a request for "rudeness".



Irish Pixie said:


> Can you be more specific? I like to read all the information I can find.


As the saying goes, don't ask the question if you don't want to hear the answer.


----------



## 101pigs (Sep 18, 2018)

haypoint said:


> When I was in Florida a few years ago, I saw where pine tree plantations had experienced fires. Little fires that burned the needles and small brush. I learned that to prevent losing their mature trees, they kept the flammable needles and sticks burned.
> 
> 
> In my community, a large swampy area was burned each spring. Dead cat tails, willow brush, swamp grass was set afire. The wild blueberries flourished and the community benefited. But for the past 25 years, the area wasn't burned. Now, if there were a fire, it would be so fierce it would be uncontrollable.
> ...


70 years ago in S.E. Mo. people burn areas off just about every year to keep undergrowth under control. 60 years ago law not to burn off woods on your property and lookout stands about 50 ft. high was build to cover areas. Someone was up there all the time to watch for fires. Crews were sent out to help control the fires. Quite a bit of timber was lost due to all the brush burning. 1980 all the lookout buildings was not used any more. Now when a fire happens people sent in the fire crews who go out with the help of people in the area to put out the fires. A lot of timber is lost now due to heavy under growth. Burning off an area each year with fire breaks will prevent a lot of timber lost. In Ca. people just build and plant a lot of trees without any proper planning. Same here in S.E. Mo. now. On my property i have 100 ft. fire breaks around each 40 acres. This has prevented a lot of lost of timber for me or the years. Fires can be control anywhere with proper planning. 
In. New Mexico mountains some people have set set up fires breaks around their property which has prevented many forest from spreading. No fuel no fire.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

ShannonR said:


> Well, you see.... It's like this. I have you on ignore, so I just do that most of the time... unless I happen to hit that button at the bottom of the page. Saves on needless drama and headaches...
> 
> First question: we did and do prescribed burns in the area. For all the good it did. Every single year. Prescribed burning only helps so much, logging would be more helpful.
> https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.redding.com/amp/537082002
> ...


Thank you for responding, and thank you for the links, I better understand now. 

And I ETA that San Diego was getting rain in the post you responded to. My daughter sent me pics of my granddogs in raincoats, they are adorable. 

Don't push the button. It's not my intent to upset you.


----------



## haypoint (Oct 4, 2006)

farmrbrown said:


> Well, since "reliable sources" are important, this came from an NPR story.
> http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2017/02/21/1617394114
> 
> The consensus is, at least 80% are caused by humans in the U.S. and as high as 95%.
> Blame nature if you want to, but the stats say different.


Is NPR reliable?
In my area, lightning strike fires are ore common.
https://www.detroitnews.com/story/n...ife-reborn-upper-peninsula-wildfire/85381152/


----------



## Clem (Apr 12, 2016)

haypoint said:


> Is NPR reliable?
> ............./


I'd have to think NPR is more reliable than a guy who made your original youtube post, and spends time making up "news" like: 
*"Cloaked "Mothership" spotted moving in HIGH in the sky near Sun*"

All you got to do is look at the source.


----------



## oneraddad (Jul 20, 2010)

I'm glad I'm not the only one that saw it


----------



## haypoint (Oct 4, 2006)

Clem said:


> I'd have to think NPR is more reliable than a guy who made your original youtube post, and spends time making up "news" like:
> *"Cloaked "Mothership" spotted moving in HIGH in the sky near Sun*"
> 
> All you got to do is look at the source.


There are many lightning strike informational web sites. I just picked one with the global picture. Most people don't understand how many times a minute lightening strikes. When it strikes Michigan sand dunes, it melts the sand into glass pieces. For something that lasts a part of a second and enough heat to melt sand, that is a lot of heat.


----------



## SLADE (Feb 20, 2004)

oneraddad said:


> I'm glad I'm not the only one that saw it


How could you it was CLOAKED.


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

For millions of years the forests got along fine without us. 
Now all of a sudden they need us to cut them down and burn them and put out the fires ?
Maybe there is just too many of us and they just need us to leave them alone ?


----------



## ShannonR (Nov 28, 2012)

Irish Pixie said:


> Thank you for responding, and thank you for the links, I better understand now.
> 
> And I ETA that San Diego was getting rain in the post you responded to. My daughter sent me pics of my granddogs in raincoats, they are adorable.
> 
> Don't push the button. It's not my intent to upset you.


Yep, lots of rain throughout the state right now.

If it helps you to understand our drought cycles any better, it isn't actually about the rain at all. Much of this rain is just washing out to sea. Once the reservoirs are full, any extra rain does no good whatsoever. It's more about the snowpack. As the snow melts throughout the summer it kind of regulates the watering of the forests. Snowpack has been declining. To add to this, much of the state has to import their water from somewhere else, so it isn't available in the places that rain and snow would naturally supply. I don't have the answers to any of this, except to say that if the state really is in perpetual drought, then the forests themselves have become unsustainable. All the more reason to mow em down.


----------



## ShannonR (Nov 28, 2012)

101pigs said:


> 70 years ago in S.E. Mo. people burn areas off just about every year to keep undergrowth under control. 60 years ago law not to burn off woods on your property and lookout stands about 50 ft. high was build to cover areas. Someone was up there all the time to watch for fires. Crews were sent out to help control the fires. Quite a bit of timber was lost due to all the brush burning. 1980 all the lookout buildings was not used any more. Now when a fire happens people sent in the fire crews who go out with the help of people in the area to put out the fires. A lot of timber is lost now due to heavy under growth. Burning off an area each year with fire breaks will prevent a lot of timber lost. In Ca. people just build and plant a lot of trees without any proper planning. Same here in S.E. Mo. now. On my property i have 100 ft. fire breaks around each 40 acres. This has prevented a lot of lost of timber for me or the years. Fires can be control anywhere with proper planning.
> In. New Mexico mountains some people have set set up fires breaks around their property which has prevented many forest from spreading. No fuel no fire.


Fire breaks in california aren't quite as effective as they are in other places. The simple reason, is wind. The winds here, when they get going during these fires, blow embers up to 3 miles away. I've seen it for myself. Combined with dry conditions, it turns everything into a potential tinderbox. 3 mile wide fire breaks would be a work of art, truly... But if that's what needs doing then absolutely. It's become a matter of either sustaining forest life or sustaining human life. I somehow doubt we're gonna start killing off people anytime soon, so the other obvious solutions have to be discussed.


----------



## Clem (Apr 12, 2016)

haypoint said:


> There are many lightning strike informational web sites. I just picked one with the global picture. ............


That's not a website, it's a youtube video.

And, it's a lot like linking back to HT posts as evidence. For instance, insanely paranoid and on drugs, forum member DingBat makes a disjointed post saying "dogwood trees kept me up all night with their barking" And the next day, forum member DollyWolly makes a post about "it's a well known fact that dogwood trees bark all night long" and links to Dingbat's post.

That crap just don't cut it. You used an extremely unreliable source as your "fact" and then want to act like that's the way facts are invented. It's not. Facts happen, they're not invented out of whole cloth.


----------



## ShannonR (Nov 28, 2012)

Clem said:


> That's not a website, it's a youtube video.
> 
> And, it's a lot like linking back to HT posts as evidence. For instance, insanely paranoid and on drugs, forum member DingBat makes a disjointed post saying "dogwood trees kept me up all night with their barking" And the next day, forum member DollyWolly makes a post about "it's a well known fact that dogwood trees bark all night long" and links to Dingbat's post.
> 
> That crap just don't cut it. You used an extremely unreliable source as your "fact" and then want to act like that's the way facts are invented. It's not. Facts happen, they're not invented out of whole cloth.


Fact checking, Clem style!! I like it.


----------



## haypoint (Oct 4, 2006)

Clem said:


> That's not a website, it's a youtube video.
> 
> And, it's a lot like linking back to HT posts as evidence. For instance, insanely paranoid and on drugs, forum member DingBat makes a disjointed post saying "dogwood trees kept me up all night with their barking" And the next day, forum member DollyWolly makes a post about "it's a well known fact that dogwood trees bark all night long" and links to Dingbat's post.
> 
> That crap just don't cut it. You used an extremely unreliable source as your "fact" and then want to act like that's the way facts are invented. It's not. Facts happen, they're not invented out of whole cloth.


Message or messenger? Do you not believe that lightening strikes happen hundreds of times a day? https://www.nationalgeographic.com....ere-lightning-strikes-all-over-the-world.aspx


----------



## Clem (Apr 12, 2016)

I believe that a cloaked mothership was spotted, moving in HIGH, in the sky, near sun. And the "HIGH" is the key word to that particular news source, and his subscribers.

That stuff about even a broke clock is right twice a day comes to mind. It's still a broke clock.

ETA: It's pretty pitiful to see someone trying to defend something like that. Once in a while, you just have to realize that some people will actually check because they've found some posters to often post unreliable sources, and when you get caught at it, move along. Maybe there's some bacteria that needs shown around. Or something.


----------



## haypoint (Oct 4, 2006)

Clem said:


> I believe that a cloaked mothership was spotted, moving in HIGH, in the sky, near sun. And the "HIGH" is the key word to that particular news source, and his subscribers.
> 
> That stuff about even a broke clock is right twice a day comes to mind. It's still a broke clock.


Do you prefer the fake stuff on naturalnews or the quack Dr. Mercola?


----------



## Clem (Apr 12, 2016)

I don't know either of those. I only read news that has actual facts and pictures that I can verify from numerous sources. Not having any health problems, it would be beyond ridiculous to fret about it and try to change what's working for me.

Furthermore, I'm about done having a discussion with someone who believes dingbats posting insane videos are actual news sources.


----------



## farmrbrown (Jun 25, 2012)

haypoint said:


> Message or messenger? Do you not believe that lightening strikes happen hundreds of times a day? https://www.nationalgeographic.com....ere-lightning-strikes-all-over-the-world.aspx


Having grown up in the lightening capital of the U.S. I firmly believe in the frequency of strikes.
That doesn't change the fact that they start only a small minority of wildfires.


----------



## JeffreyD (Dec 27, 2006)

Irish Pixie said:


> Links? I don't see the connection between your post and raking forests...


Of course you don't. You just didn't look. Look up the wilderness act of 1964, or S21.

"The *Wilderness Act* of *1964* states that there shall be no “*mechanical* transport” in *Wilderness*. ... It particularly prohibits motor vehicles, *motorized* equipment, aircraft, and “no other form of *mechanical* transport.”

No tractors with rakes. See the correlation now? Unless permitted of course. Permits can take years... I worked with the Wilderness Society and Norbert Reedy(Nobby) in particular. Also, the California Wilderness Coalition(Paul Spitler...lier)Found out to my dismay, how little they really care about the environment. Control and money...that's it! Waste of 17 years!


----------



## JeffreyD (Dec 27, 2006)

farmrbrown said:


> A few important details have been mentioned, but ignored in this discussion.
> 
> First, every area has different challenges, California has more than their share.
> There are some preventive measures that apply universally though, like good forest management.
> ...


There are soooo many vagrants in California now it's insane. They start fires all the time, but the liberals refuse to acknowledge it! The cops know it, the fire department knows it, the social workers know it, but the city council refuses to do anything about them, the vagrants are their pets, so California burns! They cost us taxpayers billions every year. BILLIONS...... not to mention the loss of life. Morons....


----------



## shawnlee (Apr 13, 2010)

I just left the house today for work and went a direction I normally do not go and 1.5 miles down the side road under the bridge are 7 or 8 motor homes, 4 or 5 vans and about 6 trucks with camper shells. Enough garbage strewn around them that they have been there for a while and jackets rolled up in the windows like house blinds

Awesome thing is , if I park my 120K motor home for more than 48 hours in front of my house the CHP starts marking the tires and leaving 24 hour fine/tow away notices on it...….welcome to Californistan, where tax paying homeowners are harassed and meth head homeless spewing trash are left alone.

Its cool of them to let the vagrant drug riddled trash spewers do that right down the street from 500k to 1m dollar houses......


----------



## ShannonR (Nov 28, 2012)

JeffreyD said:


> There are soooo many vagrants in California now it's insane. They start fires all the time, but the liberals refuse to acknowledge it! The cops know it, the fire department knows it, the social workers know it, but the city council refuses to do anything about them, the vagrants are their pets, so California burns! They cost us taxpayers billions every year. BILLIONS...... not to mention the loss of life. Morons....


Very true, transients start far more than their share of "accidental" fires here. Luckily, they are usually put out by the time they reach a few acres, but It's just a matter of time. I think there is some moronic law about "warming fires" or fires for cooking being allowed, or some such.


shawnlee said:


> I just left the house today for work and went a direction I normally do not go and 1.5 miles down the side road under the bridge are 7 or 8 motor homes, 4 or 5 vans and about 6 trucks with camper shells. Enough garbage strewn around them that they have been there for a while and jackets rolled up in the windows like house blinds
> 
> Awesome thing is , if I park my 120K motor home for more than 48 hours in front of my house the CHP starts marking the tires and leaving 24 hour fine/tow away notices on it...….welcome to Californistan, where tax paying homeowners are harassed and meth head homeless spewing trash are left alone.
> 
> Its cool of them to let the vagrant drug riddled trash spewers do that right down the street from 500k to 1m dollar houses......


Yeah, that burns my behind also. Almost as if those in charge of enforcement don't bother with those who can't afford to pay the fines... or who don't pay them. Californistan, ha, will have to remember that one!


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

If I hated somewhere as much as some seem to do, I'd move.


----------



## haypoint (Oct 4, 2006)

Irish Pixie said:


> If I hated somewhere as much as some seem to do, I'd move.


But there you are, in the country that is chock full of gun lovers and founded in Christianity.

California is an example of "You get what you tolerate". In the liberal belief that freedom includes living on the street and that no matter what choices a person makes, it is society's responsibility to care for them. If you think there are a lot of vagrants now, add a few million crazy, criminal or disabled immigrants, each year. Can't be surprised by the results.


----------



## ShannonR (Nov 28, 2012)

Irish Pixie said:


> If I hated somewhere as much as some seem to do, I'd move.


You wouldn't if you had a small kid and were forbidden from leaving even the county due to a custody dispute with the father... just sayin'.


----------



## Clem (Apr 12, 2016)

The constitution does not mention religion, and the first amendment specifically distances the government from religion. Any claim otherwise is erroneous.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

ShannonR said:


> You wouldn't if you had a small kid and were forbidden from leaving even the county due to a custody dispute with the father... just sayin'.


That would be a good reason- you can't move. It seems most others just want to whine, name call people they don't agree with, and complain.


----------



## haypoint (Oct 4, 2006)

Clem said:


> The constitution does not mention religion, and the first amendment specifically distances the government from religion. Any claim otherwise is erroneous.


Hey, Clem, you talkin' to me? Better re-read what I wrote before spouting about it. You can dispute that this country was founded in Christianity, but you'd be wrong. Any belief otherwise is idiotic. Besides you are just getting farther off topic.


----------



## Clem (Apr 12, 2016)

The constitution does not mention religion, and the first amendment specifically distances the government from religion. Any claim otherwise is erroneous. 
Facts vs emotion.


----------



## oneraddad (Jul 20, 2010)

ShannonR has the best grasp on drought and fires in this thread. The rest of you don't have a clue


----------



## haypoint (Oct 4, 2006)

Clem said:


> The constitution does not mention religion, and the first amendment specifically distances the government from religion. Any claim otherwise is erroneous.


Double post?


----------



## ShannonR (Nov 28, 2012)

Irish Pixie said:


> That would be a good reason- you can't move. It seems most others just want to whine, name call people they don't agree with, and complain.


I'm working on it, going to school and everything, trying to set myself up with the means (a good enough excuse!) to do it anyway but truthfully, the outlook on this one is kinda bleak. My kingdom, for a chance to get the hell out of it! Heh.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

ShannonR said:


> I'm working on it, going to school and everything, trying to set myself up with the means (a good enough excuse!) to do it anyway but truthfully, the outlook on this one is kinda bleak. My kingdom, for a chance to get the hell out of it! Heh.


I'm sorry you don't have a lot of choice right now, but you're strong and will find a way. 

What are you taking in school?


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

Clem said:


> The constitution does not mention religion, and the first amendment specifically distances the government from religion. Any claim otherwise is erroneous.
> Facts vs emotion.


And most of the Founding Fathers weren't even Christian, they were Deist.


----------



## ShannonR (Nov 28, 2012)

Irish Pixie said:


> I'm sorry you don't have a lot of choice right now, but you're strong and will find a way.
> 
> What are you taking in school?


Thank you. I'm an Animal Science major. My real interest is in the reproductive sciences, I would truthfully be totally happy as a run of the mill A.I. tech or whatnot.


----------



## Clem (Apr 12, 2016)

Some point's porkypine suit is on inside out.


----------



## shawnlee (Apr 13, 2010)

Can`t we all get along,,,,.....and the answer is the same as it has always been and will ever be,...NO!



Segregation is good...….like people usually group together in most situations. The group can be quite diverse, but all usually share a trait specific to the good of whatever is at hand.


----------



## farmrbrown (Jun 25, 2012)

Clem said:


> The constitution does not mention religion, and the first amendment specifically distances the government from religion. Any claim otherwise is erroneous.
> Facts vs emotion.





> Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of *religion*, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.


----------



## haypoint (Oct 4, 2006)

https://www.gregtrimble.com/founding-fathers-christian/

But I guess if you hate Christianity, you choices or other Countries is limited. Christianity being the world's most popular religion. If you aren't Christian or Islamic, you are just a minority in another way.


----------



## Clem (Apr 12, 2016)

Greg Trimble. LOL. That is exactly the same caliber "source" as all your others, blogs and youtube people. 

Farmerbrown, you do get that I said "the first amendment specifically distances the government from religion" when you quoted the first amendment saying "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of *religion*......" right? You meant to affirm what I said?


----------



## farmrbrown (Jun 25, 2012)

Clem said:


> Greg Trimble. LOL. That is exactly the same caliber "source" as all your others, blogs and youtube people.
> 
> Farmerbrown, you do get that I said "the first amendment specifically distances the government from religion" when you quoted the first amendment saying "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of *religion*......" right? You meant to affirm what I said?


I thought you might be stating the obvious, but to do so, they at least had to "mention religion".


----------



## Clem (Apr 12, 2016)

I see, I differentiate Bill of Rights from Constitution, since one is the Constitution, and the other is the Bill of Rights, a separate document ratified 3 years after the Constitution.


----------



## farmrbrown (Jun 25, 2012)

Clem said:


> I see, I differentiate Bill of Rights from Constitution, since one is the Constitution, and the other is the Bill of Rights, a separate document ratified 3 years after the Constitution.


And now *I* see.
Apparently, I assumed you would know an obvious mistake if it was pointed out. I didn't realize you thought all amendments are NOT part of the constitution, even IF you weren't aware that they were written at the same time even though _ratification_ took 3 years.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Bill_of_Rights


----------



## Clem (Apr 12, 2016)

Constitution was created 9/17/1787 and ratified 6/21/1788.
Bill of rights was created 9/25/1789, ratified 12/15/1791.
Clearly not written at the same time.
You apparently didn't even read your own link.

ETA: To save you the trouble of looking, your own link says that inserting a bill of rights was proposed, but the motion was *unanimously* defeated.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

Clem said:


> Constitution was created 9/17/1787 and ratified 6/21/1788.
> Bill of rights was created 9/25/1789, ratified 12/15/1791.
> Clearly not written at the same time.
> You apparently didn't even read your own link.
> ...


Good job of readin' there, Clem.


----------



## farmrbrown (Jun 25, 2012)

Clem said:


> Constitution was created 9/17/1787 and ratified 6/21/1788.
> Bill of rights was created 9/25/1789, ratified 12/15/1791.
> Clearly not written at the same time.
> You apparently didn't even read your own link.
> ...


Good, then we both read it.


> The convention took place from May 14 to September 17, 1787, in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Although the Convention was purportedly intended only to revise the Articles, the intention of many of its proponents, chief among them James Madison of Virginia and Alexander Hamilton of New York, was to create a new government rather than fix the existing one. The convention convened in the Pennsylvania State House, and George Washington of Virginia was unanimously elected as president of the convention.[6] The 55 delegates who drafted the Constitution are among the men known as the Founding Fathers of the new nation. Thomas Jefferson, who was Minister to France during the convention, characterized the delegates as an assembly of "demi-gods."[5] Rhode Island refused to send delegates to the convention.[7]
> 
> On September 12, George Mason of Virginia suggested the addition of a Bill of Rights to the Constitution modeled on previous state declarations, and Elbridge Gerry of Massachusetts made it a formal motion.[8] However, after only a brief discussion where Roger Sherman pointed out that State Bills of Rights were not repealed by the new Constitution,[9][10] the motion was defeated by a unanimous vote of the state delegations. Madison, then an opponent of a Bill of Rights, later explained the vote by calling the state bills of rights "parchment barriers" that offered only an illusion of protection against tyranny.[11] Another delegate, James Wilson of Pennsylvania, later argued that the act of enumerating the rights of the people would have been dangerous, because it would imply that rights not explicitly mentioned did not exist;[11] Hamilton echoed this point in _Federalist_ No. 84.[12]
> 
> Because Mason and Gerry had emerged as opponents of the proposed new Constitution, their motion—introduced five days before the end of the convention—may also have been seen by other delegates as a delaying tactic.[13] The quick rejection of this motion, however, later endangered the entire ratification process. Author David O. Stewart characterizes the omission of a Bill of Rights in the original Constitution as "a political blunder of the first magnitude"[13] while historian Jack N. Rakove calls it "the one serious miscalculation the framers made as they looked ahead to the struggle over ratification".[14]


Now that we've reviewed that they were NOT a subject discussed years later but an issue at the time of the constitutional convention, is there some doubt remaining as to whether _amendments_ are or are not included as part of the Constitution?


----------



## Clem (Apr 12, 2016)

No there's no doubt. There was a motion brought and unanimously defeated to include a bill of rights in the Constitution. And it was not included. Doesn't matter if it was discussed or not, the correct statement that you tried to discredit referenced to the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, not what somebody proposed and was unanimously defeated.

Clearly you have some issues understanding the written word. You're determined to shout yourself into being right. Read the actual words and see what it says, not what you wish it said.
You're wrong, probably when you went to school you didn't have to learn that stuff, or maybe it's been a real long time. whatever.


----------



## farmrbrown (Jun 25, 2012)

Clem said:


> No there's no doubt. There was a motion brought and unanimously defeated to include a bill of rights in theConstitution. And it was not included.
> 
> Clearly you have some issues understanding the written word. You're determined to shout yourself into being right. Read the actual words and see what it says, not what you wish it said.
> You're wrong, probably when you went to school you didn't have to learn that stuff, or maybe it's been a real long time. whatever.


LOL
I almost included the definition of 'amendment' in my previous post, but I thought that was unnecessary.
Silly me.


----------



## Clem (Apr 12, 2016)

Silly is right.
Anyway, I got a dead chicken in the yard more challenging than this conversation. I'll ask him does it hurt to be dead, instead of asking you the obvious.


----------



## farmrbrown (Jun 25, 2012)

Clem said:


> Silly is right.
> Anyway, I got a dead chicken in the yard more challenging than this conversation. I'll ask him does it hurt to be dead, instead of asking you the obvious.


Ask away.
You could even ask a jr. high student, "Are amendments part of the Constitution?"


Clem said:


> I see, I differentiate Bill of Rights from Constitution, since one is the Constitution, and the other is the Bill of Rights, a separate document ratified 3 years after the Constitution.


https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/constitution


> A proposed amendment becomes part of the Constitution as soon as it is ratified by three-fourths of the States (38 of 50 States). When the OFR verifies that it has received the required number of authenticated ratification documents, it drafts a formal proclamation for the Archivist to certify that the amendment is valid and has become part of the Constitution.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

S&EP has turned into the new Politics/Dark Room. 
Did some people get kicked out of GC?



Irish Pixie said:


> Good job of readin' there, Clem.


It's silly to think an "amendment" isn't part of the Constitution.


----------



## farmrbrown (Jun 25, 2012)

Irish Pixie said:


> There is no arguing with that kind of logic.


----------



## oneraddad (Jul 20, 2010)

farmrbrown said:


> LOL
> I almost included the definition of 'amendment' in my previous post, but I thought that was unnecessary.
> Silly me.



Dude, I think you got off track. Could you please tell us another cool story about Florida and how it pertains to the forest fires in California ?


----------



## farmrbrown (Jun 25, 2012)

oneraddad said:


> Dude, I think you got off track. Could you please tell us another cool story about Florida and how it pertains to the forest fires in California ?


Sure.
Both are coastal states with some unique geography, both have a wide range of climate, population and agriculture due to their size. And both have struggled to manage that population and their ecology at the same time.
When overdevelopment takes place people forget that Nature isn't going to retreat that easily.
One of the worst fire seasons we had in Florida was a result of a combination of drought and public backlash over regular controlled burns in preserves that were on the edges of new developments.
You wanna hear any recent updates from some family that lives a few miles from the camp fire?
I'll have to make a phone call first........


----------



## ShannonR (Nov 28, 2012)

oneraddad said:


> Dude, I think you got off track. Could you please tell us another cool story about Florida and how it pertains to the forest fires in California ?


That got a laugh out of me, I needed that!! Thank you ORD


----------



## ShannonR (Nov 28, 2012)

farmrbrown said:


> Sure.
> Both are coastal states with some unique geography, both have a wide range of climate, population and agriculture due to their size. And both have struggled to manage that population and their ecology at the same time.
> When overdevelopment takes place people forget that Nature isn't going to retreat that easily.
> One of the worst fire seasons we had in Florida was a result of a combination of drought and public backlash over regular controlled burns in preserves that were on the edges of new developments.
> ...


Yes on the updates, we can compare notes. 

I think you might be missing some key elements such as the sheer size of California, it is way bigger than Florida and contains a much more varied array of ecologies. Desert, high desert, coast, redwoods, mountains, Alpine lake country, we have it all. Its naturally arid climate, PARTICULARLY some of the inland regions, which have been hit hard recently. And the small detail that California isn't the deep South, and doesn't have the corresponding humidity. In florida, I think It's generally a safe bet that you can mow your lawn during the day and not have to worry about it sparking a wildfire... but, maybe I am wrong.


----------



## shawnlee (Apr 13, 2010)

When I see a lawn here, since we are in stage 5 drought I want to spray it with roundup...…


But people keep watering and washing cars like it ain`t happening.....


----------



## farmrbrown (Jun 25, 2012)

ShannonR said:


> Yes on the updates, we can compare notes.
> 
> I think you might be missing some key elements such as the sheer size of California, it is way bigger than Florida and contains a much more varied array of ecologies. Desert, high desert, coast, redwoods, mountains, Alpine lake country, we have it all. Its naturally arid climate, PARTICULARLY some of the inland regions, which have been hit hard recently. And the small detail that California isn't the deep South, and doesn't have the corresponding humidity. In florida, I think It's generally a safe bet that you can mow your lawn during the day and not have to worry about it sparking a wildfire... but, maybe I am wrong.


I know the differences, but I wasn't asked that, rather how wildfire management pertains to the other.

This BTW is from last year.....

https://www.usatoday.com/story/weat...nia-florida-has-usas-worst-drought/101331462/


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

farmrbrown said:


> I know the differences, but I wasn't asked that, rather how wildfire management pertains to the other.
> 
> This BTW is from last year.....
> 
> https://www.usatoday.com/story/weat...nia-florida-has-usas-worst-drought/101331462/


Do you realize that ShannonR both lives in CA (I assume her entire life) and just lost her farm (and I believe her parent's lost their home) to wild fire? Are you seriously going to tell her about California wild fires? That is the original topic of the thread... 

 Sad dead chicken.


----------



## ShannonR (Nov 28, 2012)

shawnlee said:


> When I see a lawn here, since we are in stage 5 drought I want to spray it with roundup...…
> 
> 
> But people keep watering and washing cars like it ain`t happening.....


I like your roundup idea.... you actually SHOULD do it!! At night. And write messages with the stuff so people wake up to a patch of lawn with a brown "SAVE WATER" burned into it.


----------



## ShannonR (Nov 28, 2012)

farmrbrown said:


> I know the differences, but I wasn't asked that, rather how wildfire management pertains to the other.
> 
> This BTW is from last year.....
> 
> https://www.usatoday.com/story/weat...nia-florida-has-usas-worst-drought/101331462/


Cool story. Y'all better start mowing your forests down before they burn down then.


----------



## ShannonR (Nov 28, 2012)

Irish Pixie said:


> Do you realize that ShannonR both lives in CA (I assume her entire life) and just lost her farm (and I believe her parent's lost their home) to wild fire? Are you seriously going to tell her about California wild fires? That is the original topic of the thread...
> 
> Sad dead chicken.


My dad's lot where the house once stood was actually in our local news the other night. I can't seem to find it online, but it was broadcast live.

It's a lake at the moment.


----------



## farmrbrown (Jun 25, 2012)

Irish Pixie said:


> Do you realize that ShannonR both lives in CA (I assume her entire life) and just lost her farm (and I believe her parent's lost their home) to wild fire?



Yep.
I believe it's been mentioned a few times in different threads.
Contrary to what some may think, I actually _can_ read.


> Are you seriously going to tell her about California wild fires? That is the original topic of the thread...


Only if she asks...........and I think she did, after a reply I made to Oneradad.
More of an offer of a local report, not to "tell her about California wild fires".





> Sad dead chicken.


A dead chicken may be a better match for some people to have a discussion with, it might be easier for them.


----------



## farmrbrown (Jun 25, 2012)

ShannonR said:


> Cool story. Y'all better start mowing your forests down before they burn down then.


Fortunately, that idea wouldn't an option and most of the forest dept. has learned the right way to handle it.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

farmrbrown said:


> Yep.
> I believe it's been mentioned a few times in different threads.
> Contrary to what some may think, I actually _can_ read.
> 
> ...


So you think you know more about California wildfires than she does? Hush, just hush. ETA: Just incredibly rude and insensitive. Have some grace.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

ShannonR said:


> My dad's lot where the house once stood was actually in our local news the other night. I can't seem to find it online, but it was broadcast live.
> 
> It's a lake at the moment.


It's not nearly enough, but I'm sorry for you and your families loss.


----------



## Clem (Apr 12, 2016)

2004, the house burned down as we were sleeping in it, and we got out with minutes or seconds left. I immediately went back in to get my laptop, but the second time I tried, I couldn't see or breathe. However we were all safe and sound, which is all that really mattered.

For years I wondered if I was living my last seconds, just like you hear about people's life flashing before them, maybe the future I was going to miss out on was flashing before my eyes. Eventually I accepted this as reality, but lay awake at night looking at the little light on the smoke detector.

All that to say I can relate to the hell you've been through


----------



## farmrbrown (Jun 25, 2012)

Irish Pixie said:


> So you think you know more about California wildfires than she does? Hush, just hush. ETA: Just incredibly rude and insensitive. Have some grace.


If you read what I wrote, you should have come to the opposite conclusion.



farmrbrown said:


> Only if she asks...........and I think she did, after a reply I made to Oneradad.
> More of an offer of a local report, not to "tell her about California wild fires".


My SIL is in Red Bluff and still has communications, which many people have been without for some time.

Of course if you're just _trying _to pick a fight, there's always a dead chicken around you can pound on, lol.


----------



## ShannonR (Nov 28, 2012)

Irish Pixie said:


> So you think you know more about California wildfires than she does? Hush, just hush. ETA: Just incredibly rude and insensitive. Have some grace.


I was going to just ignore it anyway, lol. You can educate people as best you can, but if they are too far out of touch with reality to accept anything BUT their own reality, I try not to waste my breath. You can't fix stupid... often, you can't fix ignorant either if it happens to be paired with stubborn.

I'm getting ready to go visit the farm and see if I can get anything productive done this afternoon. Yesterday, I found some burned bear bones, that was fun.


----------



## farmrbrown (Jun 25, 2012)

ShannonR said:


> I was going to just ignore it anyway, lol. You can educate people as best you can, but if they are too far out of touch with reality to accept anything BUT their own reality, I try not to waste my breath. You can't fix stupid... often, you can't fix ignorant either if it happens to be paired with stubborn.
> 
> I'm getting ready to go visit the farm and see if I can get anything productive done this afternoon. Yesterday, I found some burned bear bones, that was fun.



I can relate to the part about wasting your breath.
Up until this last post I didn't realize you were being entirely insincere and screwing with me.
Now I see.
I never claimed to know more about what's going on in California, but I did offer to pass along any news that might be helpful.
But when a state full of people seem to have the same multiple problems every year and can't seem to figure out what to do about it, then on top of it, belittle any suggestions, it's definitely time to save wisdom for those that can use it.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

Irish Pixie said:


> Are you seriously going to tell her about California wild fires?


Had you read what he posted you'd see it's about FL drought.



> ETA: Just incredibly rude and insensitive. Have some grace.


Yes, you are and yes, you should.

But you will just keep doing the SS on a DD 



Irish Pixie said:


> Bye Felicia.


----------



## ShannonR (Nov 28, 2012)

farmrbrown said:


> I can relate to the part about wasting your breath.
> Up until this last post I didn't realize you were being entirely insincere and screwing with me.
> Now I see.
> I never claimed to know more about what's going on in California, but I did offer to pass along any news that might be helpful.
> But when a state full of people seem to have the same multiple problems every year and can't seem to figure out what to do about it, then on top of it, belittle any suggestions, it's definitely time to save wisdom for those that can use it.


If you'll read back a ways, I think you would see that I am basically in agreement. Fuel reduction, controlled burns. Did you see my post where I added local news articles about just that being done in our area? I agree, do something about it. Anything. I don't know why these tree huggers continue to hug dead, beetle or drought killed trees, but if they wish to continue with that sort of nonsense I have some extra crispy trees they can hug.

But comparing the fires here to what goes on in Florida is an Apples and oranges situation. You don't need to act smug because the above methods work in your area and not mine.


----------



## farmrbrown (Jun 25, 2012)

ShannonR said:


> If you'll read back a ways, I think you would see that I am basically in agreement. Fuel reduction, controlled burns. Did you see my post where I added local news articles about just that being done in our area? I agree, do something about it. Anything. I don't know why these tree huggers continue to hug dead, beetle or drought killed trees, but if they wish to continue with that sort of nonsense I have some extra crispy trees they can hug.


Well, that's what I DID think, up until that last post. There shouldn't be any disagreement in the basics of what works.
Regular logging and controlled burns to keep trees healthy, and extra care by homeowners who live in or near forest lands.
In developments, keeping pavement to a minimum so the land doesn't wash away when it rains, mudslides and even Florida sinkholes can be prevented by doing the common sense thing. That only leaves the earthquakes, tornadoes and hurricanes that can't be stopped by anything.
That works no matter where you live.


> But comparing the fires here to what goes on in Florida is an Apples and oranges situation. You don't need to act smug because the above methods work in your area and not mine.


As noted above, the things that DO help are universal, especially considering that most fires aren't the result of nature, but man.
And I guess one of the things in that Florida link got overlooked, but it was something I didn't know about that's been confirmed as a way to cut down on losing homes in fires - modifying the soffits and eaves.

https://www.nfpa.org/Public-Education/By-topic/Wildfire/Wildfire-safety-tips


----------



## oneraddad (Jul 20, 2010)

farmrbrown said:


> Sure.
> Both are coastal states with some unique geography, both have a wide range of climate, population and agriculture due to their size. And both have struggled to manage that population and their ecology at the same time.
> When overdevelopment takes place people forget that Nature isn't going to retreat that easily.
> One of the worst fire seasons we had in Florida was a result of a combination of drought and public backlash over regular controlled burns in preserves that were on the edges of new developments.
> ...



The highest elevation in Florida is 345 feet above sea level with humidity average around 75%, now I see the similarity to Northern California and wildfires.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sugarloaf_Mountain_(Florida)


----------



## farmrbrown (Jun 25, 2012)

oneraddad said:


> The highest elevation in Florida is 345 feet above sea level with humidity average around 75%, now I see the similarity to Northern California and wildfires.
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sugarloaf_Mountain_(Florida)


Yep, Sugarloaf Mountain is about 20 miles from where I grew up, near another Florida 'mountain' Mt. Dora, lol.
Best spot to be in a hurricane though.

You, I already figured were busting my chops, but I answered your request with civility.
And even though I've explained I'm not an ignorant doofus and *KNOW* the geographical differences between the east and west coast, you somehow want to ignore the human aspect of this problem that exists EVERYWHERE development and its effect on forest management collide to produce terrible results.

But guess what? Sometimes the stereotypes cloud reality, like the lightening strikes.
Reality is, they cause less than 10% of the wildfires no matter where you live.
Florida cattle industry was ranked in the top 5 states until recently, as more land has turned over to development, but never had much in common with Nebraska, Texas, Oklahoma or California in other ways.
Florida ranks 4th in tornadoes, behind Texas, Kansas and Oklahoma
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tornadoes_in_the_United_States
Not much in common with those Great Plain states either but regardless, safety measures we've learned apply equally, right?
I could go on and on and nit pick a bunch of details but why?

The very difference you criticize, is also the reason the well known preventative measures should be heeded even MORE!
As you reminded me earlier, isn't that what this sub forum is about?


----------



## oneraddad (Jul 20, 2010)

How many forest fires on sugarloaf mountain in the past 20 years from target shooters ?

How many from a trailer safety chain dragging ?

How many from driving with a flat tire ?

That's daily stuff around my part of the country. Then you have lightening, every thunder storm starts dozens of fires

My son was a wildland firefighter for years and maintained the forests around Lake Tahoe by cutting brush and trees into piles for controlled burns. I live 3 miles from Northern California and spend a lot of time there because of family, I think I see enough to have a better grasp on the situation than you from your couch in Florida. You have no idea how easy it is to start a fire here or how much effort is put into the forests out west.


----------



## farmrbrown (Jun 25, 2012)

oneraddad said:


> How many forest fires on sugarloaf mountain in the past 20 years from target shooters ?
> 
> How many from a trailer safety chain dragging ?
> 
> ...



Yep.
I'm really a stupid and uneducated person when you get right down to it.
The audacity of engaging in a discussion like this, I should just keep my mouth shut and concentrate on getting my GED or something.
BTW, I don't even own a couch.


----------



## haypoint (Oct 4, 2006)

Most of those CA fires happened when humidity levels were in single digits. The forest fires in northern Michigan, often caused by lightening strikes, happened in times of low humidity, but still in the 30-40 percent range. Single digit humidity is uncommon in most of the inhabited earth.

With modern air conditioning, massive ground water extraction, river diversion, artificial human created ecosystems, many live within these uninhabitable areas.

One might think it short sighted to live in a wooden building, sided in plastic, roofed in petroleum products, surrounded by thousands of acres of twenty foot tall kindling, in arid areas.


----------



## farmrbrown (Jun 25, 2012)

For all the differences that keep being brought up, the things in common never change.
People start most of the fires and short minded thinking about the land fuels the destruction no matter what state of the Union it occurs.

http://geo.msu.edu/extra/geogmich/fires.html


----------



## oneraddad (Jul 20, 2010)

farmrbrown said:


> Yep.
> I'm really a stupid and uneducated person when you get right down to it.
> The audacity of engaging in a discussion like this, I should just keep my mouth shut and concentrate on getting my GED or something.
> BTW, I don't even own a couch.



You riding the short bus to your GED, don't forget your helmet ?


----------



## oneraddad (Jul 20, 2010)

farmrbrown said:


> For all the differences that keep being brought up, the things in common never change.
> People start most of the fires and short minded thinking about the land fuels the destruction no matter what state of the Union it occurs.
> 
> http://geo.msu.edu/extra/geogmich/fires.html



Florida, we're talking about Florida. How many wild fires from target shooting ?


----------



## farmrbrown (Jun 25, 2012)

oneraddad said:


> Florida, we're talking about Florida. How many wild fires from target shooting ?


LOL.
I was going to add in my previous post that as stupid as I am, I could try to answer your 3 questions you asked.
But I have a policy of not feeding nuisance wildlife either.


But since you seem interested in the answer, as far as I know based on searching for it, the answer is Zero.
If there are any that I couldn't find the number is bound to be very low.


----------



## ShannonR (Nov 28, 2012)

farmrbrown said:


> Well, that's what I DID think, up until that last post. There shouldn't be any disagreement in the basics of what works.
> Regular logging and controlled burns to keep trees healthy, and extra care by homeowners who live in or near forest lands.
> In developments, keeping pavement to a minimum so the land doesn't wash away when it rains, mudslides and even Florida sinkholes can be prevented by doing the common sense thing. That only leaves the earthquakes, tornadoes and hurricanes that can't be stopped by anything.
> That works no matter where you live.
> ...


I'm being sincere here, really.
Would you be able to tell me exactly how the soffits and eaves are modified to help with fire resistance? I have family who writes building codes (I call her the enemy but she really does mean well, haha) and will ask her if that is something that is implemented already or if it could be implemented. It would initially only effect one fire-ruined county but, It's a start. It won't hurt to give it a try out here. You gotta understand, though-- our tornadoes are made of fire out here and we may well not see the same results your area of the country has by doing this.

And what Oneraddad is trying to get you to understand is that the geography differences are everything, literally. Fire is a whole different animal out here, which is why many of our fire suppression efforts don't work. We've tried. A mere spark from a lawnmower (or target shooting as in his example) can start off a fire that spreads so rapidly it is impossible to put out. Alot of that is because of the ambient humidity in the air, your state is humid and doesn't have the same issues with small sparks setting off apocalyptic fires. In Florida, you have to work a little bit at starting a fire. It isn't even so much about arson out here, honest fire related accidents happen more easily in CA than in FL.


----------



## farmrbrown (Jun 25, 2012)

ShannonR said:


> I'm being sincere here, really.
> Would you be able to yell me exactly how the soffits and eaves are modified to help with fire resistance? I have family who writes building codes (I call her the enemy but she really does mean well, haha) and will ask her if that is something that is implemented already or if it could be implemented. It would initially only effect one fire-ruined county but, It's a start. It won't hurt to give it a try out here. You gotta understand, though-- our tornadoes are made of fire out here and we may well not see the same results your area of the country has by doing this.


It had to do with minimizing the hole sizes in attic and soffit vents with metal screening to prevent flying embers from getting inside.
Just a little footnote but really found it made a difference whether your house was destroyed or not.
It may not have made a difference in Paradise, but then again there WERE some homes left standing after it was all over.
Every little bit helps.





> And what Oneraddad is trying to get you to understand is that the geography differences are everything, literally. Fire is a whole different animal out here, which is why many of our fire suppression efforts don't work. We've tried. A mere spark from a lawnmower (or target shooting as in his example) can start off a fire that spreads so rapidly it is impossible to put out. Alot of that is because of the ambient humidity in the air, your state is humid and doesn't have the same issues with small sparks setting off apocalyptic fires. In Florida, you have to work a little bit at starting a fire. It isn't even so much about arson out here, honest fire related accidents happen more easily in CA than in FL.


I know that.
What baffles me is the argument that heeding good advice won't make a lick of difference.


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

A hot vehicle pulls off the road onto dry mountain grasses because it seldom rains during the summer months. Boom, wildfire. No amount of controlled burns or underbrush clean out solves the problem of dry grass and sagebrush after a hot dry summer.

Combine that with steep, rugged, hard to hike mountsides. Sorry but those of you out east have no real clue how about living with fire in the west.


----------



## farmrbrown (Jun 25, 2012)

painterswife said:


> A hot vehicle pulls off the road onto dry mountain grasses because it seldom rains during the summer months. Boom, wildfire. No amount of controlled burns or underbrush clean out solves the problem of dry grass and sagebrush after a hot dry summer.
> 
> Combine that with steep, rugged, hard to hike mountsides. Sorry but those of you out east have no real clue how about living with fire in the west.


No, but you can tell the guy to pay attention when he pulls off the road and keep a fire extinguisher handy in his car just in case so it DOESNT happen.
See how easy common sense works?

This ignorant easterner already does that and a few more things he carries.......cuz things in life never happen, right?


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

farmrbrown said:


> No, but you can tell the guy to pay attention when he pulls off the road and keep a fire extinguisher handy in his car just in case so it DOESNT happen.
> See how easy common sense works?


You really have no idea how easy a wildfire starts out here or how dry it gets, do you?


----------



## oneraddad (Jul 20, 2010)

Oh, now it's an east coast/west coast thing and who is smarter. 

Why do you think explorers headed west and left all those statues and hate behind ?


----------



## ShannonR (Nov 28, 2012)

farmrbrown said:


> It had to do with minimizing the hole sizes in attic and soffit vents with metal screening to prevent flying embers from getting inside.
> Just a little footnote but really found it made a difference whether your house was destroyed or not.
> It may not have made a difference in Paradise, but then again there WERE some homes left standing after it was all over.
> Every little bit helps.
> ...


Ok, I will ask my mom if we already implement that fire resistance measure, I think we might already though. She is out of the country right now and will be home next week..

I think the entire state is sick of the fire issue and is looking for a better way. We have some rather unique hurdles to clear, such as forests that are already dying ion a massive scale, though. And I won't even get into the environmentalist aspect of it all, it boils my blood sometimes. I say log it all off if drought stressed or beetle killed, with the exception of the high humidity coastal areas that don't burn so fast and fierce to begin with. Leave the old growth redwood stands alone, but aggressive logging is certainly warranted...so many of the trees are dead or dying anyway.


----------



## ShannonR (Nov 28, 2012)

farmrbrown said:


> No, but you can tell the guy to pay attention when he pulls off the road and keep a fire extinguisher handy in his car just in case so it DOESNT happen.
> See how easy common sense works?
> 
> This ignorant easterner already does that and a few more things he carries.......cuz things in life never happen, right?


This theoretical fire would be out of control and not exstinguishable by a typical fire extinguisher by the time you got out of the car and had the pin pulled. You'd better be running for your life instead of fooling around trying to put it out.

See how low humidity and REAL (not Florida style) drought conditions throw a stick into even the best designed wheels? Fire here is a different animal. I'm not sure why you can't comprehend that.


----------



## farmrbrown (Jun 25, 2012)

painterswife said:


> You really have no idea how easy a wildfire starts out here or how dry it gets, do you?


Nope.
I never learned a thing in all the science classes I took, and never seen scorched grass along a highway or a car burned to a crisp.

Just so ya know, fire is one of my constant worries since I live in the woods, and sometimes surrounded by idiots.
But if it helps to think that spreading a little common sense around is as useless as water in these circumstances, carry on.


----------



## ShannonR (Nov 28, 2012)

farmrbrown said:


> Nope.
> I never learned a thing in all the science classes I took, and never seen scorched grass along a highway or a car burned to a crisp.
> 
> Just so ya know, fire is one of my constant worries since I live in the woods, and sometimes surrounded by idiots.
> But if it helps to think that spreading a little common sense around is as useless as water in these circumstances, carry on.


Please, just stop.


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

farmrbrown said:


> Nope.
> I never learned a thing in all the science classes I took, and never seen scorched grass along a highway or a car burned to a crisp.
> 
> Just so ya know, fire is one of my constant worries since I live in the woods, and sometimes surrounded by idiots.
> But if it helps to think that spreading a little common sense around is as useless as water in these circumstances, carry on.


It has nothing to do with what you learned in school. It is experience. You may think you understand because of what you have read or watched on a screen but is very different kind of topography and forest than you live in. We have wet springs here. Grass and brush takes off and by Aug 1st it is turning brown. Around Sept first it is crisp and dry and ready to burst into flame from a cigarette or a thunderstorm. You can't clean out the dead grass in the forest. No matter how much logging and dead brush removal you do, you can't keep up with each springs rapid growth and die off. You can only hope for early snow or fall rain.

It is a cycle you can't stop.


----------



## farmrbrown (Jun 25, 2012)

ShannonR said:


> This theoretical fire would be out of control and not exstinguishable by a typical fire extinguisher by the time you got out of the car and had the pin pulled. You'd better be running for your life instead of fooling around trying to put it out.
> 
> See how low humidity and REAL (not Florida style) drought conditions throw a stick into even the best designed wheels? Fire here is a different animal. I'm not sure why you can't comprehend that.


I can comprehend it.
I just ain't buying it for an excuse not be careful, that's all.
The same situation went on here (in the Carolinas where I know live - notice I haven't reamed anyone on here for saying I'm still Florida) and it happened over and over again almost everyday as I drove to work.
Can ya guess what I thought every time I saw another one?
Were you there when I was reporting the fires to the local fire station with the mile marker location so it wouldn't take out the nearby town?
I make look dumb, but it's just a disguise.


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

No one is, making excuses for being careful. We live in wild fire country. It is second nature to us. Being careful does not outsmart a lighting strike. 15 percent of US wildfires are started by lightnin

We watch lighting storms here so we know where fire might start, then we watch those spots for up to a week for smoldering fires. Like I said, careful is second nature in wild fire country.


----------



## farmrbrown (Jun 25, 2012)

painterswife said:


> No one is, making excuses for being careful. We live in wild fire country. It is second nature to us. Being careful does not outsmart a lighting strike. 85 percent of US wildfires are started by lightnin
> 
> We watch lighting storms here so we know where fire might start, then we watch those spots for up to a week for smoldering fires. Like I said, careful is second nature in wild fire country.


I wish you hadn't said that after I debunked that myth with actual stats.
85% are NOT started by lightening, just the opposite, which was the point I've been hammering all along.
Most of the causes are man made, either by carelessness or intentional harm.

The other obstacle is the "Yeah, but what about THIS" crowd.
It's like being in a bullpen with the whole pitching staff throwing spitballs at ya, lol.

IF I had a problem with cars breaking down and starting infernos, I'd probably make a few suggestions to the highway dept.
How about an paved emergency lane?
Too expensive?
How about 50 ft. of one every few miles or so?
Compare that with the latest cost (or actual verifiable costs) of such events sparking a catastrophe.
If it makes sense, do it and move to the next problem.
Eventually you'll run out of everything but stupid people and have to rely on Darwinism to take care of that one.

A universal problem that I thought of is evacuations.
You don't always have weeks of notice, but it seems like no matter what the situation, people including the gov't officials, always wait til the last minute, and wonder why it was a cluster____.
I know why (human nature), I managed to survive and evade the masses on Thanksgiving weekend.
But I gotta tell ya, if I was surrounded by flames and behind a bunch of idiots that didn't have the petal to the metal, I wouldn't be one of those they found BBQ'd in the carnage.

So, what could help?
Maybe putting a few National Guard vehicles in the convoy? Big ones with plows on the front.
Stalled car or maybe just an idiot?
No problem.
Push'em off the road, load up the family in the back and keep it movin'.
Sorry about your luck pal, but we don't ALL have to die.

A good thing they started doing was reversing lanes and getting everybody moving out of harm's way.
Suspend the traffic signals and let the convoy leaders handle the traffic control, like letting in the side road and entrance ramp people in an orderly, quick manner.

From many years of experience driving highways, I assure you it only takes a few numbskulls to screw things up - and just a few taking action to fix it.


----------



## farmrbrown (Jun 25, 2012)

Now, in an effort to restore some mutual civility and respect, I'd like to offer THIS link, which expresses some of the other concerns about how particular climate changes in certain areas have been noted in the west and northwest of our country.
Again, this is a very limited study scope......

https://www.geospatialworld.net/blogs/lightning-cause-wildfires-reveal-study/


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

I changed my post. I put in the wrong percentage.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

painterswife said:


> A hot vehicle pulls off the road onto dry mountain grasses because it seldom rains during the summer months. Boom, wildfire. No amount of controlled burns or underbrush clean out solves the problem of dry grass and sagebrush after a hot dry summer.
> 
> Combine that with steep, rugged, hard to hike mountsides. Sorry but those of you out east have no real clue how about living with fire in the west.


Absolutely. I had no clue until this thread. 

In my area, we have may have a burn ban from mid April to mid May every year, that's it. One really dry spring a train's brakes caused a small fire but it was put out immediately.


----------



## shawnlee (Apr 13, 2010)

This state has the resources to do what it takes...without getting into controversial details......its the leadership here, not to mention the crazy train policies and rules.

California has burnt each year for as long as I can remember, it just keeps getting worse,...I was in the middle of what was the largest fire in California 12 months ago. The firefighters gave it their all, but lack of manpower and poor decisions and regulations are what keeps it from being as effective as possible ...from prevention to fighting.


The same things are not limited to forestry management either....its across the board here.

I remember when you could not see across the basin in LA, and it burnt your eyes... cleaner emissions,...cat converters, on cars has cleaned this up....but instead of declaring a victory, they have become fixated on it and the only acceptable number is 0 to hell with if anyone can afford it or not.

There is no happy medium here...…..

You have to remember this is ground zero here, the source of the outbreak......the nutjob mindset did not originate from rural America....the econazi mentality spawned to life out here in LA and sanfran…..this is the global world headquarters for intolerance and extremism .

All trees must be hugged, zero emissions is the only acceptable number...100% clean energy is the only thing that matters...……..no happy medium, no reasonable approach. As they jockey for a 100% solution all the 70% solutions are shot down and the citizens all pay the price for this from monetary to real life situations.

A large percentage of the population here is living in fantasy land....a dream world, home of hollywierd where real life is obfuscated and replaced by a virtual reality of perception with no basis in reality.....people adopt these things as a manifesto and deny reality as bummer, a buzzkill.....bad vibes.

Now they are even proposing a tax on those leaving the state as millions of us are doing just that...….many people thru history have went down with sinking ships because they were unable to accept what was happening.....they lived in the fantasy that the ship would just stop sinking at the last second and be ok...….just like a huge percentage of the population live in the fantasy here that some utopia will manifest out of the obfuscated reality.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

painterswife said:


> Sorry but those of you out east *have no real clue* how about living with fire in the west.


I feel sorry for those of you in the West who have no real clue how to cut the grass on the side of the road to prevent fires.


----------



## shawnlee (Apr 13, 2010)

Bearfootfarm said:


> I feel sorry for those of you in the West who have no real clue how to cut the grass on the side of the road to prevent fires.



Econazi regulations...punishable by a fine and jailtime...….you grass killer....


----------



## ShannonR (Nov 28, 2012)

shawnlee said:


> This state has the resources to do what it takes...without getting into controversial details......its the leadership here, not to mention the crazy train policies and rules.
> 
> California has burnt each year for as long as I can remember, it just keeps getting worse,...I was in the middle of what was the largest fire in California 12 months ago. The firefighters gave it their all, but lack of manpower and poor decisions and regulations are what keeps it from being as effective as possible ...from prevention to fighting.
> 
> ...


I like you... you get it. The fires truly are nothing new, but the scope and intensity of them sure are. Long as I can remember, at least some of the late summer and early fall days we had Smokey air. Now, the Smokey air is nonstop for months straight... I worry for my kids' and my own health


----------



## ShannonR (Nov 28, 2012)

shawnlee said:


> Econazi regulations...punishable by a fine and jailtime...….you grass killer....


Yeah... the heck is that guy thinking anyway? We waste perfectly good water that our state can't really spare growing that grass...and this guy wants us to just cut it!?


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

I think some here are confusing manicured byways with mountain gravel roads where cutting grass and brush is not doable.


----------



## ShannonR (Nov 28, 2012)

painterswife said:


> I think some here are confusing manicured byways with mountain gravel roads where cutting grass and brush is not doable.


As part of the Carr fire recovery effort, the edges of our highway were all..... wait for it... hydroseeded. Right up to the edge of the pavement. I don't get it, we are purposefully growing grass on steep slopes next to the highway, that will be impossible to mow. I get the erosion control aspect of it, but this idea, to me, seems a tad bit shortsighted. There are other ways to control erosion. It might look pretty... for a couple of months, before the grass dies.

Editing to add: For those of you who don't know already, this particular fire was started by a travel trailer that blew a tire on said highway. The rim sent off sparks that ignited. It ended up burning about 150,000 acres and thousands of structures.


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

ShannonR said:


> As part of the Carr fire recovery effort, the edges of our highway were all..... wait for it... hydroseeded. Right up to the edge of the pavement. I don't get it, we are purposefully growing grass on steep slopes next to the highway, that will be impossible to mow. I get the erosion control aspect of it, but this idea, to me, seems a tad bit shortsighted. There are other ways to control erosion. It might look pretty... for a couple of months, before the grass dies.
> 
> Editing to add: For those of you who don't know already, this particular fire was started by a travel trailer that blew a tire on said highway. The rim sent off sparks that ignited. It ended up burning about 150,000 acres and thousands of structures.


They hydroseed where they have disturbed the native grasses so that they regrow and hold the hillside together. When you don't do that the rock just collapses when it rains. The grass will grow back just slower.


----------



## ShannonR (Nov 28, 2012)

I get that, but it doesn't actually hold the hillside together. That is the working theory, but there are still slides in these areas, some of them are pretty bad too.


----------



## farmrbrown (Jun 25, 2012)

painterswife said:


> I think some here are confusing manicured byways with mountain gravel roads where cutting grass and brush is not doable.





ShannonR said:


> As part of the Carr fire recovery effort, the edges of our highway were all..... wait for it... hydroseeded. Right up to the edge of the pavement. I don't get it, we are purposefully growing grass on steep slopes next to the highway, that will be impossible to mow. I get the erosion control aspect of it, but this idea, to me, seems a tad bit shortsighted. There are other ways to control erosion. It might look pretty... for a couple of months, before the grass dies.
> 
> Editing to add: For those of you who don't know already, this particular fire was started by a travel trailer that blew a tire on said highway. The rim sent off sparks that ignited. It ended up burning about 150,000 acres and thousands of structures.


I hadn't heard the cause of the Carr fire, that one came the closest to my wife's sister. They said they had everything packed and ready to bug out and it was just on the other side of the ridge. Her husband was hosing everything down because the ash and embers were falling all around.
https://www.actionnewsnow.com/conte...ites-Brush-Fire-in-Redding-RFD-485776201.html

As I was looking at google maps of the road (lots of trees lining it) I found this news report that said the trailer only burned 4 acres and they contained it.
https://www.redding.com/story/news/...near-goodwater-avenue-roads-closed/707788002/
Maybe some sparks got away?
The previous link said jot started going up hwy 299, running north/south which crosses hwy 44 close by.


But yeah. We have gravel mountain roads where I live too. In places you can't get a bush hog, they have another way to clear the vegetation away. I think it's called Roundup.

After it dies, a coating of that fire retardant or even sand would help too.


----------



## oneraddad (Jul 20, 2010)

farmrbrown said:


> But yeah. We have gravel mountain roads where I live too. In places you can't get a bush hog, they have another way to clear the vegetation away. I think it's called Roundup.
> 
> After it dies, a coating of that fire retardant or even sand would help too.



I can't take anything you post serious after this, do you drink ?


----------



## farmrbrown (Jun 25, 2012)

oneraddad said:


> I can't take anything you post serious after this, do you drink ?


Occasionally.
Do you need a DOT document or something for verification?


----------



## ShannonR (Nov 28, 2012)

farmrbrown said:


> I hadn't heard the cause of the Carr fire, that one came the closest to my wife's sister. They said they had everything packed and ready to bug out and it was just on the other side of the ridge. Her husband was hosing everything down because the ash and embers were falling all around.
> https://www.actionnewsnow.com/conte...ites-Brush-Fire-in-Redding-RFD-485776201.html
> 
> As I was looking at google maps of the road (lots of trees lining it) I found this news report that said the trailer only burned 4 acres and they contained it.
> ...


The fire was started on hwy 299 by Carr powerhouse... hence the name. That link is for another trailer fire.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

painterswife said:


> I think some here are confusing manicured byways with mountain gravel roads where cutting grass and brush is not doable.


Anything is doable if you want to prevent problems.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

ShannonR said:


> I don't get it, we are purposefully growing grass *on steep slopes* next to the highway, that will be impossible to mow.


No one will be parking cars there either.


----------



## farmrbrown (Jun 25, 2012)

ShannonR said:


> The fire was started on hwy 299 by Carr powerhouse... hence the name. That link is for another trailer fire.


Yep, I found it, a week later but the same story line.
https://www.newsweek.com/flat-tire-...-carr-wildfire-thousands-acres-burned-1057256


----------



## keenataz (Feb 17, 2009)

JeffreyD said:


> Bark beetle...


Yes those bark beetles used to be killed off in winter when you would get several days of -30. That does not happen enough anymore. So climate change is a direct cause.


----------



## keenataz (Feb 17, 2009)

ShannonR said:


> Or just clear the surrounding communities and light it up... any time of year will do. It's no different than what's happening here anyway. The new forest that grows back will be more drought resistant!


You're not a forester are you?

BTW I am.


----------



## no really (Aug 7, 2013)

keenataz said:


> Yes those bark beetles used to be killed off in winter when you would get several days of -30. That does not happen enough anymore. So climate change is a direct cause.


Just a question where in California do they get several days of -30 temps?


----------



## ShannonR (Nov 28, 2012)

keenataz said:


> You're not a forester are you?
> 
> BTW I am.


No, don't worry your forests are safe from me, lol. I'm from a logging family and community. Logging paid my meal ticket for many years... not so much anymore though (divorced now).


----------



## ShannonR (Nov 28, 2012)

no really said:


> Just a question where in California do they get several days of -30 temps?


It's rare but it does happen occasionally. I just had to ask my ex husband about temps.. He said he has worked in -34 temp in the very northeast part of the state in high elevations. Around bogard and north of there he says. The vast majority of the state doesn't even get down to zero, though.


----------



## JeffreyD (Dec 27, 2006)

keenataz said:


> Yes those bark beetles used to be killed off in winter when you would get several days of -30. That does not happen enough anymore. So climate change is a direct cause.


Got a link, i can't find that anywhere?


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

JeffreyD said:


> Got a link, i can't find that anywhere?


https://insideclimatenews.org/news/...imate-change-northern-canada-new-jersey-maine


----------



## keenataz (Feb 17, 2009)

JeffreyD said:


> Got a link, i can't find that anywhere?


It is what I do for a living and I live in mountain pine beetle central

https://www2.gov.bc.ca/assets/gov/f...etles/biology_of_the_mountain_pine_beetle.pdf


----------



## ShannonR (Nov 28, 2012)

keenataz said:


> It is what I do for a living and I live in mountain pine beetle central
> 
> https://www2.gov.bc.ca/assets/gov/f...etles/biology_of_the_mountain_pine_beetle.pdf


True, the pine beetles are actually native but the population has been exploding. Down here, we blame drought conditions


----------



## keenataz (Feb 17, 2009)

ShannonR said:


> True, the pine beetles are actually native but the population has been exploding. Down here, we blame drought conditions


Makes sense. I would asume drought weakens trees and limits their ability to fight them.


----------



## ShannonR (Nov 28, 2012)

keenataz said:


> Makes sense. I would asume drought weakens trees and limits their ability to fight them.


That's the working theory


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

I spent several years back in the early 2000's working on the Pine Beetle problem for landscaping customers. It is directly related to not getting enough severe cold weather to keep the larvae in check. It worked through the forests over 10-12 years targeting trees that were older and of poorer health for whatever reasons. For us, it was usually trees that were too close together and competing for the same nutrients. Where you use to get one or two trees a year dying you would get many as the beetle moved from tree to tree and multiplying. The forest turned red as the trees died.


----------



## ShannonR (Nov 28, 2012)

painterswife said:


> I spent several years back in the early 2000's working on the Pine Beetle problem for landscaping customers. It is directly related to not getting enough severe cold weather to keep the larvae in check. It worked through the forests over 10-12 years targeting trees that were older and of poorer health for whatever reasons. For us, it was usually trees that were too close together and competing for the same nutrients. Where you use to get one or two trees a year dying you would get many as the beetle moved from tree to tree and multiplying. The forest turned red as the trees died.


California hasn't tended towards severe cold weather much, if at all in recent (thousand or so years) history though. I will completely and totally agree the trees are too close together, but what is this severe cold you speak of?


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

Bearfootfarm said:


> S&EP has turned into the new Politics/Dark Room.
> Did some people get kicked out of GC?
> 
> 
> ...


I was thinking the same thing. It is like the fight starters move from place to place, and then there are fights were there were none.


----------



## shawnlee (Apr 13, 2010)

If anyone still watches the news.....fresh off the griddle,....forestry department admits they should have been raking the forests....


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

shawnlee said:


> forestry department admits they should have been raking the forests....


Gee, why didn't someone else think of that???


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

shawnlee said:


> If anyone still watches the news.....fresh off the griddle,....forestry department admits they should have been raking the forests....


Like they do in Finland? Except they don't rake forests in Finland...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...ts-not-because-raking/?utm_term=.32e99cf4005c


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

haypoint said:


> Is NPR reliable?
> In my area, lightning strike fires are ore common.
> https://www.detroitnews.com/story/n...ife-reborn-upper-peninsula-wildfire/85381152/


NPR is very reliable.... They can be counted on for a leftist spin every time.


----------



## shawnlee (Apr 13, 2010)

Irish Pixie said:


> Like they do in Finland? Except they don't rake forests in Finland...
> 
> https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...ts-not-because-raking/?utm_term=.32e99cf4005c



Got it, they rake with fire...….




People can take issue with rake all they want, it still stands true......clean the fricken forest up, when you rake the yard you are cleaning it up......our forests were not maintained, they were let go or in simple terms, they need cleaned up or raked or maintained or whatever terminology makes a person happy.


Some people need and like a 9000 word SA that breaks down to clean it up, some prefer 3 words.....rake it up.


----------



## ShannonR (Nov 28, 2012)

shawnlee said:


> Got it, they rake with fire...….
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Mow it down


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

shawnlee said:


> Got it, they rake with fire...….
> 
> 
> 
> ...


The article boils down to just two words: controlled burns. Easy enough for you? 

Point is the unindicted co-conspirator lied about what the Finnish President supposedly told him. You have advocated for controlled burns this entire thread and now you're whining. LOL


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

Irish Pixie said:


> Like they do in Finland? Except they don't rake forests in Finland...


They should. 
You really don't know what anyone "told" Trump though.



Irish Pixie said:


> *Point is* the unindicted co-conspirator lied about what the Finnish President supposedly told him. You have advocated for controlled burns this entire thread and *now you're whining*. LOL


*Point is* you're trying to make this about "politics" when *you whine the loudest* if anyone says anything you disagree with in one of your threads.


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

Irish Pixie said:


> The article boils down to just two words: controlled burns. Easy enough for you?
> 
> Point is the unindicted co-conspirator lied about what the Finnish President supposedly told him. You have advocated for controlled burns this entire thread and now you're whining. LOL


Torpedo away


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

Um. Perhaps I should point out that this isn't General Chat.


----------



## shawnlee (Apr 13, 2010)

Irish Pixie said:


> The article boils down to just two words: controlled burns. Easy enough for you?
> 
> Point is the unindicted co-conspirator lied about what the Finnish President supposedly told him. You have advocated for controlled burns this entire thread and now you're whining. LOL


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

Irish Pixie said:


> Um. Perhaps I should point out that *this isn't General Chat*.


GC isn't "Politics" but that's never stopped you before.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

Bearfootfarm said:


> GC isn't "Politics" but that's never stopped you before.


This forum is not General Chat. Please point out exactly where it states no politics in the rules on this forum which is *Survival & Emergency Preparedness*. Thanks.


----------



## oneraddad (Jul 20, 2010)

Are you having margaritas for breakfast ?


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

Perhaps it's true what they say, pot kills brain cells? Hmmm. Or it could be that it causes nasty bitterness in some people. Who knows? Who cares? Absolutely no one in some cases.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

Irish Pixie said:


> This forum is not General Chat.


You seem to be trying to turn it into GC.



Irish Pixie said:


> Perhaps it's true what they say, pot kills brain cells? Hmmm. Or it could be that *it causes nasty bitterness *in some people.


It's proven alcohol does that.

It's also proven it kills more people than assault weapons.

It also makes people forget things they've said, making them repeat themselves.
It also makes them misunderstand simple statements



Irish Pixie said:


> Please point out exactly where it states *no politics in the rules on this forum*


Did I say any such thing?
I think you just want to argue.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

Bearfootfarm said:


> You seem to be trying to turn it into GC.
> 
> 
> It's proven alcohol does that.
> ...


It's unethical and has always been the against the rules of this forum to change someone's post. You do it constantly when you cut them up in order to make your nasty response posts make sense. Why do you do that?


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

Irish Pixie said:


> It's unethical and has always been the against the rules of this forum to *change* someone's post.


I haven't changed anything at all.
I copy and paste.

There's no need to lie just because you're irritated.

If you don't like my posts, don't read them.
I don't care if you do or not.

Don't pretend you really care about the "rules" unless you think you can use them against someone else.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

Bearfootfarm said:


> I haven't changed anything at all.
> I copy and paste.
> 
> There's no need to lie just because you're irritated.
> ...


You unethically change other member's posts. There is no point in denying it, anyone can see that you do it with many (most?) of your posts. Why? It make it easier for you to "win"? LOL 

Tell you what, I'll start pointing it out when you do it.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

Irish Pixie said:


> You unethically *change* other member's posts.


You're repeating an obvious *lie* simply because you love to argue.



Irish Pixie said:


> Tell you what, I'll start pointing it out when you do it.


You can't, because I don't "change" anything.



Irish Pixie said:


> anyone can see that you do it with many (most?) of your posts.


Only the delusional see "changes".
I *copy* and paste.



Irish Pixie said:


> Why? It make it easier for you to "win"?


The only way to win is to not play your silly word games. 
SSDD


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

Bearfootfarm said:


> You're repeating an obvious *lie* simply because you love to argue.
> 
> 
> You can't, because I don't "change" anything.
> ...


Case in point. You did not quote my post, you cut certain parts out (the parts that suited what you wanted it to say) and deleted the rest. That's is changing my post and it's meaning. Unethical and against the rules.

This is my post, notice the bits that are missing/changed.



Irish Pixie said:


> You unethically change other member's posts. There is no point in denying it, anyone can see that you do it with many (most?) of your posts. Why? It make it easier for you to "win"? LOL
> 
> Tell you what, I'll start pointing it out when you do it.


ETA: I'll continue to point it out so you'll understand.


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

Irish Pixie said:


> Um. Perhaps I should point out that this isn't General Chat.


Perhaps I should point out you turn a lot of threads a shade darker.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

Irish Pixie said:


> Case in point. You did not quote my post


I didn't "change" anything you posted.
Repeating the lie won't make it real.



Irish Pixie said:


> (the parts that suited what you wanted it to say) and deleted the rest


I highlighted a portion, and "deleted" nothing at all.
I can't "change" your post by *copying*.



Irish Pixie said:


> This is my post, notice the bits that are missing/changed.


Nothing is missing.
Your post is still there.
You're just ranting.



Irish Pixie said:


> That's is changing my post and it's meaning. Unethical and against the rules.


Report *everything* you see that you think is "against the rules".

Be sure to include *everyone*, not just those who you don't like
(meaning those who don't always agree with you)


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

Irish Pixie said:


> ETA: I'll continue to point it out so you'll understand.


*Everyone* understands more than you like to admit.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

Bearfootfarm said:


> *Everyone* understands more than you like to admit.


You unethically and against HT rules changed my post so it reflected what *you* wanted it to say rather than what I actually said. It was so you could do what you consider a "zinger" and "win". It's pathetic.

This is my post:


Irish Pixie said:


> Case in point. You did not quote my post, you cut certain parts out (the parts that suited what you wanted it to say) and deleted the rest. That's is changing my post and it's meaning. Unethical and against the rules.
> 
> This is my post, notice the bits that are missing/changed.
> 
> ...


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

Irish Pixie said:


> You unethically and against HT rules changed my post so it reflected what *you* wanted it to say rather than what I actually said. It was so you could do what you consider a "zinger" and "win".


Repeating a lie and expecting different results is the definition of "insanity".



Irish Pixie said:


> It's *pathetic*.


I agree that what you keep doing is pathetic 

But you'll probably repeat it again anyway, thinking something will be different this time....


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

Bearfootfarm said:


> Repeating a lie and expecting different results is the definition of "insanity".
> 
> 
> I agree that what you keep doing is pathetic
> ...


Good job!! You do understand. I'm proud of you.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

Irish Pixie said:


> Good job!! You do understand. I'm proud of you.


I've understood all along.
You love to argue.
I'm getting bored with you now though since you can't come up with anything original.

But go ahead and repeat yourself some more if you think it helps you.

It's just the SSDD.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

Bearfootfarm said:


> I've understood all along.
> You love to argue.
> I'm getting bored with you now though since you can't come up with anything original.
> 
> ...


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

Irish Pixie said:


>


Good job. You got the coveted ssdd. It is used so seldom that it is an accomplishment getting one.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

painterswife said:


> Good job. You got the coveted ssdd. It is used so seldom that it is an accomplishment getting one.


You know everything I said is true.
Why pretend otherwise?


----------



## shawnlee (Apr 13, 2010)

Can`t we all get along......and the answer is the same as it will always be....NO, NO and NEVER.


That's why we have separate clubs/ communities and countries and states.


Like people group together or at least those capable of co existence who are willing to stay up to a standard or conform enough to maintain the norm.


People are not the same/equal/even in any way other than shape...…..we all deserve equal rights, but we are all about as equal and rocks and martians. 


I believe self imposed segregation is a good thing, no, not black and white segregation you ninny. Self regulating segregation,...…..the world functions much smoother this way. People are different and should be allowed to be different and in order to flourish things need a environment. I do not care if people want weeds and trash in the front yard, just not close to me and I am sure they do not care if I have a golf course in my back yard, just not close to them...….it is fairly simple to grasp.


It just works out better that way for everyone...….in all aspects, I go out on the town when I want to mingle with people from different walks, I just do not want them living next to me. I applaud a persons golf course and shiney car if it makes them happy, just keep it away from my hog harvest and mud track and we will all be happy.


----------

