Has anyone on here had to evacuate their home. I have been watching the news, but I am curious as to what it is really like over there.
Fires in Southern California
There are tons of celebrities like Mel Gibson, Pierce Brosnon, Pamela Anderson etc have left there home due to fire. Now it is under a bit control due to the die out of the wind. The mayor Mr.Arnold schwarzenegger is the only celeb who is standing and fighting the fire.The latest news can be obtained from the new york times--
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/26/us/26bush.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/26/us/26bush.html
Many people has lost their house and all things, I belive that a crazy guy is the source of the fire,.
I live in Santa Barbara, the weather has been terrible recently because of the fires.
Soot and dirt in the air. But thankfully nothing immediately close by that's a great threat.
I got a good view of the fires when I flew to LA last week -- it's real bad.
Soot and dirt in the air. But thankfully nothing immediately close by that's a great threat.
I got a good view of the fires when I flew to LA last week -- it's real bad.
| tzabaot wrote: |
| Many people has lost their house and all things, I belive that a crazy guy is the source of the fire,. |
It's called global warming
It has and will continue to have dire effects on the magnitude of natural disasters. Although, the only reason they believe it was arson is because the fires started in multiple different places. They did catch somebody the other day trying to start a fire. Sad that people are compelled to do stuff like this when it's already a terrible situation.I have been fortunate. It's been really hard to breath for the last few days, I've had to stay inside, and all sporting events/physical activities at my school have been canceled. But my family and I have been very fortunate, because we have not had to evacuate.
| liljp617 wrote: |
|
It's called global warming |
Atually i just heard on the news at a young boy has admitted to starting the fire by playing with matches.
They dont know what charges, if any will be brought yet though
i still can't understand why you should start such fires. Only a great murderer can you be when this fire gets a great catch.
I hope that everyone who is responsible for this disaster will be punisched greatly.
I hope that everyone who is responsible for this disaster will be punisched greatly.
| Lord Klorel wrote: |
| i still can't understand why you should start such fires. Only a great murderer can you be when this fire gets a great catch.
I hope that everyone who is responsible for this disaster will be punisched greatly. |
They're called pyromaniacs.
| thomasw wrote: | ||
Atually i just heard on the news at a young boy has admitted to starting the fire by playing with matches. They dont know what charges, if any will be brought yet though |
There are multiple effects of global warming that allowed the fires to grow so uncontrollably and give the firefighters an extremely difficult task at containing them. I didn't say it was the cause...there are many things that could have caused this.
I heard it's a small kid who mistakenly started the fire. If that's the case, then such things should be strictly monitored and children in such locations should be taught in school with new curriculum what not to do and what is dangerous.
Only if they were taught from their childhood about the dangers of playing with fire, this would not have happened. So many people would not have been killed. It's all about education.
I definitely hope this would be a wake up call for everyone and they teach young children more about their environment. Sadly, no one seems to be interested in that.
Read this story from International Herald Tribune
http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2007/11/02/america/NA-GEN-US-California-Wildfires.php
Officials unsure whether to charge boy accused of setting California fire while playing
Only if they were taught from their childhood about the dangers of playing with fire, this would not have happened. So many people would not have been killed. It's all about education.
I definitely hope this would be a wake up call for everyone and they teach young children more about their environment. Sadly, no one seems to be interested in that.
Read this story from International Herald Tribune
http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2007/11/02/america/NA-GEN-US-California-Wildfires.php
Officials unsure whether to charge boy accused of setting California fire while playing
| liljp617 wrote: |
|
There are multiple effects of global warming that allowed the fires to grow so uncontrollably and give the firefighters an extremely difficult task at containing them. I didn't say it was the cause...there are many things that could have caused this. |
Umm, no. The cause for the fires was 2 things... 1) Not allowing forest thinning (green weenies getting all bent about it), and 2) CDF not letting military planes fly until all "private" contractors have been used (wink wink, nudge nudge).
There's more fuel there than there's ever been, and once it catches (especially in a NATURALLY OCCURRING Santa Ana wind), it's gone. Burns are a natural cycle here, and they have been all but eliminated, so there's always too much fuel. Add that to those stupid green idiots who lobby to prevent forest thinning, and you've got a disaster of Biblical proportion waiting every 3 to 5 years.
The military has flown in worse wind to fight worse fires than we had here. They had the manpower, again. They had the equipment, again. They were not allowed to fly by the CDF, again.
From what I understand, our current forest fire problem stems from the 60's and 70's when we started 'fighting' fires. Most trees are resistant to fire on a reasonable scale. A fire every few years cleans out all the brush and small trees / plants. But when you stop them, it allows the brush to grow thick, which then fuels fire hot enough to burn the big strong trees, which escalates into a huge firestorm that will burn anything. (Basically what you said Billy)
I don't understand the problem with cutting trees anyway, as long as you're replanting the same kind and rotating areas to allow for wild life. I mean really, the best way to conserve anything thick this is to make it into a valuable resource.
If the green idiots really want to save trees they need to propose intelligent ideas. You can't just leave trees alone and expect them to be ok. Human impact is to wide spread. For anything to last humans need to see value in it and actively do something about it.
Since the 90's the forest rangers have tried remedying this with intentional burn, but I guess it's not as effective as nature. Anyway, with all the home its not like any municipality will stop fighting small fires anyway.
Screwed ourselves once again.... oops
What do you guys think about the US increasing the size of it's military and adding such jobs as disaster relieve and fire fighting to their list of duties? Take the hurricane trouble, a brigade could set up a temporary infrastructure to keep everyone healthy, sort of like under battle conditions.
This would leave the military room to grow and be ready for bigger trouble world wide while not sitting idle (training of course) when there's no war to fight.
I don't understand the problem with cutting trees anyway, as long as you're replanting the same kind and rotating areas to allow for wild life. I mean really, the best way to conserve anything thick this is to make it into a valuable resource.
If the green idiots really want to save trees they need to propose intelligent ideas. You can't just leave trees alone and expect them to be ok. Human impact is to wide spread. For anything to last humans need to see value in it and actively do something about it.
Since the 90's the forest rangers have tried remedying this with intentional burn, but I guess it's not as effective as nature. Anyway, with all the home its not like any municipality will stop fighting small fires anyway.
Screwed ourselves once again.... oops
What do you guys think about the US increasing the size of it's military and adding such jobs as disaster relieve and fire fighting to their list of duties? Take the hurricane trouble, a brigade could set up a temporary infrastructure to keep everyone healthy, sort of like under battle conditions.
This would leave the military room to grow and be ready for bigger trouble world wide while not sitting idle (training of course) when there's no war to fight.
| horseatingweeds wrote: |
| From what I understand, our current forest fire problem stems from the 60's and 70's when we started 'fighting' fires. Most trees are resistant to fire on a reasonable scale. A fire every few years cleans out all the brush and small trees / plants. But when you stop them, it allows the brush to grow thick, which then fuels fire hot enough to burn the big strong trees, which escalates into a huge firestorm that will burn anything. (Basically what you said Billy)
I don't understand the problem with cutting trees anyway, as long as you're replanting the same kind and rotating areas to allow for wild life. I mean really, the best way to conserve anything thick this is to make it into a valuable resource. If the green idiots really want to save trees they need to propose intelligent ideas. You can't just leave trees alone and expect them to be ok. Human impact is to wide spread. For anything to last humans need to see value in it and actively do something about it. Since the 90's the forest rangers have tried remedying this with intentional burn, but I guess it's not as effective as nature. Anyway, with all the home its not like any municipality will stop fighting small fires anyway. Screwed ourselves once again.... oops What do you guys think about the US increasing the size of it's military and adding such jobs as disaster relieve and fire fighting to their list of duties? Take the hurricane trouble, a brigade could set up a temporary infrastructure to keep everyone healthy, sort of like under battle conditions. This would leave the military room to grow and be ready for bigger trouble world wide while not sitting idle (training of course) when there's no war to fight. |
This is why American Indians routinely conducted burns to control growth and renew the land.
As for the military, I personally don't like the idea of expanding its duties beyond what it already does for disaster relief. One must remember that the Federal military cannot move into a state and conduct operations (even disaster relief) without the invitation of the governor. The federal government can't just step into a state's business and takeover (as much as people might like to blame all of the Katrina failures on the federal government). That would be a violation of state's rights.
Respectfully,
M
| Moonspider wrote: |
|
One must remember that the Federal military cannot move into a state and conduct operations (even disaster relief) without the invitation of the governor. The federal government can't just step into a state's business and takeover (as much as people might like to blame all of the Katrina failures on the federal government). That would be a violation of state's rights. Respectfully, M |
I am certain that the south-eastern states begged the government for help during huricane katrina. Furthermore, how long does it take to get federal help? Americans knew taht hurricane katrina was gonna hit the coast, so the states concerned had sufficient time to ask for help or the federal governemnt to ask to interfere on the states behalf.
| ThePolemistis wrote: |
| I am certain that the south-eastern states begged the government for help during huricane katrina. |
FEMA was ready well before they were asked to help by the LOCAL government.
| Quote: |
| Furthermore, how long does it take to get federal help? |
Didn't take long here in So Cal. The only problem was the CDF blocking them from helping in the first day or two when we needed it the most. And that's WITHOUT several day's notice that the fires were going to hit that hard.
| Moonspider wrote: |
|
As for the military, I personally don't like the idea of expanding its duties beyond what it already does for disaster relief. One must remember that the Federal military cannot move into a state and conduct operations (even disaster relief) without the invitation of the governor. The federal government can't just step into a state's business and takeover (as much as people might like to blame all of the Katrina failures on the federal government). That would be a violation of state's rights. Respectfully, M |
What about expanding National Guard then? A good healthy wing of AC-135s would be handy.
| horseatingweeds wrote: | ||
What about expanding National Guard then? A good healthy wing of AC-135s would be handy. |
I have no problem with that. Any change must go through the Pentagon since the National Guard is actually federal and not a militia (despite the fact that they also report to the governors of their respective states). However I am sure leaders would be amiable to such a change if deemed prudent.
| ThePolemistis wrote: |
|
I am certain that the south-eastern states begged the government for help during huricane katrina. |
As far as I remember, the federal government moved in as soon as they were asked. I do remember a lot of foot dragging by Louisiana though.
Respectfully,
M
 |