** Many journalists do not have a huge background in general knowledge because of our culture of expertise over broad based knowledge. Here is a bit of a cheat sheet that can be used to put the current climate change hype in perspective. The library is much better for research than Google. Trending is not a value of. Knowledge. This is also written by someone who is experiencing the effects of these wildfires as well as the eruption of Mt. Saint Helens.
Agenda driven politicians and younger scientists take the position that wildfires like these are the result of climate change because natural cycles for the planet take longer than they can remember. That does not make them climate change related but part of a cycle most of us no longer understand.
Take these notes into consideration before spreading the hype.
1. Forests are nature's automatic lamd reclaimers. Forests do not need to be planted by humans. Any piece of vacant land, no matter how small, which is located in a place with adequate rainfall (more than 30 inches generally) will produce woody brush and young trees within five years. Burned land often reaches this stage faster because of nature's design (too complicated to explain here)
2. All forests have a life cycle. Soft woods such as pines may mature in 30 years but hard woods like oaks and maples may not reach maturity for 80 years. The more mature a forest the more likely they are to succumb to wildfires--its nature's method of regeneration.
3. Pre-electricity, forests were cleaned of downed trees and brush by people who needed the wood for building materials, cooking, heathing, smoke houses etc. Without this mutually beneficial relationship, forests are more likely to become hotter and more dangerous if they start. Interestingly, mature trees can generally survive a ground level wildfire IF and only IF the amount of leaves and debris is minimal.
4. By protecting our forests, we abandoned long standing methods of keeping wildfires in check. That is not a climate change factor. That was allowing environmental emotion to over take good sense.
Now for the Air Quality Issue and weather
1. Yes, heavy smoke is not good for people but the human body is much more resilent than our healthcare system chooses to believe. Please remember the Air Quality Index goes from 0 to 500. These fires rated upwards of 400. Generally Air Quality numbers in the States are less than 50 which means that yes the air is free of smoke particles but also free of ground level oxygen compounds which animal life (humans, pets, farm animals and wildlife) need to stay healthy and alive.
2. Its particles in the air that are instrumental in helping to form clouds. As the Northeast deal with chilly temperatures during this smoke event, it is clear that everyday clouds would do the same thing. Less Sun. Cooler temperature. No a complicated concept.
3. Particles are also instrumental in acceptable levels of humity. While healthcare makes a big deal about high humidity and the effect on the heart, low humidity is just as dangerous for the overall body. Dry air dires out lund tissue which keeps it from absorbing oxygen as easily as needed. High humidity at least keep lung tissue moist.
Conclusion: Removing components of the atmosphere based on occasional and naturally occuring inconvenience is just ridiculous. the United Nations is spreading hype and not science .
Hope this helps.