International Finland's President explains to President Moron that they don't rake forests to prevent forest fires

[RockstarChris]

i wont talk about the leadership of calfire.

 

[Seano]

He talks with unwarranted sense of authority about topics he doesn't know anything, or even less than anything, about on the daily. He deserves to be fed shit every time he starts talking shit.

I'll ask you too, did you watch the video this quote came from?

 

[Bargey]

it's like someone flipped a switch in the heads - be angry now. "DRUMPPFFF!"

The funniest is that we went from:

Trump is a rapist to
Trump is a traitor that works for Putin to
Trump has cheated on his taxes to
Trump is a racist to
Trump is a pervert who harassed female workers / beauty contestants to
Trump has committed adultery to
Trump has two scoops of ice cream to
Trump talked about raking leaves


Are they getting the insane pattern yet?

 

[Throttlehead]

The only reason this even became news is because we've got elections coming up in Finland, and the left-wingers basically tried to pander to the lowest common denominator by turning this into a "meme", a failed meme at that, since the forest experts have already moved to acknowledge that Trump used the correct terminology, which was taken out of context by left-wing media and partisans.

Just another day of madness and stupidity, as usual.

Usually I wouldn't even bother, but since it was my country responsible for this bit of ignorance, I felt like I needed to do the Americans a favour, by pointing out the truth.

Finland is indeed a very advanced country when it comes to taking care of our forests and preventing wildfires, and this type of "raking" being done at a national level, to clear out forests of dead trees, stumps, etc. is a part of that.

Fucking stop it! The childish imbecile said something so stupid even some of the cult rolled their eyes. Finland gets about 20 inches more rain year, and has snow 1/2 the year. They also don't deal with a Santa Anna wind.

"We want the best climate" ...run that one through the cult decryptor...what does it mean?

Completely correct...another day of madness and stupidity by Trump and his cult. The world is laughing at this moron and his childish like madness.

 

[Metusalemi]

Fucking stop it! The childish imbecile said something so stupid even some of the cult rolled their eyes. Finland gets about 20 inches more rain year, and has snow 1/2 the year. They also don't deal with a Santa Anna wind.

"We want the best climate" ...run that one through the cult decryptor...what does it mean?

Completely correct...another day of madness and stupidity by Trump and his cult. The world is laughing at this moron and his childish like madness.

Last summer was very dry and hot. Sweden had massive forest fires while we didn't. It's not just about the climate differences.

Trump has a point. Although his output was typically trumpian.

 

[Throttlehead]

Last summer was very dry and hot. Sweden had massive forest fires while we didn't. It's not just about the climate differences.

Trump has a point. Although his output was typically trumpian.

Read this https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...ts-not-because-raking/?utm_term=.28c4a13f1f1e

Trump has no point concerning California.

 

[Ruprecht]

Last summer was very dry and hot. Sweden had massive forest fires while we didn't. It's not just about the climate differences.

Trump has a point. Although his output was typically trumpian.

Hot and dry for Finland. Not hot and dry for a Mediterranean climate. Unlike California, which is coming off a 5 year drought. California's charparral, scrub and woodlands are also nothing like subarctic forests.
Your early warning system and better access roads are great for forest fires, but don't really achieve anything for fires on the urban outskirts.
I don't know what the Californian building code is, but over here there are very specific requirements for houses in those areas (I live in a very similiar Mediterranean zone with similar flora). Including no plants overhanging roofing or gutters, a 20m clearance from the house, a dedicated fire fighting water supply of at least 22,000 liters not reliant on mains pressure, roof sprinklers, and construction of non-combustible materials (I don't know if timber homes are as popular in California as the rest of the US).
We also have a similar program of prescribed burns, which is likewise effected by drought conditions.
Ultimately though, if the the climate continues to warm and droughts increase in frequency and severity, there will be more fires and more severe fires.
Clearcutting, even with harvesting of logging residue, won't improve the situation.

 

[Son of Jamin]

17% of the forest fires in Sweden in 2018 were linked to arsonists!

 

[LangfordBarrow]

But do you believe that one word should be the focus of what he said? Is it something that should have created this stir?

I think it's another example of him just making things up and saying something stupid. It's not just about the word rake. Is there any evidence that the forests in SC are being mismanaged?

 

[Metusalemi]

Hot and dry for Finland. Not hot and dry for a Mediterranean climate. Unlike California, which is coming off a 5 year drought. California's charparral, scrub and woodlands are also nothing like subarctic forests.
Your early warning system and better access roads are great for forest fires, but don't really achieve anything for fires on the urban outskirts.
I don't know what the Californian building code is, but over here there are very specific requirements for houses in those areas (I live in a very similiar Mediterranean zone with similar flora). Including no plants overhanging roofing or gutters, a 20m clearance from the house, a dedicated fire fighting water supply of at least 22,000 liters not reliant on mains pressure, roof sprinklers, and construction of non-combustible materials (I don't know if timber homes are as popular in California as the rest of the US).
We also have a similar program of prescribed burns, which is likewise effected by drought conditions.
Ultimately though, if the the climate continues to warm and droughts increase in frequency and severity, there will be more fires and more severe fires.
Clearcutting, even with harvesting of logging residue, won't improve the situation.

My point was that Sweden has same climate as Finland, but more problems with forest fires.

 

[Ruprecht]

My point was that Sweden has same climate as Finland, but more problems with forest fires.

Sure, and maybe Sweden can emulate Finland's strategy, but they aren't applicable solutions for all the Mediterranean climate areas currently dealing with increasing numbers and severity of bushfires.

 

[TheGreatA]

Sure, and maybe Sweden can emulate Finland's strategy, but they aren't applicable solutions for all the Mediterranean climate areas currently dealing with increasing numbers and severity of bushfires.

I can pretty much guaran-damn-tee that with the Finnish level of organization, when it comes to protecting and preserving the environment, you'd see far fewer wildfires in Mediterranean climate areas than you do now.

Not all of the solutions are directly applicable, but the level of expertise and effort certainly is.

I would say that it's pretty much going to be our number 1 export going forward, how not to destroy ourselves and how to preserve the future.

In that sense, Trump came looking for solutions from the right place.

I see that a lot of people here are clinging onto the argument about the climate when it comes to Nordic ecology, much like many cling onto the argument of smaller population size when it comes to the Nordic economy. Perhaps what people ought to look at is the difference in effort, rather than zoning in on the difference of the scenario.

The do-nothings, and this includes Trump's own political party, would see California burn and pretend that it is merely an inevitability, the result of "global warming" or human carelessness. In reality, even if all of the damage can never be prevented, there are certainly a number of measures that could be put into effect, to prevent damage of this scale.

Disposing of flammable material to prevent feeding the flames, seems like a decent place to start from a "common sense" perspective. Whether this is achieved by raking or whatever the fuck, doesn't really matter.

 

[Ruprecht]

I can pretty much guaran-damn-tee that with the Finnish level of organization, when it comes to protecting and preserving the environment, you'd see far fewer wildfires in Mediterranean climate areas than you do now.

Not all of the solutions are directly applicable, but the level of expertise and effort certainly is.

I would say that it's pretty much going to be our number 1 export going forward, how not to destroy ourselves and how to preserve the future.

In that sense, Trump came looking for solutions from the right place.

I see that a lot of people here are clinging onto the argument about the climate when it comes to Nordic ecology, much like many cling onto the argument of smaller population size when it comes to the Nordic economy. Perhaps what people ought to look at is the difference in effort, rather than zoning in on the difference of the scenario.

The do-nothings, and this includes Trump's own political party, would see California burn and pretend that it is merely an inevitability, the result of "global warming" or human carelessness. In reality, even if all of the damage can never be prevented, there are certainly a number of measures that could be put into effect, to prevent damage of this scale.

Disposing of flammable material to prevent feeding the flames, seems like a decent place to start from a "common sense" perspective.

It's a different problem because you're talking about ecological management of completely different ecologies. The size of the areas involved is only part of that. The plants involved. The length of the fire danger season. The nature and frequency of fires needed to maintain the ecology (as I understand it Finland currently needs more fires, that's certainly not the case here).
You can't manually "rake" chaparral or bushland. What are you going to do, just bulldoze the lot? Dry shrubbery is what it is. It's extremely flammable vegetation.That's the ecology. Sure, if you turn it into a desert that would reduce the fire danger. It's also not possible to use bulldozers or disk harrowing in a lot of these areas anyway, simply due to the terrain.
The solution is prescribed burnoffs (patch mosaic burns or otherwise), which Finland also does, but which you can't do unless the conditions are suitable. Low winds, relatively high humidity and recent rain. That's not an issue in Finland, but in a Mediterranean climate it may not be safe to burn off areas for years.
To the extent that things can be done similarly to Finland (such as vastly upgrading the access road infrastructure and automated early warning systems) you're looking at a much higher financial cost due to the size of the areas and differences in population density. Also those won't make any real difference to fires occurring in the outlying suburbs.
There's also the issue of rezoning. Areas that weren't previously considered high risk for wildfire now are, and making those homes now compliant with the resultant stricter building codes is a cost issue.
As usual, it's a matter of spending the money.
Clearcutting woodlands on the other hand isn't any sort of solution, and as I understand it Finland stopped doing that some time ago. So using the wildfires as an excuse to do it doesn't pass the smell test.

 

[Prefect]

He has an instinct for forest management just as he has for science .

Don't forget his uncle at MIT. Good stock. Trump went to Wharton, too. Got good grades. Good stock

 

[TheGreatA]

It's a different problem because you're talking about ecological management of completely different ecologies. The size of the areas involved is only part of that. The plants involved. The length of the fire danger season. The nature and frequency of fires needed to maintain the ecology.
You can't manually "rake" chaparral or bushland. What are you going to do, just bulldoze the lot? Dry shrubbery is what it is. It's extremely flammable vegetation.That's the ecology. Sure, if you turn it into a desert that would reduce the fire danger. It's also not possible to use bulldozers or disk harrowing in a lot of these areas anyway, simply due to the terrain.
The solution is prescribed burnoffs (patch mosaic burns or otherwise), which Finland also does, but which you can't do unless the conditions are suitable. Low winds, relatively high humidity and recent rain. That's not an issue in Finland, but in a Mediterranean climate it may not be safe to burn off areas for years.
To the extent that things can be done similarly to Finland (such as vastly upgrading the access road infrastructure and automated early warning systems) you're looking at a much higher financial cost due to the size of the areas and differences in population density. Also those won't make any real difference to fires occurring in the outlying suburbs.
There's also the issue of rezoning. Areas that weren't previously considered high risk for wildfire now are, and making those homes now compliant with the resultant stricter building codes is a cost issue.
As usual, it's a matter of spending the money.
Clearcutting woodlands on the other hand isn't any sort of solution, and as I understand it Finland stopped doing that some time ago. So using the wildfires as an excuse to do it doesn't pass the smell test.

It's a different problem, sure, however, were the Finns responsible of taking care of the environment in a different climate, they would do a better job of it than most of their counter-parts. Because there is, again, more effort and care poured into it, as well as individual responsibility required.

There is a whole culture around treating nature with respect. In America, this does not exist. And yes, one of the major culprits is the state of the so-called "conservatives" in the country, who seem content in conserving nothing.

It is not purely about money, although that is obviously a large part of it. But if you eliminated a number of the fires caused by human error or negligence, you would already reduce a large number of the fires in America. In Finland, these have largely been eliminated.

Trump proposed reducing the number of flammable material, which may or may not be an applicable solution in California's climate. He almost certainly did not mean people using their personal rakes to take care of fallen leaves from the tree in your backyard, which is the angle that the media has run with.

We can make mockery of him for offering a "common man's" solution to a complex problem. We can go ahead and mock him for it. But then we can hardly be surprised if he decides that perhaps resolving ecological problems ought not to be his area of interest, when his suggestions are met with nothing but juvenile derision.

Not saying that he himself is above such juvenile derision, but men who actually give a shit about resolving the world's problems, ought to be.

When it comes to finding solutions to preserving the environment, Trump's looking for them from the right place. You're not going to find a country in Mediterranean climate that takes care of their business in that regard, unfortunately. Finland, I would regard, as one of the world's leaders in that aspect, as good a source for advice as any, even in spite of the differences in climate.

 

[Prefect]

Yes, yes. Whats dumber? The president misspeaking? Or a legion of NPCs pathetically acting like they can't figure out what he means? I vote the latter.

How about twice misstating the name of the city that burned down that you were visiting? It was such a tragedy to him that he couldn't be bothered to learn its name just through osmosis of the deluge of media and federal funding request. Of all the people I have talked to about Paradise, not one misstated its name. Trump is going senile or is just a run of the mill self centered hole in your butt that couldn't be bothered to review all the plans and aid necessary to help solve and mitigate the forest fire problems in California. You pick. It is impossible for the name of the city to not have come up over 1000+ times in conversation and reviews.

 

[Ruprecht]

It's a different problem, sure, however, were the Finns responsible of taking care of the environment in a different climate, they would do a better job of it than most of their counter-parts. Because there is, again, more effort and care poured into it, as well as individual responsibility required.

There is a whole culture around treating nature with respect. In America, this does not exist. And yes, one of the major culprits is the state of the so-called "conservatives" in the country, who seem content in conserving nothing.

It is not purely about money, although that is obviously a large part of it. But if you eliminated a number of the fires caused by human error or negligence, you would already reduce a large number of the fires in America. In Finland, these have largely been eliminated.

Trump proposed reducing the number of flammable material, which may or may not be an applicable solution in California's climate. He almost certainly did not mean people using their personal rakes to take care of fallen leaves from the tree in your backyard, which is the angle that the media has run with.

We can make mockery of him for offering a "common man's" solution to a complex problem. We can go ahead and mock him for it. But then we can hardly be surprised if he decides that perhaps resolving ecological problems ought not to be his area of interest, when his suggestions are met with nothing but juvenile derision.

Not saying that he himself is above such juvenile derision, but men who actually give a shit about resolving the world's problems, ought to be.

When it comes to finding solutions to preserving the environment, Trump's looking for them from the right place. You're not going to find a country in Mediterranean climate that takes care of their business in that regard, unfortunately. Finland, I would regard, as one of the world's leaders in that aspect.

Was he really looking to a Finnish cultural approach to responsible environmental stewardship though?
I've seen nothing to back that up. He didn't even correctly relate the discussion they had according to your President.
I don't care much about his handwaving about a "solution" which isn't, but using the tragedy to further weaken environmental protection in favour of increased logging and/or clearcutting seems to be what he's actually doing.
That most certainly isn't any sort of solution.

 

[TheGreatA]

Was he really looking to a Finnish cultural approach to responsible environmental stewardship though?
I've seen nothing to back that up. He didn't even correctly relate the discussion they had according to your President.
I don't care much about his handwaving about a "solution" which isn't, but using the tragedy to further weaken environmental protection in favour of increased logging and/or clearcutting seems to be what he's actually doing.
That most certainly isn't any sort of solution.

I have no idea what he's doing. He's probably doing nothing. From what I understand, it's ultimately the state of California that gets to resolve such issues in the end.

I do think that he was raising the point of Finnish responsibility in comparison to American irresponsibility. The irony obviously being that he himself falls short of that responsibility. Nonetheless, I don't really see the big deal about his statements, they were about on par of what you would expect from a man with no expertise in the area. If every world leader's statements were picked apart as his have been, we'd have a flood of such threads.

He may have erred in his statements, but he did not err as much as he was presented to have. Pretty clear that he wasn't talking about people picking up their rakes and cleaning up the forests on their own. That's what the memes and the original narrative was about.

 

[Ruprecht]

I have no idea what he's doing. He's probably doing nothing. From what I understand, it's ultimately the state of California that gets to resolve such issues in the end.

I do think that he was raising the point of Finnish responsibility in comparison to American irresponsibility. The irony obviously being that he himself falls short of that responsibility. Nonetheless, I don't really see the big deal about his statements, they were about on par of what you would expect from a man with no expertise in the area.

He may have erred in his statements, but he did not err as much as he was presented to have. Pretty clear that he wasn't talking about people picking up their rakes and cleaning up the forests on their own.

The biggest issue is simply that he's talking about forest management and logging as a solution, when the majority of the destructive fires weren't in the forests.
His comments about Finland were simply underlining that by saying you guys look after your forest floors and have few problems.
That's fine and all, but the destructive fires were mostly in chaparral/scrubland on urban outskirts. There is no chaparral in Finland, you don't have a comparable ecology or fire danger season.
Blaming poor forest management is simply a talking point to support further deregulation of logging.

 

[JoeyJoeJoeJr]

I wonder how many hours a day you spend looking for something to feel upset about. I feel sorry for you warped trump haters, you guys get upset by everything.