Anatomy of the false link between forest fires and anthropogenic CO2

Here is my latest article, published moments ago on Research Gate.

Anatomy of the false link between forest fires and anthropogenic CO2

By D. G. Rancourt, PhD
Research Gate, May 2016
DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.1.2059.6087

Summary: In this critical review of the scientific literature about fire, I describe how the false notion of a link between forest fires and anthropogenic CO2 was ignited in 2006 by a fatally flawed article promoted in the science-trend-setting magazine Science, and spread like wildfire through the scientific literature and beyond, driven in part by high winds of climate modelling extravagance, while fortunately leaving large unburnt patches. There is no evidentiary basis for such a link. On the contrary, established knowledge about forest fires leads to the conclusion that dedication to teasing out such a link is preposterous: In the present circumstances starting in approximately 1900, the dominant effect is direct human impacts on land use, which causes global fire occurrences to be dramatically less than from the known long-term natural cycles (modern fire deficit). No special circumstances or regions have been correctly identified where forest fire behaviour can be attributed to CO2. Canada’s recent Fort McMurray fire is no exception. The claimed 7 g mean birth weight loss arising from mothers’ general exposure to CO2-driven southern California wildfires, like all such claims, is a product of statistical and conceptual overenthusiasm. I use concepts from the animal-behaviour scientific literature to explain how some scientists and their followers can get so carried away.

Read the entire article HERE.

Backed up here: https://archive.ph/gAjLs  

It's about the geopolitics stupid!

By Denis Rancourt

CO2-alarmism is fabricated by the Empire for domestic consumption. Service intellectuals dutifully gobble it up and adopt and project it.

The global legislative instruments of carbon control that are being implemented at breakneck speed in Empire-controlled jurisdictions have nothing to do with "saving the planet" and everything to do with global dominance and predation, in the same way that the World Bank has nothing to do with altruist "development".

"Peak oil" theorists and CO2-alarmists tend to disregard that the Earth is a "planet", not a fragile organism in a precarious micro-habitat, but a "planet".

As a recent example, which allows a view of the underlying geopolitical driving forces, THIS ARTICLE (reading between the lines) explains part of the mechanism whereby oil/gas are a viable USA geopolitical weapon against Russia, and China by extension. Briefly, new-era US production capacity allows the Empire to crash oil prices, using subservient Saudi Arabia, in order to bring Russia down, without itself suffering anything much.

Another consequence is that the Empire's ongoing implementation of "carbon economy" global instruments of coercion and control must deal with resistance from a new array of "small" domestic shale-oil producers, until these are monopolized and fully integrated.


Dr. Denis G. Rancourt is a former tenured and Full Professor of physics at the University of Ottawa, Canada. He is known for his applications of physics education research (TVO Interview). He has published over 100 articles in leading scientific journals, in the areas of spectroscopy, condensed matter physics, and environmental science. He has written several social commentary essays. He is the author of the book Hierarchy and Free Expression in the Fight Against Racism.

My position on climate change

I have come to conclude that there are geostrategic and global-finance forces that drive the push to implement a global "carbon economy".

See: Denis Rancourt, Carbon Reality Check, Dissident Voice, 30 April 2016.

Scientists are not the tail that wags the carbon-politics dog. Generally, in addition to direct IPCC machinations, establishment scientists are salaried professionals who are biased in the same way that embedded journalists are biased in war reporting.

I am against global warming alarmism, and against the proposition that climate change is a dominant threat to humanity or to the environment, which I believe is a preposterous proposition. Habitat destruction is caused by habitat destruction. Large-scale human misery is caused directly by human economic and geopolitical violence.

Like all groundless myths that align popular thought for the benefit of an oligarchy, this particular myth should be exposed and denounced.

In this case, exposing the myth is a self-image threat to some, a career threat to others, and a financial or legitimacy threat to certain institutions and corporations: eco-lobbyists, careerist scientists, carbon economy parasites and predators...

I reject the argument that "it is positive to support the proposition of a dominant threat from climate change irrespective of whether it is true or not". Supporting the myth provides a pretext for soft, ineffective, and counter-productive politics of "change", and supports the hegemony that is actively seeking to broaden and enforce a carbon economy that is not and will never be democratically controlled.

The way to fight habitat and ecological destruction is to fight habitat and ecological destruction. The way to fight injustice is to fight injustice. CO2 is not leverage for activists, it is a manipulation.

A list of my work in this area is HERE.

-- Denis Rancourt

Dr. Denis G. Rancourt is a former tenured and Full Professor of physics at the University of Ottawa, Canada. He is known for his applications of physics education research (TVO Interview). He practiced various areas of science (environmental geochemistry, soil science, spectroscopy, condensed matter physics, materials science) which were funded by a national agency, has published over 100 articles in leading scientific journals, and has written several social commentary essays. He is the author of the book Hierarchy and Free Expression in the Fight Against Racism.