all 39 comments

[–]Karce33 8 insightful - 3 fun8 insightful - 2 fun9 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

I think it's more they're climate alarmists. They want their message to be that climate change is causing these fires. They don't care about the environment, but they want the message out that the climate emergency is real, so they start fires to push an agenda.

[–]sproketboy 7 insightful - 3 fun7 insightful - 2 fun8 insightful - 3 fun -  (3 children)

Look up the satellite images. It's obvious what happened.

[–]JasonCarswell 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

* Timelapsed satellite videos.

[–]noice 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

Where can I find those?

[–]JasonCarswell 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

[–]Credit2Saidit 6 insightful - 3 fun6 insightful - 2 fun7 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

Problem is that, despite the insane amount of humidity they were experiencing, the amount of moisture in the underlying brush is insanely low. Literally a bone dry tinderbox waiting for a spark.

It's that way around where I live, too. Saw a brush fire erupt seemingly out of nowhere just around the corner from my home. Piece of glass with sun shining at just the right angle on top of mulch equals ignition. Doesn't take much in these conditions.

[–]Oyveygoyim 5 insightful - 4 fun5 insightful - 3 fun6 insightful - 4 fun -  (2 children)

They've been arresting people for weeks for starting forest fires. It was absolutely planned by climate fags at the behest of their jew overlords

[–]JewsAreOfColor 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Oyveygoyim is a racist pedophile who jerks his needle dick off to Bacha Bazi.

[–]Brewdabier 5 insightful - 3 fun5 insightful - 2 fun6 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

It's the reddit climate change environmental extremists setting the fires just so they can point and say see we told you so.

[–]Alphix 5 insightful - 3 fun5 insightful - 2 fun6 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

The ones in Québec ALL GOT STARTED AT VIRTUALLY THE SAME TIME as evidenced by satellite imaging.

[–]MagicMike 4 insightful - 3 fun4 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

Canada does very limited controlled burns, so when the SHTF or we have a dry spell, there’s plenty of fuel for fires.

[–]Musky 3 insightful - 5 fun3 insightful - 4 fun4 insightful - 5 fun -  (0 children)

Pretty sure the fires were caused by GOD punishing homiesexuals and trans babies

[–]JasonCarswell 4 insightful - 3 fun4 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)


[–]passionflounder 4 insightful - 3 fun4 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

Possible? Try "likely".

[–]carn0ld03 3 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

Depends. Is any corporation in anyway interested in the land that's currently on fire? For all we know, this might be a large scale land clearing operation.

[–]Maggotus 3 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

Since they all started at the same time across the province I might have to say yes to this... \

[–]hfxB0oyA 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (6 children)

It's said that incompetence is functionally indistinguishable from sabotage, and I think that's likely the case here. I doubt environmentalists would intentionally set fires, which would be in opposition to everything they stand for. In fact, I'd posit that people doing so would de facto not be environmentalists, even if they were to hide behind the label.

Humidity aside, Canada has seen a relatively dry spring, and the trees and soil need to drink up lots of liquid water in order to become fire resistant. All that tinder makes for a bad situation even if there is no increase in the number of spark events compared to a previous, wet spring. It's just that things are more prone to quickly get out of hand in this case.

Some causes may be lighting strikes, but I'm guessing the majority are man made or at least man influenced, but few are arson. A broken bottle can focus the sun like a magnifying glass and set leaves ablaze. Cigarette butts chucked out of cars on the highway are reportedly also a significant threat. At least one big fire out here in Nova Scotia was started by some idiot burning garbage in her backyard during the fire ban.

It's always more exciting to think that there are intentional bad guys lurking behind the bad things that happen, but I think that in most cases, the truth of the matter is a lot less intriguing and a lot more banal.

[–]Adventurous_Ad6212[S] 7 insightful - 2 fun7 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 2 fun -  (4 children)

The only thing I wanna say in response to this is… an enviornmental extremist would absolutely go to extreme lengths such as coordinated forest fires to push their agenda. Hence the extremism.

[–]hfxB0oyA 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (3 children)

My point above was that, even if such people called themselves environmentalists, or were even in a group that labeled themselves environmentalists, their actions confirm that they are in reality the opposite of environmentalists. Anyone doing this would be firmly in the psychotic propaganda territory of the US government's "bombing for peace" rhetoric.

That said, I do believe that very little of it is intentional arson.

[–]Adventurous_Ad6212[S] 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

Fair enough, I’ll concede your point. And don’t get me wrong I don’t think some Tom Clancy level shadowy organization is trying to set fires it’s just that where I am we don’t really get forest fires and I find it odd that we would have had such bad fires in the general area that we would have had the worst amount of pollution in the air globally for any natural incident. When I see the sky basically burning and the smell of smoke in places where it hasn’t had a thunderstorm and is super humid super humid as in right before this happened we had a day with nearly +40 with humidity I’m gonna start questioning somethings. Especially when the media goes full retard and starts using it to justify their climate change agenda.

[–]hfxB0oyA 3 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 3 fun -  (1 child)

Yeah, the media certainly stopped being a benefit a few years back.

[–]chadwickofwv 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

You need to look back at least 100 more years. The media has been the enemy of the people for a very long time.

[–]Canbot 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

which would be in opposition to everything they stand for

Only in opposition to what they claim to stand for. Their true agenda is to implement tyranny under the pretext of environmentalism.

[–]cant_even 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Since I heard of "lithium mining operations" in the affected area being impacted by the fires it does raise the possibility that eco-fascists are behind them.

[–]Zednix 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

There have already been a whole pile of arrests for arson related to the fires in other, better provinces like Alberta and Sask. There is most certainly criminal activity surrounding the fires in Kebek and Ontario.

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

No. It was Elon Musk.

[–]Alienhunter 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (11 children)

I don't think climate extremists could have dried out the whole forest.

Sure it is a possibility that extremists start any fire, but if the whole forest will start burning from a light, it can just as easily be started by lightning or an abandoned camp fire.

[–]Adventurous_Ad6212[S] 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

Good thing that part of Ontario isn’t dry.

[–]Alienhunter 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

It is if the whole forest is up in smoke. Wet forests won't light.

[–]Adventurous_Ad6212[S] 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Naw bro just sayin it’s probably Trudeau in his gay ass socks setting shit on fire while he fucks his boyfriend in blackface

[–]Canbot 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (7 children)

I don't think climate extremists could have dried out the whole forest.

Another strawman by (((alienhunter)))

[–]Alienhunter 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

If you've got a plausible theory about how they did it I'm listening.

[–]Canbot 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (5 children)

Are you claiming that it is physically impossible? 🤣

[–]Alienhunter 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

Few things are "physically impossible".

Is it practical? And can it practically be done while keeping it a secret?

Like with the moon landing conspiracies, at a certain point the cost and difficulty of faking the thing makes it much easier to just do the thing instead.

9/11 conspiracy theories involving fake planes and shit, why not just fly a real plane into the building?

So in this case we are looking at the idea that climate activists somehow got the whole forest on fire? Ok. If the forest was dry they could do it easily with a spark. That is reasonable to assume. But did they dry out the forest? And if so how. Or did they plant a huge coordinated effort to plant incindiary devices all throughout the forest to simulate a fire? And control the weather to make it seem like it was natural (or just the reporting on the weather).

It reaches a point where you either just assume they can control all media and manufacture their own reality, in which case whether or not there even is a fire comes into question and so there would be no need for a conspiracy to start one. Didn't happen? Or did?

Or did they simply wait until a natural disaster happened then take full advantage of it to put a climate change spin on it. Fire? Climate change. Too much rain? Climate change. Sunny? Climate change. Volcano? Climate change!

[–]Canbot 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

It is far less likely that all those fires started at the same time all by accident

[–]Alienhunter 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Seems likely that lightning strikes start fires.

[–]Canbot 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Lightening does not strike 30 locations at the same time, starting a fire at each location. Especially when 99.999% of lighting strikes do not start a fire.

[–]JasonCarswell 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

The forest doesn't have to be dried out. There are other factors in play too.